3 ms·

> Investing in fossil fuels makes you responsible for the people who use those services? Maybe not responsible, but not exactly a great move if you cared more

by diggan 1y ago

> Investing in fossil fuels makes you responsible for the people who use those services? Maybe not responsible, but not exactly a great move if you cared more about our world than your own financials. Said another way, if the top 10% stopped investing in companies continuing with fossil fuels, and instead tried to aim to invest into renewables, couldn't that potentially A) make companies dealing with renewables more attractive as investments increase and B) make companies dealing with fossil fuels less attractive or potentially make them change towards something else? Basically "Vote with your wallet" but for the ultra-rich, and "Vote" is really "Make Earth still be habitable in the future".

fastball 1y ago
You have this backwards. People invest in these companies because they are growing. They are growing because consumers (you and me) are, year over year, consuming more and more fossil fuels and their byproducts. Investment doesn't drive our behavior, our behavior is what is driving investment.
- WorldMaker 1y ago
  Investment shifts Supply through capital expenditures. Less investment can mean lower supply. Lower supply can mean higher prices. Higher prices can cause lower demand. Investment definitely has a relationship with demand, that's one of the core parts of the law of supply and demand. The businesses don't "have to" grow just because there seems to be a high demand. The businesses not growing can be a useful way to drop that demand. It's still a choice to prefer short-term investment revenue gains from a business that is long-term destructive to the planet and everyone else's well being. That revenue isn't value neutral, the source still matters.
- amanaplanacanal 1y ago
  That leaves out the political side. Big companies have way more influence on governance than you and I do, and will lobby to make the law favor their business rather than outcomes that would protect the environment.
  - fastball 1y ago
    If companies have too much influence, that can be changed. In the mean time, investors in oil companies are not "responsible" for warming – our consumption is.
    - AlecSchueler 1y ago
      > If companies have too much influence, that can be changed. So far it seems that it can't as long as these companies are using investors' money to lobby various governments. > investors in oil companies are not "responsible" for warming – our consumption is. Many people would happily use alternatives to lessen the impact of their consumption but there are companies more powerful than them trying to influence and limit their options.

by diggan 1y ago

fastball 1y ago

You have this backwards. People invest in these companies because they are growing. They are growing because consumers (you and me) are, year over year, consuming more and more fossil fuels and their byproducts. Investment doesn't drive our behavior, our behavior is what is driving investment.

WorldMaker 1y ago
Investment shifts Supply through capital expenditures. Less investment can mean lower supply. Lower supply can mean higher prices. Higher prices can cause lower demand. Investment definitely has a relationship with demand, that's one of the core parts of the law of supply and demand. The businesses don't "have to" grow just because there seems to be a high demand. The businesses not growing can be a useful way to drop that demand. It's still a choice to prefer short-term investment revenue gains from a business that is long-term destructive to the planet and everyone else's well being. That revenue isn't value neutral, the source still matters.
amanaplanacanal 1y ago
That leaves out the political side. Big companies have way more influence on governance than you and I do, and will lobby to make the law favor their business rather than outcomes that would protect the environment.
- fastball 1y ago
  If companies have too much influence, that can be changed. In the mean time, investors in oil companies are not "responsible" for warming – our consumption is.
  - AlecSchueler 1y ago
    > If companies have too much influence, that can be changed. So far it seems that it can't as long as these companies are using investors' money to lobby various governments. > investors in oil companies are not "responsible" for warming – our consumption is. Many people would happily use alternatives to lessen the impact of their consumption but there are companies more powerful than them trying to influence and limit their options.