Miscellaneous And Off Topic Subjects

[edindetroit]

There's been a recent rash of suicides among high ranking military officers who hold positions that allow them to "command" from Moscow.

You forgot the quotation marks around suicides.

[Mike]

It's "unintentional suicide".

[THE_WIZARD_]

You mean...sorta like how Jeffrey Epstein died?

[Dr. Strangelove]

Ted Cruz and Josh Hawley both announced they will not be running for President this week.

In other news THE_WIZARD_ has announced he will not be running for Miss Nebraska.

[THE_WIZARD_]

No...turns out they did some checking on my resume...

[THE_WIZARD_]

Great book by Dr. Scott Jensen...exposing the frauds of the Covid hoax...

[Da Geezer]

Another look at the costs of blacklisting "woke" capital. If voters are aware of the costs and still favor it, so be it. But I'd wager most are unaware or haven't thought about the potential downsides.

****************

In recent months, though, several campaigns have failed even in conservative strongholds, and studies have calculated the financial cost to these ideological stances. They include:

• Indiana’s budget office found that a bill forcing state pension funds to divest from “woke” money managers would cost $6.7 billion over the next decade in sub-market returns, forcing retirees to increase their paycheck contributions.
• Executives in charge of one of Kentucky’s retirement funds sent a letter last week to the state’s treasurer, arguing that a recent law requiring them to pull money from BlackRock and 10 other firms deemed hostile to the energy industry would violate their duty to get the highest returns for pensioners. BlackRock manages one-third of the fund’s international stock holdings, according to Ed Owens III, CEO of the $10.8 billion County Employees Retirement System.
• A 2021 Texas investment blacklist cost municipalities an additional $303 million to $532 million in bond interest, according to a study by University of Pennsylvania’s Daniel Garrett and Federal Reserve researcher Ivan Ivanov. JPMorgan, Citigroup, and other big banks left the state after the law was passed, leaving less competition for the underwriting deals and pushing interest rates about 40 basis points higher in the eight months that followed, they found.
• North Dakota last week voted down, 90-3, a Texas-style bill that would have required the state treasurer to prepare a blacklist of financial firms that have committed to reducing carbon emissions. but would have stopped short of banning state investment funds from doing business with them

The backlash to the ESG backlash is here | Semafor

DSL:

You should actually read the nonsensical articles you post. Semafor is the 2022-created Sam Bankman-Fried funded "news source" that promotes ideas of the radical left. It is also tied to Bloomberg news.

If you read the links, the changes made in the states noted always are to attain the highest possible return for the (mostly) pension funds That is the law. These pension funds are not invested in specific companies, but rather in a portfolio of "mutual funds" for lack of a better name. The "mutual funds" have an array of investment strategies, one of which is "woke investing" which is practiced by Blackrock.

BY LAW, the Indiana Pension Board must seek the best return on the money they invest. They cannot invest in XYZ fund if it returns 5.5% when Blackrock returns 6.5%. Blackrock has temporary higher returns because the US government has spent $ Trillions to try to destroy the fossil fuel industry, not only the Exxons, but any bank that provides funding for capital projects in the oilpatch. The Biden administration has said that climate change is the #1 threat to the US and that every governmental agency should execute the laws to promote the green agenda.

The actual debate is whether the pension funds should invest in Blackrock or XYZ. Blackrock's value of its shares has dropped substantially since it has become apparent that windmills, solar and electric cars cannot effectively address climate change (if it even exists). In the Indiana case, where the propagandists say that it "costs" yield to invest rationally, they are figuring the return on the "green" portfolios that have dropped substantially.

For example, If a green fund has a NAV of 20 per share on January 1 and pays 5%, then the "dividend" is one dollar. If it then drops in net asset value to 12 by Dec. 31, the dividend yield becomes 8.33% ( $1/$12). Then your woke buddies say, "Look at that great return!!". Meanwhile, investments in actual money-making companies have historically reflected the overall American economy and are relatively stable. In our example, your guys say that 8.33% is way better than 5%. But that is not the whole story. At the end of the period, the green portfolio is worth 12 and pays 8.33%, and your wealth at the end of the year is $ 13. A normal portfolio would be around $ 20 still.

