I'm distrustful of extremes and both of these seem like extreme positions by Thiel.
I don't see any reason to think bitcoin is a savior because I think the moment it gets strong enough to matter it'll get smashed by the governmental powers it threatens. Someone needs to explain in simple, practical terms how to avoid this.
ESG... It's not at all my bag, but I don't understand the visceral hatred for it. Compared to government regulation, it seems like private investors choosing to put their money where their mouth is is a big improvement. Will such companies try to game this system? Of course. But so do non-ESG companies and we don't bat an eyelash at that. The bottom line to me is:
You misunderstand the drivers of demand for ESG. Its not voluntary in the way you think, its like a self-propogating extortion racket that everyone is forced to reluctantly fund. As it grows the demands get more and more detatched from reality but no single individual can leave the system without paying a huge cost.
Could you explain in more detail? Nobody is forcing me to buy into an ESG company.
And nobody is forcing a company to declare it will abide by whatever ESG standards a company agrees to.
I imagine ESG demands will get more and more ridiculous and there’s a cost to firms backing out but it’s still a choice. But again, I don’t see how that’s different than any other corporate strategy. Once you go public and start courting institutional investors you run that risk. But… if it’s not profitable you can walk away from it. And if ESG based firms or funds lag, people get to decide to walk away from them.
I don’t see what the huge cost is. If I don’t want to buy google, I don’t have to.
I agree about bitcoin, but I would add that I am skeptical it'll ever be useful or practical enough to really challenge established institutions or governments in the first place.
There’s plenty in there I don’t disagree with, but it’s so far afield from the basic point.
You say “ stakeholder capitalism as the worst enemy of markets, liberty, and prosperity.”
I say the residual claim of owning the stock always has the final say. Owners of companies should be free to fun them as they see fit. If they want to consider the interests of “stakeholders” they should have the right to do so. Any other answer seems to me to be the worst enemy of markets and liberty, because it’s fundamentally limiting my liberty to dispose of my property as I see fit. I don’t see how destroy the village saves it.
Arnold - I appreciate your stance on Bitcoin as I use it to check my own, opposite view. Curious to understand who in the bitcoin space you have read or consumed via podcast. There is a tremendous undercurrent of Austrian Economics in this space that I believe would align with much of your thinking. Often in your Monday seminars I’m listening to you and hearing a strong echo of bitcoiners. Which makes me very curious about the specific divergence of your view point from theirs (mine). Genuinely curious here. Hope we get a chance to cover it on a Monday evening…
I'm distrustful of extremes and both of these seem like extreme positions by Thiel.
I don't see any reason to think bitcoin is a savior because I think the moment it gets strong enough to matter it'll get smashed by the governmental powers it threatens. Someone needs to explain in simple, practical terms how to avoid this.
ESG... It's not at all my bag, but I don't understand the visceral hatred for it. Compared to government regulation, it seems like private investors choosing to put their money where their mouth is is a big improvement. Will such companies try to game this system? Of course. But so do non-ESG companies and we don't bat an eyelash at that. The bottom line to me is:
https://www.google.com/finance/quote/VFTAX:MUTF?comparison=MUTF%3AVFIAX&window=1Y
(ESG indices consistently underperform the S&P500).
You misunderstand the drivers of demand for ESG. Its not voluntary in the way you think, its like a self-propogating extortion racket that everyone is forced to reluctantly fund. As it grows the demands get more and more detatched from reality but no single individual can leave the system without paying a huge cost.
Could you explain in more detail? Nobody is forcing me to buy into an ESG company.
And nobody is forcing a company to declare it will abide by whatever ESG standards a company agrees to.
I imagine ESG demands will get more and more ridiculous and there’s a cost to firms backing out but it’s still a choice. But again, I don’t see how that’s different than any other corporate strategy. Once you go public and start courting institutional investors you run that risk. But… if it’s not profitable you can walk away from it. And if ESG based firms or funds lag, people get to decide to walk away from them.
I don’t see what the huge cost is. If I don’t want to buy google, I don’t have to.
I agree about bitcoin, but I would add that I am skeptical it'll ever be useful or practical enough to really challenge established institutions or governments in the first place.
There’s plenty in there I don’t disagree with, but it’s so far afield from the basic point.
You say “ stakeholder capitalism as the worst enemy of markets, liberty, and prosperity.”
I say the residual claim of owning the stock always has the final say. Owners of companies should be free to fun them as they see fit. If they want to consider the interests of “stakeholders” they should have the right to do so. Any other answer seems to me to be the worst enemy of markets and liberty, because it’s fundamentally limiting my liberty to dispose of my property as I see fit. I don’t see how destroy the village saves it.
Excellent. Good investment advice.
Arnold - I appreciate your stance on Bitcoin as I use it to check my own, opposite view. Curious to understand who in the bitcoin space you have read or consumed via podcast. There is a tremendous undercurrent of Austrian Economics in this space that I believe would align with much of your thinking. Often in your Monday seminars I’m listening to you and hearing a strong echo of bitcoiners. Which makes me very curious about the specific divergence of your view point from theirs (mine). Genuinely curious here. Hope we get a chance to cover it on a Monday evening…
Maybe April 25th