ESG Credit Scores - This should scare hell out of everyone

[BeAllied]

I don't think S&P cares about your employer having you on their payroll or what your political beliefs are. I believe they care whether your employer is exposed to social, environmental, and governance risks.

What they may be concerned about with regards to you personally is if you are an executive and you are engaged in discriminatory hiring practices. That is about it.

Now your employeray fire you if you are arrested for looting a store or storming the Capitol or you drive drunk or any other number of illegal or risky behaviors but that is pretty well understood by everyone.

No one cares what kind of car you drive with regards to your company. The government may regulate what kind of cars we drive in the future or tax us higher if we want to drive a big truck like I do, but that has nothing to do with ESG credit ratings by investment banking firms.

What these firms are looking at is what extra risks are companies under like the Chemours plant in Louisville that emits more carbon than all of the motor vehicles in Louisville combined. Companies like that can't be rated just on their profits and cash flow as they are probably at significant risk of having to make substantial and costly changes to their production processes. This they would have a lower credit rating than a company with similar finances that is not facing those risks.

The biggest deal is still cash flow, but investors want all the risk sussed out, not just most of them. For instance if Deutsche Bank had known Donald Trump was going to run for President and piss of 55% of Americans who will never buy anything from him again do you think they would have loaned him $400 million? I mean love him or hate him that matters when he owes you money on properties that depend on American consumers using them. On the other hand if you wanted to loan him money to start a conservative TV station it may decrease the risk associated with that because he has a built in audience.

For somebody who started the stock advice thread, you seem to have a curiously dismissive and accepting attitude toward something that is somewhat arbitrary and complex to determine. It would be interesting to go back through that thread to see when you started recommending companies based on their environmental attitudes and ability to anger social media mobs and protestors.

After everything that we have seen over the past decade, why should anybody believe anything that is assuredly simplified? "You can keep your health insurance." "It's only two weeks weeks to flatten the curve." Oh, well, if you say so...

If you are an employer, then you are going to assess your workforce for those risk exposures. I just gave examples above. Large employers will be pressured to hire employees who don't expose them to any criticism, and employees will be pressured to falsely exhibit and hide/lie about certain behaviors out of fear. Engineering specific outcomes that are unnatural is not healthy and often counterproductive at addressing real issues.

With your Trump example, there is no way that you could have scored Trump except for making political statements prior to being President. You are only making a supporting argument that choosing a political or social side is dangerous to the health of your business. Trump has been making public political comments for about 40 years now. This could go either way.

Are you going to invest in Coca-Cola after their "Be Less White" racial sensitivity training? Is Coke not a target for white nationalists and extremists now? What if extremists burn down their bottling facilities or carry-out a mass casualty event at one of their corporate buildings to retaliate? Perhaps a corporate neutrality score on anything controversial would also be helpful. I wouldn't want to be invested in a company that suppresses behaviors in their employees, which would increase the likelihood of mentally lashing out over time. Would you?

 

[ganner918_rivals60369]

You added this after I had hit reply. OK, so what about this?

Will these ESG scores on large corporations put pressure on those corporations to hire people who only have certain behaviors and identities?

Companies already get reduced health insurance premiums or rebates for having a healthy workforce that reaches a certain level of participation from its employees. I believe that Humana has a Bronze, Silver, Gold, and Platinum (whatever) health achievement status for individuals, and if companies achieve a 50%, 70%, or 90% participation of Gold status or better achievement, for example, then they will receive a significant cost savings at the different tiers. True or false? I already know that the answer is true, but maybe your stance is, "Well, the government should be paying for everybody's health insurance anyway. So the gov't will take care of that."

OK, but what if an employer asks me what kind of car I drive? If I drive a gas vehicle over an electric car, then would that give them reason to discriminate against me? My gas vehicle would "not uphold the standard of an environmentally conscious company." Would that be reason for them to fire me or deny me employment? Are there legal protections for gas vehicle owners? No. But maybe your stance is, "Well, all cars are going to be electric in 10-15 years anyway, so that's not going to even be an issue."

