5 ms·

> BlackRock, the world’s largest asset manager, has played no part in the pension reforms. But workers targeted the company because of its work for private pens

> BlackRock, the world’s largest asset manager, has played no part in the pension reforms. But workers targeted the company because of its work for private pension funds, according to protester Françoise Onic, a school teacher who spoke to Reuters. Uh... this makes no sense. At first I thought it was a coincidence, but nope, it was intentional and targeted. > “The meaning of this action is quite simple. We went to the headquarters of BlackRock to tell them: the money of workers, for our pensions, they are taking it,” Jerome Schmitt, spokesman for French union SUD, told CNN affiliate BFM-TV. Again, this makes absolutely no sense. The protesters aren't even aligned on why they are there. If this was about the pensions this moment would be a bit like keying your own car.

prepend 4y ago
Mobs aren’t typically known for being smart or avoiding stupid actions. What’s weird here is that it seems more like willful stupidity rather than just random mobs burning things due to chaos. I think it’s some sort of availability bias. Black rock isn’t doing the thing they dislike but they are big and have an office in Paris; therefore, burn it down as an effigy of the system I dislike.
- legitster 4y ago
  Well, the mobs have at least been pretty peaceful. So much as they have a goal it's to get attention. They probably had a dozen different targets they try to hit in a day, tell any media that show up why they are there, and then move on. Actually having a good reason is unimportant - they are just trying to hack a way into a news cycle.
  - prepend 4y ago
    > pretty peaceful I don’t like this description. Peaceful protests are peaceful. Pretty peaceful protests aren’t peaceful. There was a protest in my town recently where a cop car was set on fire and a bunch of windows were smashed. Maybe 200-500 people total but it was described as “mostly peaceful.” While that is true as I think only 10 people were arrested and more were violent, but that’s like 5-10% violent and the rest peaceful. I don’t think that’s earnest and truthful and I’d rather like to know if a group is peaceful or not.
    - anigbrowl 4y ago
      There's a fundamental difference between property and people, and many people consider interpersonal violence as the dividing line between what's peaceful or not. This cannot be decided unilaterally. Using a zero-tolerance approach leads to outcomes like police gassing crowds of thousands of people because one individual flung a water bottle in their general direction.
      - prepend 4y ago
        Oh certainly. A burned car is a different form of violence than someone beaten or killed. But “mostly peaceful” protests are the bad kind of protests. I think they are more accurately described as light riots or something or mostly peaceful riots. Or some inflection point between a lawful, peaceful protest and a violent protest. The police actually just kind of watched the protesters smashing and burning stuff and they certainly werent tear gassing people. But I think that they do need to do something to stop violent/mostly peaceful protests and arresting 9 out of 100-200 rioters doesn’t seem to be reducing the number of riots.
      - dumpsterdiver 4y ago
        While I agree there is a difference between committing acts of violence against people and inanimate objects, I would consider damaging or destroying a person's home or primary means of transportation (perhaps one and the same) as a direct attack upon that person's well-being. It's not accurate to say that a protest is mostly peaceful when random citizens lose their ability to drive to work and subsequently take on unexpected costs that might devastate them financially.
    - cudgy 4y ago
      How is 90-95% peaceful not “mostly peaceful”?
      - prepend 4y ago
        I mean that “mostly peaceful” isn’t a good label as it downplays the important piece that most protests are peaceful. So a “mostly peaceful” is actually a violent protest. It’s like describing someone charged with domestic abuse as “mostly a loving spouse who almost never beat their spouse.” True, but disingenuous.
- anigbrowl 4y ago
  That seems strategic rather than stupid.
kneebonian 4y ago
In me it seems more of an expression with a general dissatisifaction with the current massive conglomerates that seem to be ossfying into a defacto ruling class. Blackrock is a massive player that is by some accounts, possibly the largest and most powerful hedge fund in the world, that is doing things like buying up houses to rent out, pursuing ESG initiatives extensively etc. It's not about the pensions so much as it is an expression of outrage about the powerlessness people are feeling and directing it at what is precieved to be one of the sources of that powerlessness.
- dangwhy 4y ago
  > buying up houses to rent out I've seen this reported many times even in places like nytimes but never seen actual numbers behind it. I 've read number between 3% and even as high as 20% . My impression was it was ordinary upper income ppl like high end tech workers , retirees ect that were doing most of the buying and renting. A vast majority of my friends now own rental properties by directly buying them or turning their previous residence into a rental. We all want one evil villain to blame but reality is much more complicated. Thats why movements like occupy wall st acoomplish nothing. Wouldn't it be easy if the problem can be solved by taking down one evil dude in his castle. https://www.vox.com/platform/amp/22524829/wall-street-housing-market-blackrock-bubble https://www.vox.com/platform/amp/22524829/wall-street-housin...
  - TylerE 4y ago
    Gotta start somewhere. Taking out one evil dude = one less evil dude = better society. Do not let perfect be the enemy of good.
  - mistermann 4y ago
    > We all want one evil villain to blame but reality is much more complicated. Thats why movements like occupy wall st acoomplish nothing. Whether the demise of OWS was 100% due to their shortcomings and actions is speculative - a lot of people think the original demise and subsequent massive increase in culture war catching the media's attention (and in turn, dividing the public on yet another contentious issue) was to some degree coordinated...and I am one of those people.
ekianjo 4y ago
[flagged]
- causi 4y ago
  Is this terminology I'm not familiar with or are you saying French unions regularly kidnap people?
wunderland 4y ago
Just because CNN writes “BlackRock ... has played no part in the pension reforms”, can you not see how the world’s largest asset manager — which manages many private pensions — would obviously have a clear interest in such pension reforms? This isn’t complicated.
- legitster 4y ago
  Sure, but Blackrock managing your pension is all the same to them whether you start drawing on it at 62 vs 64. If anything, the collapse of the French public pension system would be a net benefit to their business if people start fleeing to private investments.
  - ngrost24 4y ago
    The way I see it, if the pension fund has less money there's less to manage and also less to gain from. If the people flee to private investments, they do not necessarily flee to Blackrock.
    - realusername 4y ago
      That's the opposite though, the pension fund gets more money because of the reforms. Sure the workers are screwed in favour of retired people but the fund is increasing with this change.
      - ubercow13 4y ago
        Isn't this change about the public pension, which is not a fund at all, it's simply a transfer from workers to retirees? Blackrock has nothing to do with that money, except in that if the money becomes insufficient, people might privately invest in Blackrock products to make up the difference.
- realusername 4y ago
  And by how much those reforms are adding private pensions into the mix?
mistermann 4y ago
> Again, this makes absolutely no sense. You might say the same about large quantities of public policy, written by The Experts, with little regard for public sentiment, in this so called "democracy". Let's hope that the elites aren't too inconvenienced in their walled neighbourhoods by these non-expert's lack of expertise.