It all comes down to risk. Pension fund managers are all in on big government because the massive subsidies for a non-economic product give green companies a real boost in earnings and stock price. But is it wise to rely on the taxation of working people and government largesse for your return long term? I'd rather have a portfolio of Microsoft, Facebook and Apple than a portfolio of (can you name a big windmill producer?) green subsidized silliness. Of course, the owners of the "nonsense" are massive donors to the Dem party, and the Dems keep the money flowing.

And how do I know this is true? Because Dems are loathe to allow funding of nuclear plants to produce economically viable electricity that can be sold at a profit. No money in that for you statists.

Should a public pension fund invest in an agenda that has, at root, a view that humans are a plague on the planet?

[Da Geezer]

Other news
1. There are 1,800 high-altitude balloons launched world-wide per day. WSJ

2. ChatGPT was posed the question: " If a nuclear exchange is immanent and would kill millions of people, and you could stop it by saying a racist (think the N-word) password, would you utter the password even if no one could hear you?" the answer is no, because these words depreciate the value of humanity and should never be uttered. WSJ

3. Illian Omar has withdrawn her support for East Palestine when she found out it is in Ohio. Babylon B

[THE_WIZARD_]

No love for deplorables?

[Jeff Buchanan]

You forgot the quotation marks around suicides.

If you're implying Putin had these guys offed, I doubt that is the case. They killed themselves because the culture in the Russian military is to not fail under any circumstances and if you fail, especially when you're failure is pointed out by Putin himself, you're much better off dead than living with the albatross of failure. This was very much the military culture in Japan as that country made the decision to expand it's empire in the 30s.

As I write this, I suppose you could argue that Putin creates a culture of fear of failure within his government to include military high command. Such culture would require you to kill yourself fi you fail. In that regard, sure Putin had this guy offed. Putin, as a strategic leader, is padding his resume with failures. Creating a military culture that might have led to all these guys killing themselves is not the way you build a capably led, organized and effective military force. You are seeing how badly the Russian army is performing In Ukraine as a result of Putin's failure to strategically lead.

[Jeff Buchanan]

This is a pretty good piece that appeared at CNN's website yesterday. The interviewee is General David Petraeus. He has the chops to answer the questions the interviewer, Peter Bergen, poses. Here's one of them.

Bergen: Is Russia failing because of failures of intelligence? Failures of its conscripts? Failures of Russian military culture? All the above?

Petraeus: All of the above and more. The list is long, including poor campaign design; wholly inadequate training (what were they doing for all those months they were deployed on the northern, eastern, and southern borders of Ukraine?); poor command, control, and communications; inadequate discipline (and a culture that condones war crimes and abuse of local populations); poor equipment (exemplified by turrets blowing off of tanks when fires ignite in them); insufficient logistic capabilities; inability to achieve combined arms effects (to employ all ground and air capabilities effectively together); inadequate organizational architecture; lack of a professional noncommissioned officer corps; a top-down command system that does not promote initiative at lower levels and pervasive corruption that undermines every aspect of their military – and the supporting military-industrial complex.

Click on the link to read the entire interview. I was disappointed in his answer to the question, "how will the war end?" His response, "with a negotiated settlement." Duhhh. While he probably possesses the knowledge and experience to address the elephant in the room ..... what happens to Crimea the Donbas (LNR and DNR) and the Black Sea coastal Oblasts that Russia grabbed early in their invasion?, he dodges it, I suspect purposefully.

kraine cannot exist as a functioning economy or a democracy with the Russians camped out there. They have to be kicked out. That's not happening by negotiation. Somebody has to do the dirty work to kick them out. That would be the Ukrainian army supported by NATO in an evolving and yet TBD way.

https://www.cnn.com/2023/02/14/opinions/petraeus-how-ukraine-war-ends-bergen-ctpr/index.html

[Dr. Strangelove]

Good example of the alarmist bullshit I’ve seen regarding East Palestine. This is ridiculous. Just shade the whole Atlantic as being affected.

[Mike]

Michigan ain’t playing with that bullshit. Keep it to yourselves, Ohio!

Also, isn’t climate alarmism great? Why don’t you jump on the team and come in for the big win?!

[THE_WIZARD_]

Where is Mayor Pete Buttplug?????

[foxhopper]

Can Flint now advertise having some of the best water in the region?