Clarice Feldman writes in THE PIPELINE
Imagine if you had billions of dollars of other people’s money to invest and instead of investing it judiciously for the safest return you could find, you decided to blow it up to promote your own “environmental, social and governance” (ESG) goals. Imagine this virtue signaling power trip at the expense of those to whom you owe a high level of care, costing customers $1.7 trillion over a six-month period. Well, you don’t really have to take this as a theory, it’s BlackRock’s story as I noted last month.
The question in my mind during the two years I’ve been warning about the loss to beneficiaries from mismanagement is whether there are consequences to that behavior, and it looks likely there will be. Big time.
Clarice continued to write about the upcoming backlash from state attorneys general.
Recently the status of West Virginia Announcement it will no longer do business with companies that boycott the fossil fuel industry — including BlackRock. According to West Virginia’s treasury office, the ban will “cost companies $18 billion a year.” That business loss is now likely to run into the trillions as 19 state attorneys general pointed to Fink’s filing and asserted the company he heads is “a clear leader in the field.” ‘fossil fuel retirement'”. Letter to BlackRock President Fink reads like a legal supplication with very extensive legal and factual citations. It starts :
Further in the mail.
The letter seeks a response on the 22nd of this month. The contents of this well-documented letter and its extensive citations of fact and law lead me to believe that BlackRock will be forced to defend multiple lawsuits unless it takes significant steps to drop both. ESG’s investment strategy and its expansion activities to force net-zero emissions at the expense of those with whom they manage money.
Related
