Non woke, non-ethical pensions

MrWannabe

Kathy Burke famously tweeted her thoughts on all things ‘woke’ last year.  I would have posted a link to her tweet, but I refuse to go anywhere near what is now known as ‘X’ since Elon Musk took control of Twitter.  Fortunately, I do recall what Kathy had to say about ‘woke’…she said:

’I love being ‘woke’. It’s much nicer than being an ignorant f*#*ing t*at’

Bravo to Kathy.  Yes, her language/choice of words may have been a bit strong, but she really was spot on.   The world would be a nicer place if everyone was more ‘Woke’ 🌍  🕊️ ❤️

dunstonh

’I love being ‘woke’. It’s much nicer than being an ignorant f*#*ing t*at’
Bravo to Kathy.  Yes, her language/choice of words may have been a bit strong, but she really was spot on.   The world would be a nicer place if everyone was more ‘Woke’ 🌍  🕊️ ❤️

It would be a horrible world to live in if everyone was woke. 
The problem is that both ends of the scale are extremes and are best avoided.   Somewhere in the middle is better.

Its also worth noting that Kathy Burke's tweet was the opposite of woke.   
a) she called people  "ignorant f*#*ing t*at’"
b) she did not consider the feelings of those that she was accusing
c) she was not tolerant of other peoples opinions

shortseller09

dunstonh said:

It would be a horrible world to live in if everyone was woke. 

That's assuming the worst extremist left-wing definition of the word.

If everyone was more 'awake' to discrimination and prejudice, the world would be a far better place.

Bianchiintenso

It seems to me the original comment was not a serious question simply a trigger post given what’s happening politically at the moment, I’m sure it will appear in the daily mail comments section next

DullGreyGuy

Albermarle said:

DullGreyGuy said:

Albermarle said:

In any case many so called ESG funds are hardly that at all. There is a lot of greenwashing involved, although I believe the FCA is cracking down on this,

I think the answer is really that its difficult... having done some work around ESG its a really complex and subjective thing of how you balance the different components such as the E, S and G, the current state and future state etc. The fact that many companies with ratings are conglomerates which have some good bits and some bad bits but a single over arching score.

Having a regulator set a system would make life much easier but then if everything is so overt then things can be gamed just like the poor quality 4* hotel that made sure it just met each element required to get the 4th star -v- the amazing luxury hotel that'd be a 5*+ were it not for the absence of a large enough swimming pool. 

A fun example was a NFP company that makes satellites that monitor methane, CO2 and other greenhouse gasses in the atmosphere... any profits made are donated to various environmental or social charities. Being something going up in space they have to be red hot on the governance side too. In principle then the poster child for an ESG company however there is a vast amount of pollution created building it, shipping it around the world and then getting it up into space. Do the ends justify the means? Should they be highly rated or blacklisted?

Having had some previous involvement with some of these issues, I can only agree it is difficult. However I think some companies, investments ones included, are too free in describing themselves as sustainable, environmentally friendly, green, kind to the planet etc

Another example is on a riverside walk recently, I saw a large new house being built, and the banner on it said 'another sustainable home being built by xxxxx '
Now I am sure it will be well insulated, probably with a heat pump etc. However a previous smaller house had first been demolished to build a much larger property. Is that sustainable ??

This is the catch 22 though... don't make your own decisions but buy the independent rating from S&P or MSCI can just as easily get you accused of greenwashing. 

By all accounts the first ESG Lloyds Syndicate initially decided to buy ratings for 6 or more agencies saying they'd only consider writing for companies considered "positive" by all of them... the problem they had was that left almost no companies in the world as potential customers either due to different level of coverage or spread of results. They'd somewhat backed themselves into a corner though as if you changed it from all must rate it as positive to if any rate it as positive (allegedly the initial suggested change) is clearly an open invitiation to get shot down for greenwashing

penners324

PensionBee do offer a number of funds, only 2 of them follow ESG goals. Switch to 1 of the other 1s

westv

dunstonh said:

’I love being ‘woke’. It’s much nicer than being an ignorant f*#*ing t*at’
Bravo to Kathy.  Yes, her language/choice of words may have been a bit strong, but she really was spot on.   The world would be a nicer place if everyone was more ‘Woke’ 🌍  🕊️ ❤️

It would be a horrible world to live in if everyone was woke. 
The problem is that both ends of the scale are extremes and are best avoided.   Somewhere in the middle is better.

Its also worth noting that Kathy Burke's tweet was the opposite of woke.   
a) she called people  "ignorant f*#*ing t*at’"
b) she did not consider the feelings of those that she was accusing
c) she was not tolerant of other peoples opinions

Barack Obama maybe got it right

 "I get a sense among certain young people on social media that the way of making change is to be as judgemental as possible about other people. 

If I tweet or hashtag about how you didn't do something right or used the wrong verb, then I can sit back and feel pretty good about myself because 'Man did you see how woke I was? I called you out!

That's enough, If all you're doing is casting stones, you are probably not going to get that far.

"People who do really good stuff have flaws".

eastcorkram

MrWannabe said:

Kathy Burke famously tweeted her thoughts on all things ‘woke’ last year.  I would have posted a link to her tweet, but I refuse to go anywhere near what is now known as ‘X’ since Elon Musk took control of Twitter.  Fortunately, I do recall what Kathy had to say about ‘woke’…she said:

’I love being ‘woke’. It’s much nicer than being an ignorant f*#*ing t*at’

Bravo to Kathy.  Yes, her language/choice of words may have been a bit strong, but she really was spot on.   The world would be a nicer place if everyone was more ‘Woke’ 🌍  🕊️ ❤️

She also proved that it's perfectly possible to be both things.

Dixter

leosayer said:

Dixter said:

My view would tend to be that they should be focussed solely on getting the best returns and appointing and promoting the most suitable people to do that regardless of reliion, colour, sexual preferences and anything else. 

Do you really only care about returns regardless of how they are achieved?

Thanks for your reply. What is "caring"? If it is dressed up caring; hypocritical, greenwashing does it still count? We live in an incredibly regulated commercial environment and that provides all the care needed IMHO. I want people to stick to their area of expertise and work within the law. That's good enough and perhaps caring perfection is the enemy of good enough. 

Dixter

shortseller09 said:

dunstonh said:

It would be a horrible world to live in if everyone was woke. 

That's assuming the worst extremist left-wing definition of the word.

If everyone was more 'awake' to discrimination and prejudice, the world would be a far better place.

Thanks for your answers. I guess I'm with Brian Aldis when he observed that bureaucracies dont do some of the more valuable human traits particularly well. Mercy, pity, love, sort of come out wrong. Everyone trying to be "more 'awake'" which is a very good thing is very different from a whole load of corporate measures. The measures tend to proxies for what is actually needed and what is impossible to measure.