Have you thanked Walmart recently for providing a job to 2.2 million of people? They go out of business, then those jobs are gone.
How many Sears stores were taken over and jobs maintained when they went bankrupt? Apples and oranges.Maybe a part of these jobs will be gone, but surely not 2.2 million. Amazon, Lidl, Aldi have still big expansion plans. Take over Walmart would be an opportunity for them.
Last year one of the biggest travel agencies with a fleet of own planes, own hotels everywhere and shops in many countries went broke. In a very short time big pieces of the company, including the employees, were taken over by competitors.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Cook_Group
I have a lot of respect for the Japanese and their work ethic. But they are a dying country. Huge demographic problem. Also, compare the Nikkei 225 to the S&P since the early 90s. And the Nikkei 225 would be even worse if the BOJ had not been buying it over the past decade.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...ying-pace-through-march-sources-idUSKBN20Y1Q9
Businesses don't exist to employ people. They exist to produce products and services for a profit. That profit is necessary to sustain the business, allow it to expand, and sustain it though hard times (I agree with your last point). Have you thanked Walmart recently for providing a job to 2.2 million of people? They go out of business, then those jobs are gone.
Maybe a part of these jobs will be gone, but surely not 2.2 million. Amazon, Lidl, Aldi have still big expansion plans. Take over Walmart would be an opportunity for them.
Last year one of the biggest travel agencies with a fleet of own planes, own hotels everywhere and shops in many countries went broke. In a very short time big pieces of the company, including the employees, were taken over by competitors.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Cook_Group
You are so behind the times. Ever heard of ESG? It's not a fad but a fundamental change in society. Companies that only adhere to shareholders will either not be tolerated anymore or large funds will simply not invest in them anymore. We are not talking about small size Carl Icahn accounts but funds of the size of Calpers.
Also you can push to continue to favor the current setup. But you will over time end up with a developing country that has the biggest number of billionaires and the largest army in the world. All that while the rest of the country dies from starvation, murder, obesity, and lack of education. Already now Australia, New Zealand, Germany, Japan, Switzerland, Denmark, Holland and a bunch of others are worlds ahead in terms of metrics that humans really care about.
You're talking past each other. You're fixated on financial performance as the only meaningful metric. The ESG folks are saying that financial performance isn't the only meaningful metric. So arguing that ESG won't outperform SPY isn't really a meaningful argument against that point.Your response had nothing to do with the decline of Japan that I pointed out. ESG is the latest fad. My bet is that it will drastically under-perform QQQ over the next several years similar to how SHE (Gender / Diversity ETF) has underperformed SPY. Since inception a few years ago, it's only up 2.57%...and that's total return, not annual. SPY up 34% over that same period.
A business that primarily exists to employ people is not a business worth investment. Objective of any business for long-term sustainability is to reduce long-term costs as much as possible while growing revenue. Therefore, there should be a continuous focus on automating as much as possible. Automation also reduces human error and allows production to continue uninterrupted by factors that influence humans.
Your response had nothing to do with the decline of Japan that I pointed out. ESG is the latest fad. My bet is that it will drastically under-perform QQQ over the next several years similar to how SHE (Gender / Diversity ETF) has underperformed SPY. Since inception a few years ago, it's only up 2.57%...and that's total return, not annual. SPY up 34% over that same period.
A business that primarily exists to employ people is not a business worth investment. Objective of any business for long-term sustainability is to reduce long-term costs as much as possible while growing revenue. Therefore, there should be a continuous focus on automating as much as possible. Automation also reduces human error and allows production to continue uninterrupted by factors that influence humans.
Nobody talks about Japan here, Japan was used as an example to support the main point. Also, nobody claims a business should not primarily be profit seeking. You are conflating issues, throw them all in one big bucket and stir. It's hard to see the big picture through a cloud of soup.
Actually, you brought up Japan. You highlighted why it's so great and implied that other countries should emulate it. Well, hate to say it, but it's a dying country that had to resort to negative interest rates and have the CB buy its stock market.
As I said, a company that exists primarily to create jobs is a horrible investment and unlikely to survive. Companies will always seek ways to reduce human labor in order to reduce cost and improve reliability and efficiency.