3 ms·
> ... someone is on the other side of that transaction, lending the billions. Who does that and why? Are they perpetual suckers, unaware of the decades of exper
by everybodyknows 3y ago
> ... someone is on the other side of that transaction, lending the billions. Who does that and why? Are they perpetual suckers, unaware of the decades of experience we have doing this?
I listened to a podcast interview with a financial professional who advises public pension fund boards. What he said in all but words was that, yes, the political appointees who actually vote on decisions are perpetual suckers.
- ahzhou 3y agoPensions are very rarely lenders. They may invest in lenders but tend to look at historical performance. Political appointees are not the ones making investment decisions. At most they are setting very broad themes. For example, political appointees are the ones that say all investments must be carbon-neutral.
- pessimizer 3y ago> Political appointees are not the ones making investment decisions. Political appointees are making investment decisions by choosing the people who make investment decisions.