Comments on: Can you ethically invest in unethical companies? A slice of lime in the soda Sun, 26 Oct 2014 19:05:02 +0000 hourly 1 By: Dee Quenneville Fri, 17 Oct 2014 08:43:54 +0000 That you are rightIbrahim: Search together with Yahoo and google this operater: winxp_Graphic remote collection 945GMLit will work okay using your LG R400 laptop computer Remember to help me since my very own Bluetooth enabled is just not doing work. Earlier the has been functioning but now soon after completely new installation of Screen XP the not working. Even though I have tried out frequently to setup Bluetooth’s operators. If anyone can fix this problem, please help me. We will probably be happy to from this point of view. Regards, Younis

By: Dillon Eischen Thu, 16 Oct 2014 21:54:31 +0000 A bail bond agent, or bondsman, is any person or corporation that will act as a surety and pledge money or property as bail for the appearance of persons accused in court. Although banks, insurance companies and other similar institutions are usually the sureties on other types of contracts (for example, to bond a contractor who is under a contractual obligation to pay for the completion of a construction project) such entities are reluctant to put their depositors’ or policyholders’ funds at the kind of risk involved in posting a bail bond. Bail bond agents, on the other hand, are usually in the business to cater to criminal defendants, often securing their customers’ release in just a few hours. Bail bond agents are almost exclusively found in the United States and its former commonwealth, The Philippines. In most other countries bail is usually much less and the practice of bounty hunting is illegal.

By: TFF Tue, 26 Oct 2010 00:15:09 +0000 @bernankesbubble, interesting point on China. Whatever the rationale, we will likely need to restart our domestic production at some point.

One problem with investing in “unethical” companies is that they face a greater risk of regulatory crackdown (and that can slam profits). I tend to be risk-averse, so I rarely take positions in such companies and am quick to sell when I do.

By: y2kurtus Mon, 25 Oct 2010 14:19:00 +0000 Hi again Felix,

When I read “I don’t buy it…. since voting is statistically certain to make no difference at all” I thought it came across as saying that voting proxies was minimally imporntant.

I very much belive that even a very small investor has a far better chance to bend the course of a multi-national company than a single voter has on swaying the course of a regional or national election. The math David Neubert put forth is hard to argue with on that point.

There are obvious limits on small shareholders voteing power. An obvious example would be the case of the enviromental group trying to get a company in a globally competitive industry like oil refining to spend hundreds of millions of dollars to make a refinery more envriomentally sound and LESS financially sound. That trade-off has no place at the individual company level.

Publish a set of envriomental rules for all to follow and the companies who can achive the targets by spending the least will win in the marketplace.

So I’m quite sorry if I twisted your words in a way you did not intend and keep up the fantastic writing.

p.s. to bernakesbubble… the idea that you exposure to any one company is so small as to have no impact is an obvious falacy. Most mega-cap companies are so large that no single investor owns even 5%… but they are still governed by the collective voice of their shareholders.

In the near term those small voices will get much louder… soon any long-term investor group with a 3% stake will be allowed to nominate a diretor on the company proxy statement. I’m very hopeful that this will force directors to listen more intentlyly to shareholders and less intently to CEO’s.

By: bernankesbubble Sun, 24 Oct 2010 16:33:32 +0000 TFF: China’s market share in rare earth mining is due to decades of heavily subsidized exports. THe subsidies were done consciously to maintain levels of employment and increase market share despite sometimes operating at heavy losses (much of their industry has not been profitable at times). Now they recognize that if they don’t reduce exports (ie. subsidies) their deposits will run out more quickly than they are prepared to deal with.

Felix: Good topic. I’ve silenced my conscious by concluding that my exposure to any one company is infinitesimal in relation to outstanding shares. If refraining from buying a share in valero would have no impact, then buying a share would have no impact as well.

By: hsvkitty Sat, 23 Oct 2010 19:32:51 +0000 Yes my portfolio is less diverse, because I do invest more ethically and have removed myself from any investments associated with the (racketeers) Wall-street. There were far too many funds with, but I had no qualms in removing them.

I also invest in an ethical fund that ensures that those in it are also doing some good. (no, not doing God’s work, but doing no harm)

You can choose a fund or group of funds that match your ethical standards. No animal testing, clean and green, ones with different hues of green, cleaner energy and technology, new energy and Local growth funds. The funds have performed well over the years, for those of us that had long term and diverse retirement funds with less risk. They did far better then my American funds.

It is nice to have the choice, but I doubt that my voting had any bearing on the ethical behaviour of companies/Banks who continue to act unethically. Voting en masse (vocally/structured) and Boycotts en masse are the only thing that will hurt a company enough to change.

I vote with my actual vote, my voicing, my written word and my feet. But then, that’s my standard of ethics. Am I making a big difference? Not so anyone else can tell, but it makes a difference to me.

By: side Sat, 23 Oct 2010 15:42:03 +0000 Another way to support what you do or don’t believe in is to buy or not buy certain products. Of course, sometimes this requires looking into the value or supply chain. If you believe that climate change is an issue to be addressed (which I do because I’ve worked on it for 20 years, and note that I am a business person working on making money on a variety of solutions), then use your wallet to buy products and services from companies that have similar values. I will not buy anything from Valero, Koch or the others that support Prop 23 (and please note that Prop 26 needs similar attention as it might be used as a back door to shut down CA’s efforts to address greenhouse gas emissions).

By: randomRT Sat, 23 Oct 2010 14:17:33 +0000 Maybe it is true you can have change the direction of the company with your vote, but this is only going to happen in companies that have some greener products or ideas along with their pollution pumping product. Companies that do not have any such ideas on the horizon you won’t change with 1/130,000,000 or 1/220,000 votes.

By: TFF Sat, 23 Oct 2010 12:27:45 +0000 @DanHess, as far as “unethical companies”, I would have to vote for Verizon.

* “Gotcha” fees that can run thousands of dollars for services that would be covered in the right “unlimited” plan for $60/month.

* Third-party billing that is passed along WITHOUT QUESTION and cannot be disputed through Verizon. You can attempt to resolve the matter with the third party, but you cannot refuse that portion of your bill. Any money you send to Verizon is applied to third-party charges first, giving lie to the statement “your service won’t be terminated for failure to pay these charges”.

* “Guaranteed lifetime” rates that steadily increase as they tack on additional fees (including charges that had previously been paid by Verizon).

The best way to invest ethically, if you wish to do so, is to start your own business and run it according to the highest standards. “Voting with your feet” is only effective if a substantial minority does so because the money is fungible. “Voting your proxy” faces a similar uphill battle.

By: rxn Sat, 23 Oct 2010 12:02:54 +0000 Let’s be serious!
Very unethical behavior and even mentality is present all across America, from low to high level, no conscience present in this country. Children dye every second of starvation (somewhere in the world) and you here care only about the next house, car or trip that you will purchase and still in debt you are.
Primitive behavior!