OK, but what if an employer sees that I have a Blue Lives Matter bumper sticker on my electric car? Would they have reason to fire me because it could be perceived as insensitive and counter to their social justice score? It would look bad for them to have cars on the company lot that protestors might have an issue against.

What if my children go to a private/charter school that does not have a certain diversity score or social justice curriculum? Would that reflect badly on me as a parent and be used as evidence of being a possible racist if my child's school makes a few co-workers "uncomfortable"?

What if the governance team of my corporation has selected charities that they want the company to support? Will I be pressured into doing an automatic payroll deduction for that charity/cause? Could I be fired or on the list of for the next round of layoffs if I don't? Nobody could really know that's the reason/final straw they laid you off, but wouldn't you feel pressured to do so to have that added layer of job security?

This is not a simple, "Oh, it only affects the corporate big-wigs and investors." No, it has trickle down effects that are passed onto the expendable employees. It creates entirely new factors of discrimination based on outward social identity.

The metrics used to calculate these scores are published openly, and "what kind of cars do your employees drive" or "what kind of bumper stickers do they have" or "where do your employees send their kids to school" are not among these metrics.

 

[ganner918_rivals60369]

I have to applaud your responses in this thread. You make great points and speak truth to a real issue. Unfortunately in some cases, it falls on people who have submerged themselves in a cult like political party who put party over facts and truth.

He's neither making great points nor speaking truth. He's inventing scenarios that don't exist and getting scared or angry about them - just like Glenn Beck did. There's no basis for any of this. It's groundless fearmongering that achieved its goal - riling you guys up so you'd watch and share Glenn Beck videos.

 

[BeAllied]

2020 was nothing but fear-mongering, but Glenn Beck and using the Socratic method to play out the logical outcomes are the problems.

 

[ganner918_rivals60369]

2020 was nothing but fear-mongering, but Glenn Beck and using the Socratic method to play out the logical outcomes are the problems.

It's not the Socratic method if no one is answering, or you're not listening to answers. Glenn Beck is jerking himself off and pulling your string.

 

[CB3UK]

It is absolutely a real thing in China right now folks. Go do your research.

 

[BigSexyCat]

He's neither making great points nor speaking truth. He's inventing scenarios that don't exist and getting scared or angry about them - just like Glenn Beck did. There's no basis for any of this. It's groundless fearmongering that achieved its goal - riling you guys up so you'd watch and share Glenn Beck videos.

No basis...yet it's happening to an extent and how far it progresses is a concern. I know you believe in your leftest leaders can do no harm but here's a little 411 for ya. The rich only care about getting richer and your party is the party of the rich.

 

[ganner918_rivals60369]

No basis...yet it's happening to an extent and how far it progresses is a concern. I know you believe in your leftest leaders can do no harm but here's a little 411 for ya. The rich only care about getting richer and your party is the party of the rich.

Yes, no basis, because none of the things Beck or you or Allied are speculating about ARE happening to any extent. You're making things up out of thin air and then getting upset about them and refusing to consider that there actually is no evidence to support any of the things you're saying.

And I wish we had leftist leaders, I'm pretty leftist and disappointed at how cozy with big business the DNC is. Both parties are the parties of the rich. There is no party of the common man.

 

[Rebelfreedomeagle]

My broker absolutely loves ESG funds and I can guaran-damn-tee that little bastard is not "THE LEFT".

 

[BeAllied]

There is overlap in the conversation between ESG scores and the Social Credit System of China. The dots are there, but it's up to people to connect them or to ignore them. The red pill is inconvenient truth and the blue pill is blissful ignorance.

 

[cat_chaser]

Beck didn't give proof of anything. He just asserted things, and made claims that it was based on "their documents." Show me the evidence and I'll examine it. Glenn Beck is known to, time and time again, spin up stories like this and they've never been true before. Show me any documentation that banks will make decisions on lending you money based on your personal ESG score, and I'll take read it with an open mind.

