http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070723/ap_on_el_st_lo/sharpton_buffalo_1
NY pension funds invest the pensioners' funds - pretty simple. About $3BN of these funds is invested in the entertainment industry (I'm hoping that includes conglomerates like GE because that's too much otherwise, but that's another topic).
Sharpton says the fund managers should not be allowed to invest the funds in, and should divest the pension funds of, stocks of entertainment companies that produce rap with objectionable lyrics.
The fund managers OWE A FIDUCIARY DUTY TO THE OWNERS OF THOSE FUNDS to try to maximize return and minimize risk.
They have no right to use those funds to try to affect social policy - - - even if you think gangsta rap is wrong, if stock in the company that produces and sells the CDs is determined by the fund managers to have the best risk/return profile for the funds invested, that stock is the asset they should buy.
'Sides - Buffalo - what would Rick James think?
2007-07-23 10:43:33 · 8 answers · asked by truthisback 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
fdj but what about the WAY Al Sharpton is going about it, to wit, appropriating other people's property? The government employees' pension fund is NOT THE GOVERNMENT'S MONEY.
2007-07-23 10:52:34 · update #1
Westhill (a) I'm a Libertarian, I think gangsta rap is stupid but people should be free to listen to it, and (b) he's using other people's money.
See this is very telling - the Libs just can't even see that the means are an issue!!!! They think as long as the ends "seem like a good idea" it's irrelevant how they will achieve them.
That's scary!
2007-07-23 10:58:56 · update #2
It's not an "economic boycott" when you use SOMEONE ELSE'S MONEY.
It's an "economic boycott" if Al Sharpton gets on a megaphone and tells his peeps to stop buying records made by companies X, Y and Z - - - THAT'S perfectly FINE, they have a right to buy or not buy whatever they want and their reasons are their own - - but he's not doing that. He's directing the managers of other people's money, who have a fiduciary duty to consider risk and return only in managing it, to consider "social" factors - to dilute the returns to be generated for the owners of those assets.
And again - that the Libs fail to distinguish even between government funds and government employees' funds under government management, is very scary.
2007-07-23 11:01:43 · update #3
Westhill it has EVERYTHING TO DO with the fiduciary duties of the fund managers - they are being directed to make decisions based on criteria other than risk and return.
2007-07-23 11:02:33 · update #4
I'm afraid that I have to disagree; truthisback is correct--a fund manager's *only* duty is to maximize ROI for the fund owners. If that means investing in businesses or locations that are not "politically correct" than that is too bad. It's business, not politics or a social agenda.
2007-07-23 11:05:01 · answer #1 · answered by Mathsorcerer 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Wait... he wants to do a type of economic boycott against objectionable rap music and you as a Conservative are against this! If he took the opposite position you'd oppose it on moral grounds.
Money managers can be directed to divest their ownership in certain stocks. The pension funds can make this choice. This has nothing to do with the fiduciary duty of the managers. Universities, pensions funds and other large institutional investors have sold off investments in South Africa during apartheid and in Iran just lately. The investors have the right to give these directions, and yes, it's a valid use of their money.
Sharpton is right because his actions are helping to clean up music lyrics.
2007-07-23 10:51:42 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Reverend Al seems to know all about other people's money. Too bad he never worked for a living, then he could have his own pension.
2007-07-23 10:48:54 · answer #3 · answered by sam simeon 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Sounds like a special interest group
2007-07-23 10:47:44 · answer #4 · answered by Don W 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
uhhh
fo once al may be trying to do something legitimate and that is to
tone down the ridicoulous rap industry
so i support him on this one
2007-07-23 10:48:36 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
plain and simple the one sure way to know when Al Sharpton is wrong is to ask this one simple question.
Did Al Sharpton Speak?
if the answer is yes then you can be sure he is wrong.
2007-07-23 10:47:56 · answer #6 · answered by Insane 5 · 2⤊ 1⤋
I second Westhill.
2007-07-23 10:53:20 · answer #7 · answered by Rosebee 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
"again"?
ALWAYS.
At least since as far back as tawana brawley, as far as I know.
2007-07-23 10:46:35 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