prepend 4y ago

Mobs aren’t typically known for being smart or avoiding stupid actions. What’s weird here is that it seems more like willful stupidity rather than just random mobs burning things due to chaos. I think it’s some sort of availability bias. Black rock isn’t doing the thing they dislike but they are big and have an office in Paris; therefore, burn it down as an effigy of the system I dislike.

legitster 4y ago
Well, the mobs have at least been pretty peaceful. So much as they have a goal it's to get attention. They probably had a dozen different targets they try to hit in a day, tell any media that show up why they are there, and then move on. Actually having a good reason is unimportant - they are just trying to hack a way into a news cycle.
- prepend 4y ago
  > pretty peaceful I don’t like this description. Peaceful protests are peaceful. Pretty peaceful protests aren’t peaceful. There was a protest in my town recently where a cop car was set on fire and a bunch of windows were smashed. Maybe 200-500 people total but it was described as “mostly peaceful.” While that is true as I think only 10 people were arrested and more were violent, but that’s like 5-10% violent and the rest peaceful. I don’t think that’s earnest and truthful and I’d rather like to know if a group is peaceful or not.
  - anigbrowl 4y ago
    There's a fundamental difference between property and people, and many people consider interpersonal violence as the dividing line between what's peaceful or not. This cannot be decided unilaterally. Using a zero-tolerance approach leads to outcomes like police gassing crowds of thousands of people because one individual flung a water bottle in their general direction.
    - prepend 4y ago
      Oh certainly. A burned car is a different form of violence than someone beaten or killed. But “mostly peaceful” protests are the bad kind of protests. I think they are more accurately described as light riots or something or mostly peaceful riots. Or some inflection point between a lawful, peaceful protest and a violent protest. The police actually just kind of watched the protesters smashing and burning stuff and they certainly werent tear gassing people. But I think that they do need to do something to stop violent/mostly peaceful protests and arresting 9 out of 100-200 rioters doesn’t seem to be reducing the number of riots.
    - dumpsterdiver 4y ago
      While I agree there is a difference between committing acts of violence against people and inanimate objects, I would consider damaging or destroying a person's home or primary means of transportation (perhaps one and the same) as a direct attack upon that person's well-being. It's not accurate to say that a protest is mostly peaceful when random citizens lose their ability to drive to work and subsequently take on unexpected costs that might devastate them financially.
  - cudgy 4y ago
    How is 90-95% peaceful not “mostly peaceful”?
    - prepend 4y ago
      I mean that “mostly peaceful” isn’t a good label as it downplays the important piece that most protests are peaceful. So a “mostly peaceful” is actually a violent protest. It’s like describing someone charged with domestic abuse as “mostly a loving spouse who almost never beat their spouse.” True, but disingenuous.
anigbrowl 4y ago
That seems strategic rather than stupid.