I bet if Beck would’ve told you 10 years ago you’d have men competing in women’s sports, men being allowed to use the same restroom as a girl, small children deciding they want to change their sex ‘identification’, and companies like Coke training their white employees on how to be less white you prolly would’ve laughed at him then, too

I swear, some of you simply refuse to recognize the slippery slope we’re flying down.

 

[BigSexyCat]

Yes, no basis, because none of the things Beck or you or Allied are speculating about ARE happening to any extent. You're making things up out of thin air and then getting upset about them and refusing to consider that there actually is no evidence to support any of the things you're saying.

And I wish we had leftist leaders, I'm pretty leftist and disappointed at how cozy with big business the DNC is. Both parties are the parties of the rich. There is no party of the common man.

https://www.moderntiredealer.com/ar...-issues-sustainability-linked-credit-facility

You need to tell that to Bridgestone who's is partnering with SMBC banks to extend ESG scores to suppliers of Bridgestone and link interest rates of their new credit facilities to ESG scores.

https://www.statista.com/chart/20944/2020-dem-candidates-billionaire-donors/

164 billionaires contributed to Dem candidates in 2020. The Dems are indeed the party of the rich. In fact the amount of wealth and power that party welds is dangerous.

 

[BeAllied]

Some of the local government policies
Beijing	Starting May 15, 2019, inappropriate behavior in Beijing's rapid transits, including playing loud music or eating (except infants and sick people), could result in a negative record in credit profiles.[32][85] In January 2019, Beijing government officially announced that it will start to test "Personal Credit Score."[86] In November 2018, a detailed plan was produced for further implementation of the program for 2018–2020 in Beijing. The plans included black listing people from public transport and publicly disclosing individuals' and businesses' untrustworthiness rating.[87][88] Starting 2018, in some places, personal information of traffic violators is publicly displayed on the screens at traffic crosses, and red-light violations may be recorded in credit profiles in the future.[89][90]
Shanghai	In September 2019, Shanghai Police Department intended to establish a credit system for dog owners, which is linked to the owners' overall credit profiles.[91][92] Starting July 1, 2019, individuals and organizations who do not comply with the waste sorting rules of the city will receive a negative record in their credit profiles and will have to pay a corresponding amount of fine.[36][37] Starting May 1, 2016, elderly residents may sue their children or other family members if the latter do not regularly visit the elderly, and the courts in Shanghai may rule that the children or other family members must visit the elderly and, if rejected, the children or relevant family members will be blacklisted.[93][94]
Guangzhou	Starting August 1, 2019, residents who cheat in national, provincial or municipal examinations will receive a negative record in their credit profiles.[39][95] Starting August 1, 2019, residents who fraudulently use other people's public-transportation identification cards or fake ID cards, or occupy the seats of others, may receive a negative record in their credit profiles.[39][95]
Shenzhen	Starting November 1, 2019, residents at least 14 years old who violate traffic rules such as jaywalking and violating the red light, once caught, will receive a negative record in their credit profiles. For residents under age of 14 who violate traffic rules, their legal guardians will need to take educational courses or complete certain social services, otherwise the traffic violation will be recorded in their credit profiles.[33][96][97][98] Starting November 1, 2019, traffic violations of motor-vehicle or moped drivers, such as inappropriate use of high beam and drunk driving, may be recorded in the credit profiles of the drivers; if the driver receives a traffic fine 5 times or more in a year, or has 3 unresolved violations or more in a year, they will receive a negative record in their profile.[33][96][97][99] Starting 2018, in some places, personal information of traffic violators is publicly displayed on the screens at traffic crosses.[100][101]
Hangzhou	Starting August 1, 2019, individuals and organizations who do not comply with the waste sorting rules of the city will receive a negative record in their credit profiles and will have to pay a corresponding amount of fine.[38][102]
Nanjing	Starting July 8, 2019, moped drivers and pedestrians who make 5 or more traffic violations (including red-light violation) in a year will receive a negative record in their credit profiles. In some places, personal information of traffic violators is publicly displayed on the screens at traffic crosses.[34][103][104] Starting July 8, 2019, moped drivers who drive into the lanes of motor vehicles for 5 times or more in a year will receive a negative record in their credit profiles.[103]
Suzhou	Starting 2016, twenty-five types of residents' behavior will cost a drop in their credit scores, including cheating in online video games, making reservations at hotels or restaurants but not showing up, failing to pay cellphone bills promptly, failing to pick up take-out foods ordered, etc.[35][42] On the other hand, making blood donations or doing volunteer work may boost one's credit score.[42]
Jinan	Starting January 1, 2017, dog owners lose three points for keeping their dogs off leash in public places, allowing their dogs to disturb other people, not cleaning up after their dogs, etc. Owners lose another three points on the second offense. They lose all 12 points for the third time and are banned from owning a dog for a period of 5 years; owners also lose all 12 points immediately if their dogs are found unregistered with the government or faulting annual review.[105][106][107] Dogs of owners with zero points are confiscated by the government until the owner takes free courses on relevant city rules and passes corresponding exams.[105][106][107]

