4 ms·

Unfortunately the recent trend of tearing down public statues probably doesn’t instill confidence that these kinds of corporate investments will be properly pro

Unfortunately the recent trend of tearing down public statues probably doesn’t instill confidence that these kinds of corporate investments will be properly protected.

jemski 6y ago
If it takes 155 years or so for people to decide they don't like that investment, I'd probably call that a sound investment. You could even put money into things that tend to be quite nice for people. Schools come to mind. Libraries. I'm spitballing. Unless the plan is to build monuments to current day prison wardens. Depends how bad-faith the argument is, I suppose.
- Kye 6y ago
  Not that it takes away from your point, but they're mostly not 155 years old. Most of the statues were put up during the Jim Crow era and during the Civil Rights movement of the '60s. You can see a graph on the Wikipedia page. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Confederate_monuments_and_memorials https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Confederate_monuments_...
heisbsissi 6y ago
Yeah and when the rabble ended slavery I sold all my stocks because I knew the stupid libs didn't respect private property.
rswail 6y ago
Hmm, perhaps Wall St M&A activities pumping stock prices isn't considered "core" to Main St's society and economies. It might be time to divest it from society's operations to allow us to focus on our core competencies and comparative advantages?
pessimizer 6y ago
A statue isn't an investment these days unless it drives tourism. Statues of Confederate soldiers put up 70 years at the end of the Civil War were good investments at the time, because placing far cheaper signage displaying direct messages to black people from the local authorities would be seen as distasteful or possibly illegal (depending on the phrasing of the message.) A sudden unexplained affection for Nathan Bedford Forrest was a clear message, and cheap to maintain after an initial outlay.

Unfortunately the recent trend of tearing down public statues probably doesn’t instill confidence that these kinds of corporate investments will be properly protected.

jemski 6y ago

If it takes 155 years or so for people to decide they don't like that investment, I'd probably call that a sound investment. You could even put money into things that tend to be quite nice for people. Schools come to mind. Libraries. I'm spitballing. Unless the plan is to build monuments to current day prison wardens. Depends how bad-faith the argument is, I suppose.

Kye 6y ago
Not that it takes away from your point, but they're mostly not 155 years old. Most of the statues were put up during the Jim Crow era and during the Civil Rights movement of the '60s. You can see a graph on the Wikipedia page. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Confederate_monuments_and_memorials https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Confederate_monuments_...

heisbsissi 6y ago

Yeah and when the rabble ended slavery I sold all my stocks because I knew the stupid libs didn't respect private property.

rswail 6y ago

Hmm, perhaps Wall St M&A activities pumping stock prices isn't considered "core" to Main St's society and economies. It might be time to divest it from society's operations to allow us to focus on our core competencies and comparative advantages?

pessimizer 6y ago

A statue isn't an investment these days unless it drives tourism. Statues of Confederate soldiers put up 70 years at the end of the Civil War were good investments at the time, because placing far cheaper signage displaying direct messages to black people from the local authorities would be seen as distasteful or possibly illegal (depending on the phrasing of the message.) A sudden unexplained affection for Nathan Bedford Forrest was a clear message, and cheap to maintain after an initial outlay.