kneebonian 4y ago

In me it seems more of an expression with a general dissatisifaction with the current massive conglomerates that seem to be ossfying into a defacto ruling class. Blackrock is a massive player that is by some accounts, possibly the largest and most powerful hedge fund in the world, that is doing things like buying up houses to rent out, pursuing ESG initiatives extensively etc. It's not about the pensions so much as it is an expression of outrage about the powerlessness people are feeling and directing it at what is precieved to be one of the sources of that powerlessness.

dangwhy 4y ago
> buying up houses to rent out I've seen this reported many times even in places like nytimes but never seen actual numbers behind it. I 've read number between 3% and even as high as 20% . My impression was it was ordinary upper income ppl like high end tech workers , retirees ect that were doing most of the buying and renting. A vast majority of my friends now own rental properties by directly buying them or turning their previous residence into a rental. We all want one evil villain to blame but reality is much more complicated. Thats why movements like occupy wall st acoomplish nothing. Wouldn't it be easy if the problem can be solved by taking down one evil dude in his castle. https://www.vox.com/platform/amp/22524829/wall-street-housing-market-blackrock-bubble https://www.vox.com/platform/amp/22524829/wall-street-housin...
- TylerE 4y ago
  Gotta start somewhere. Taking out one evil dude = one less evil dude = better society. Do not let perfect be the enemy of good.
- mistermann 4y ago
  > We all want one evil villain to blame but reality is much more complicated. Thats why movements like occupy wall st acoomplish nothing. Whether the demise of OWS was 100% due to their shortcomings and actions is speculative - a lot of people think the original demise and subsequent massive increase in culture war catching the media's attention (and in turn, dividing the public on yet another contentious issue) was to some degree coordinated...and I am one of those people.

ekianjo 4y ago

[flagged]

causi 4y ago
Is this terminology I'm not familiar with or are you saying French unions regularly kidnap people?

wunderland 4y ago

Just because CNN writes “BlackRock ... has played no part in the pension reforms”, can you not see how the world’s largest asset manager — which manages many private pensions — would obviously have a clear interest in such pension reforms? This isn’t complicated.

legitster 4y ago
Sure, but Blackrock managing your pension is all the same to them whether you start drawing on it at 62 vs 64. If anything, the collapse of the French public pension system would be a net benefit to their business if people start fleeing to private investments.
- ngrost24 4y ago
  The way I see it, if the pension fund has less money there's less to manage and also less to gain from. If the people flee to private investments, they do not necessarily flee to Blackrock.
  - realusername 4y ago
    That's the opposite though, the pension fund gets more money because of the reforms. Sure the workers are screwed in favour of retired people but the fund is increasing with this change.
    - ubercow13 4y ago
      Isn't this change about the public pension, which is not a fund at all, it's simply a transfer from workers to retirees? Blackrock has nothing to do with that money, except in that if the money becomes insufficient, people might privately invest in Blackrock products to make up the difference.
realusername 4y ago
And by how much those reforms are adding private pensions into the mix?

mistermann 4y ago

> Again, this makes absolutely no sense. You might say the same about large quantities of public policy, written by The Experts, with little regard for public sentiment, in this so called "democracy". Let's hope that the elites aren't too inconvenienced in their walled neighbourhoods by these non-expert's lack of expertise.