 

[BigSexyCat]

I bet if Beck would’ve told you 10 years ago you’d have men competing in women’s sports, men being allowed to use the same restroom as a girl, small children deciding they want to change their sex ‘identification’, and companies like Coke training their white employees on how to be less white you prolly would’ve laughed at him then, too

I swear, some of you simply refuse to recognize the slippery slope we’re flying down.

LOL....10 year ago I wouldn't have thought that either. Don't forget about gay marriage. Since the beginning of mankind marriage was between a man and a woman but then the Dems decided now would be a good time to change things up.

 

[jameslee32]

I swear, some of you simply refuse to recognize the slippery slope we’re flying down.

Enraged fear beats plain ordinary fear every day of the week!

 

[BeAllied]

Enraged fear beats plain ordinary fear every day of the week!

 

[jameslee32]

 

[BeAllied]

Is that your adrenochrome source?

 

[dgtatu01]

For somebody who started the stock advice thread, you seem to have a curiously dismissive and accepting attitude toward something that is somewhat arbitrary and complex to determine. It would be interesting to go back through that thread to see when you started recommending companies based on their environmental attitudes and ability to anger social media mobs and protestors.

After everything that we have seen over the past decade, why should anybody believe anything that is assuredly simplified? "You can keep your health insurance." "It's only two weeks weeks to flatten the curve." Oh, well, if you say so...

If you are an employer, then you are going to assess your workforce for those risk exposures. I just gave examples above. Large employers will be pressured to hire employees who don't expose them to any criticism, and employees will be pressured to falsely exhibit and hide/lie about certain behaviors out of fear. Engineering specific outcomes that are unnatural is not healthy and often counterproductive at addressing real issues.

With your Trump example, there is no way that you could have scored Trump except for making political statements prior to being President. You are only making a supporting argument that choosing a political or social side is dangerous to the health of your business. Trump has been making public political comments for about 40 years now. This could go either way.

Are you going to invest in Coca-Cola after their "Be Less White" racial sensitivity training? Is Coke not a target for white nationalists and extremists now? What if extremists burn down their bottling facilities or carry-out a mass casualty event at one of their corporate buildings to retaliate? Perhaps a corporate neutrality score on anything controversial would also be helpful. I wouldn't want to be invested in a company that suppresses behaviors in their employees, which would increase the likelihood of mentally lashing out over time. Would you?

I like to invest in companies that make money and will make more money in the future. The same kinds of companies banks want to lend money to. Right now I'm invested in Hilton Hotels, PayPal, DraftKings, Slang Worldwide, and S&P 500 Index funds.

 

[jameslee32]

Is that your adrenochrome source?

