2 ms·

But not voting is like not investing. If you can't beat the index you don't just not invest, just like if you can't vote better than average you don't just not

But not voting is like not investing. If you can't beat the index you don't just not invest, just like if you can't vote better than average you don't just not vote. All you do is give others an outsized influence. Should index funds not vote on whether index funds should receive dividends or not? If you're a Turkey, you don't abstain from the Christmas vote.

mlthoughts2018 7y ago
If you know your own vote is worse than average, then by tacitly increasing the value of other voters’ votes by not voting, you are thereby increasing the influence of better quality votes than your own vote (by your own premise). Another way to go would be to just copy the average vote, which again by the premise would have to improve the quality of your vote. If you know you are not informed, then not voting _really is_ one of the best things you can do, in a utilitarian sense.
- benj111 7y ago
  I'll accept that if there's a vote that doesn't affect you, and you aren't qualified in the particular area, then you may not be adding much by voting, I don't think you can extrapolate that out to not voting at all, which is what my original parent was suggesting. I'll go further and accept the mere possibility of you being able to vote prevents the very worst outcomes. I'm doubtful you would knowingly have a worse than average opinion though, Dunning Kruger (and the reverse) I would guess, would dominate, so if you think you're worse than average, that would make you better than average, and make you duty bound to vote to cancel out the guy who thinks he knows better. Question. If I created an index and tracker that tracked low carbon companies, and that tracker voted against things that would increase the carbon intensity of it's businesses, would that tracker still be passive? I would say yes, it is still tracking an index, and its following simple rules to further the aims of that tracker, and by extension, it's investors
OscarCunningham 7y ago
> Should index funds not vote on whether index funds should receive dividends or not? That's not the kind of question shareholders vote on. I doubt it would even be legal to pay different amounts to different shareholders within the same share class.
- benj111 7y ago
  Well if passive investors aren't going to vote, you can bet active investors are going to suggest things that disadvantage them. You're right, something so blatant probably isn't allowed, but offering cheap convertible bonds, which passives won't buy, convertible to preferential shares that can pay different dividends. That's plausible, as are 1000 other things. I don't want to do a Godwin, but if you don't vote, someone else will still vote for Hitler, and genocide isn't the type of question citizens vote on.

mlthoughts2018 7y ago

If you know your own vote is worse than average, then by tacitly increasing the value of other voters’ votes by not voting, you are thereby increasing the influence of better quality votes than your own vote (by your own premise). Another way to go would be to just copy the average vote, which again by the premise would have to improve the quality of your vote. If you know you are not informed, then not voting _really is_ one of the best things you can do, in a utilitarian sense.

benj111 7y ago
I'll accept that if there's a vote that doesn't affect you, and you aren't qualified in the particular area, then you may not be adding much by voting, I don't think you can extrapolate that out to not voting at all, which is what my original parent was suggesting. I'll go further and accept the mere possibility of you being able to vote prevents the very worst outcomes. I'm doubtful you would knowingly have a worse than average opinion though, Dunning Kruger (and the reverse) I would guess, would dominate, so if you think you're worse than average, that would make you better than average, and make you duty bound to vote to cancel out the guy who thinks he knows better. Question. If I created an index and tracker that tracked low carbon companies, and that tracker voted against things that would increase the carbon intensity of it's businesses, would that tracker still be passive? I would say yes, it is still tracking an index, and its following simple rules to further the aims of that tracker, and by extension, it's investors

OscarCunningham 7y ago

> Should index funds not vote on whether index funds should receive dividends or not? That's not the kind of question shareholders vote on. I doubt it would even be legal to pay different amounts to different shareholders within the same share class.

benj111 7y ago
Well if passive investors aren't going to vote, you can bet active investors are going to suggest things that disadvantage them. You're right, something so blatant probably isn't allowed, but offering cheap convertible bonds, which passives won't buy, convertible to preferential shares that can pay different dividends. That's plausible, as are 1000 other things. I don't want to do a Godwin, but if you don't vote, someone else will still vote for Hitler, and genocide isn't the type of question citizens vote on.