It's the source of this thread silly. With the help of some unknown guy in a hoodie and his media because these conspiracy theories play on the fears you've already created in your heads.

 

[Nightwish84]

LOL....10 year ago I wouldn't have thought that either. Don't forget about gay marriage. Since the beginning of mankind marriage was between a man and a woman but then the Dems decided now would be a good time to change things up.

People didn't buy into your fear mongering so you're switching topics mid-thread to ***** about gay marriage? You're like K-Mart Bill O'Reilly.

 

[BeAllied]

It's the source of this thread silly. With the help of some unknown guy in a hoodie and his media because these conspiracy theories play on the fears you've already created in your heads.

Join me in overcoming those fears by taking your mask off when you go outside.

 

[Kentucky#1]

I swear, some of you simply refuse to recognize the slippery slope we’re flying down.

Here’s the problem with most conservatives - the left, including those in this thread, fully recognize what’s going on.

THEY DON’T CARE.

They support it. It’s their side and their beliefs. They want them forced on everyone else. They’re not interested in political debate or discussion.

The sooner we realize this and react accordingly the better.

 

[jameslee32]

Join me in overcoming those fears by taking your mask off when you go outside.

You have much bigger fish to fry. Good luck!

 

[jameslee32]

Here’s the problem with most conservatives - the left, including those in this thread, fully recognize what’s going on.

THEY DON’T CARE.

They support it. It’s their side and their beliefs. They want them forced on everyone else. They’re not interested in political debate or discussion.

The sooner we realize this and react accordingly the better.

Enlighten us.

 

[gamecockcat]

As a bank it is going to be applied to the risk of losing business. So possibly. If someone says something that pisses a bunch of people off and they lose all their business that is a risk to getting a loan repaid. I don't think this is some kind of standard to favor someone over another it's just a score to weed out bad debt. It doesn't mean what you're implying.

I hope you're right. Being highly skeptical of all things political, I'm afraid the opportunity for enormous abuse is huge.

 

[ganner918_rivals60369]

https://www.moderntiredealer.com/ar...-issues-sustainability-linked-credit-facility

You need to tell that to Bridgestone who's is partnering with SMBC banks to extend ESG scores to suppliers of Bridgestone and link interest rates of their new credit facilities to ESG scores.

https://www.statista.com/chart/20944/2020-dem-candidates-billionaire-donors/

164 billionaires contributed to Dem candidates in 2020. The Dems are indeed the party of the rich. In fact the amount of wealth and power that party welds is dangerous.

Bruh, rich people own American politics. This is from 2018 election but look how many billionaires are donating millions to both parties.

 

[BigSexyCat]

Bruh, rich people own American politics. This is from 2018 election but look how many billionaires are donating millions to both parties.

Bruh, take time to read you own linked article lol. It was updated. I gave you 160 plus Dem billionaire donors.....you gave me one billionaire Republican donor.

 

[ganner918_rivals60369]

So for the conservatives here concerned about the power of money in politics, are you going to join us leftists in calling for campaign finance reform to limit their ability to fund elections? Gonna join us in calls to tax the uber wealthy? How about funding the IRS to be able to audit them and directing them to focus their attention where the biggest bang is with those wealthy? Because as it stands now, the IRS targets lower and income people because we're easier and don't have lawyers to tie things up and drag them out. Even though most estimates are that tax evasion is concentrated among the wealthy.

 

[ganner918_rivals60369]

Bruh, taking time to read you own linked article lol. It was updated. I gave you 160 plus Dem billionaire donors.....you gave me one billionaire Republican donor.

Bruh, take YOUR time to read the article I linked before you make an *** of yourself making false statements. There are 8 Republican billionaires on that list, one leans-conservative billionaire, and 3 other Republicans of unknown net worth who gave multiple millions. You didn't read it, and then accused me of not reading it.

 

[BigSexyCat]

So for the conservatives here concerned about the power of money in politics, are you going to join us leftists in calling for campaign finance reform to limit their ability to fund elections? Gonna join us in calls to tax the uber wealthy? How about funding the IRS to be able to audit them and directing them to focus their attention where the biggest bang is with those wealthy? Because as it stands now, the IRS targets lower and income people because we're easier and don't have lawyers to tie things up and drag them out. Even though most estimates are that tax evasion is concentrated among the wealthy.

Now you're talking like a Trump Republican. Congrats and welcome aboard. We cherish common sense and power to the working man. BTW I'm on board with everything you listed.

 

[BigSexyCat]

Bruh, take YOUR time to read the article I linked before you make an *** of yourself making false statements. There are 8 Republican billionaires on that list, one leans-conservative billionaire, and 3 other Republicans of unknown net worth who gave multiple millions. You didn't read it, and then accused me of not reading it.

Your link started at the bottom of the article that displayed one billionaire but nevertheless 8 billionaire donors pale to over 160 billionaire donors.

 

[ganner918_rivals60369]

Now you're talking like a Trump Republican. Congrats and welcome aboard. We cherish common sense and power to the working man. BTW I'm on board with everything you listed.

I'm talking like Bernie and AOC. Trump cut rich people's taxes. And the Republican party is pretty much unanimously opposed to campaign finance reform and to funding the IRS, while even the DNC wants to raise taxes on the rich some, fund the IRS, and enact campaign finance reform. Pay attention to the issues and not just rhetoric and divisive social issues the billionaire funded corporate news feeds us and you might realize we leftists want to do things you like.

 

[ganner918_rivals60369]

Bruh, from your own link....

Correction, November 12, 2019: This article originally stated that all 25 individuals and couples on the list are billionaires. The language has since been updated to reflect the fact that they are all high net worth individuals, not necessarily billionaires.

Read past that, they specify net worth for each individual on the list, or if unknown put net worth is unknown. Seriously man, you're making yourself look foolish.

 

[ganner918_rivals60369]

Your link started at the bottom of the article that displayed one billionaire but nevertheless 8 billionaire donors pale to over 160 billionaire donors.

That was not a comprehensive list, I hope you recognize that. It didn't have 160 billionaire Democrats on that list. It was just the top donors in American politics and 12 of the 25 were Republicans or Republican leaning in their donations.

 

[BigSexyCat]

I'm talking like Bernie and AOC. Trump cut rich people's taxes. And the Republican party is pretty much unanimously opposed to campaign finance reform and to funding the IRS, while even the DNC wants to raise taxes on the rich some, fund the IRS, and enact campaign finance reform. Pay attention to the issues and not just rhetoric and divisive social issues the billionaire funded corporate news feeds us and you might realize we leftists want to do things you like.

Nah, killing babies is a big turn off for me. Strange how Sanders, Warren and AOC have gone silent about corporate America now that they control all 3 branches of government.

 

[BigSexyCat]

That was not a comprehensive list, I hope you recognize that. It didn't have 160 billionaire Democrats on that list. It was just the top donors in American politics and 12 of the 25 were Republicans or Republican leaning in their donations.

An earlier reply to you contained a link listing over 160 Dem billionaire donors in the 2020 election.

 

[ganner918_rivals60369]

Nah, killing babies is a big turn off for me. Strange how Sanders, Warren and AOC have gone silent about corporate America now that they control all 3 branches of government.

Warren has continued advocating her wealth tax. All the Democrats are backing a bill that includes campaign finance reform - though the ultimate solution as noted in the bill requires a constitutional amendment.

 

[Ron Mehico]

Term limits would solve a ton, but will never happen.

 

[ganner918_rivals60369]

An earlier reply to you contained a link listing over 160 Dem billionaire donors in the 2020 election.

Come on my man, I know that. I'm saying the fact that I haven't seen a list someone made naming every Republican billionaire donor doesnt mean Republicans dont have billionaire donors. The list I could find showed the TOP donors evenly split between parties.