The Corruption of Stakeholder Capitalism

[Music] hey there everyone it's James Lindsay and you are listening to the new discourses podcast it's time to talk about the stakeholder model in ESG I really should probably reflect this off of Claus Schwab very specifically since he's credited with developing the so-called stakeholder model um in fact stakeholder capitalism is his his claim to fame uh allegedly he actually cooked This idea up in the 70s uh there are reasons to believe that he didn't cook it up at all but that he borrowed it from his mentors at Harvard uh the infamous Harvard um namely particularly

uh Henry kinger um the stakeholder model is a model ultimately of oligarchical control which is a big fancy word to say that there are going to be certain Elites who have the secret knowledge of how Society is supposed to work and how everything in society is supposed to Work and they're going to run everything and they're doing it in the name of these things called stakeholders so you would think that you are a stakeholder because they Define stakeholders is everybody who has a stake in the thing um so if a company produces a product whether

you want to buy that if you want to buy that product you have a stake in them producing the product well but if they you know say use water or electricity since you also Depend on water and electricity and resources are in some sense finite you're a stakeholder and how they run their corporation that way too if they produce pollution you're a stakeholder in their environmental damage so everybody's a stakeholder but that means that really nobody's a stakeholder and what they actually are doing is selecting handful a handful of experts that are going to actually

be the representatives of how the stakeholder Thinks and this model like I said is largely attributed to CL Schwab um it probably came out of the Harvard Consortium which included Kissinger at the time and it is a shift of power from people to the representatives in the stakeholder Council which is as good a Time is I need to remind you that the word which I'll mispronounce cuz I'll try to be fancy about it that means governing Council uh in in Russian is Soviet uh so you can you can do what you Want with that um

ultimately what they are going to run through this stakeholder model is a economic system known as distributism now I talked about that in the degrowth uh the degrowth communism podcast that I did talking about uh the the the distributist model in fact I called it degrowth distributism instead of degrowth communism because I realize reading kito's book on degrowth communism that what he's actually Describing is a distributist model that the society itself is generating lots of goods and services and products and so on and then there is you know nature and there's society and those things

produce a commonwealth and that what you need are people who are qualified to be able to distribute the Commonwealth uh and the work required to to produce it uh reasonably and the model with degrowth is that we're going to degrow the size of our GDP to increase the Other aspects rather than Commodities and goods and services we're going to in decrease those and in exchange increase the amount of I guess free time and sociality and pristine nature and so on which I guess you're not allowed to really use or see so you can see pictures

of it that somebody took or generated in in an AI or something um with your virtual travel so that we can preserve the nature better that you'll never be able to see but that'll be an Increased amount of Commonwealth that then they will distribute so they'll decide how often you can take a vacation because they're Distributing your access to go see things like that they'll decide how much beef you can eat because they're uh Distributing access to what they would consider to be high emissions food supply food sources um and they'll also decide you know

in in terms of equity to redistribute to cross past harms and and injustices in the world Who's going to do the hard labor that nobody wants to do and who gets to do the so-called creative work hint hint they get to do the Creative work and everybody else is their slaves so anyway this model those people that know how to do the distribution of the distributist system are the stakeholders that's the model that they're building out a different way to phrase this I used to try to do this communo Fascism and fasal communism thing and

it didn't Really catch on and people didn't really get it um it's not exactly right as a matter of fact they're not particularly fascist in the fascist sense having reviewed melini what they are is neoliberal so what we're really dealing with is a neoliberal communism and communist neoliberalism um as two sides of the coin China is uh neoliberal communism they are a communist system that's running a neoliberal market to interface with the Western counterpart Which will be a uh commun neoliberalism which is a neoliberal that is to say uh big corporations in partnership with the

state and sucking off of the government tit as much as they can um and basically almost Monopoly inclusive Behavior operating with at the level of those big monopolistic companies um that is doing a communistic redistribution of wealth and in fact if they take the degrowth plan that ESG is part of uh that's actually intentionally shrinking our Economy following the path that Herbert maruza laid out in onedimensional man where he said that socialism's got the right ideology but its problem ultimately is that it can't produce that's in the second chapter but capitalism can produce but it

has the wrong ideology and what the real problem though is he say well maybe their ideology is right you know they're producing something's working I mean that's basically what he admits what he Says is that the problem is that what capitalism does is produces all these this this endless chain and infinite progress of false needs and the satisfaction of false needs it's ultimately not sustainable and so it'll eventually collapse in on itself and take Humanity with it or lead us into the Calamity of a nuclear war as people fight uh over the the the amount

of privation relative privation that it uh produces and so the ninth chapter of Onedimensional man is basically devoted to this idea of what I would call a um sustainable capitalism and I don't know I would love to find out so if you know or have a Smoking Gun piece of evidence I'd love to see it um whether or not uh Claus Schwab or Henry Kissinger um or even the the Chinese going into the 1970s were fully aware of it's one dis you can say of course kissing at Harvard he probably read maruza that's not enough

is there some hard evidence is There a citation if you know of a citation where Kissinger is like look maruza said that capitalism is not sustainable so we're going to do blah blah blah that would be like a Smoking Gun piece of evidence that would be just unbelievable or Schwab Schwab would be even better frankly um but I think Schwab has been very careful in in hiding uh his relationships there so at any rate that's the model is this Distributist model and like I said in that previous podcast the way that it's going to work

is through a corporate subsidiarity program so you're going to have big giant corporations that basically own everything and they're going to have subsidiary corporations and that's going to trickle on down so that we all have to do the agenda at the center is the stakeholder Council or whatever they're going to call it that's the biggest top monopolistic leaders Working together to decide the stakeholder agenda for all of the stakeholders in all of the world and the corporations are all subsidiary to their biggest corporations which are probably going to be like Black Rock Vanguard and so

on that are all mutually owned by one another and this weird corporate collusion that somehow isn't considered to be a gigantic Monopoly Corporation even though it is through subsidiarity now the trick is that what you actually Have in China is that the CCP is the top Corporation and you have this exact same model uh the CCP is the top Corporation in some sense in China and then all of the corporations doing business in China are also subsidiary to it so what you have is a Subs a corporate subsidiary model in order to solve the problem

of production that socialism can't solve but with the central control and the distributism at the part of the whole thing now that's not only the case that Socialism isn't the only way to do distributism but that's the model that the ESG program that's the S and ESG really uh has chosen and so we do have this distributist model and um ESG is at the heart of it so what I'm reading to you or what this episode of the podcast is I want to go through this document called the stakeholder model in ESG uh that was

published at the Harvard Law School Forum on corporate govern govern in um I think in 2020 I'm trying to find The date yeah September 14th 2020 okay so um I'll put a link to it of course but Harvard Law School Forum on corporate governance published in late 2020 the stakeholder model and ESG laying out literally what the ambition for the ESG model is that we're now actually making progress against we're fighting back against ESG we're exposing ESG and it's actually going well to the point where they're starting to Rebrand it um people people get frustrated

by The way and think that forcing them to Rebrand these things means they're just going to keep doing it and we should we should black pill and give up no no no that's not how it works every time they Rebrand several things happen number one they waste a ton of resources having to Rebrand rewrite everything they have to go scrub old stuff off the internet they got to produce new stuff they got to disseminate new stuff they got to put it out to all the corporations they got to Get all the corporations on board all

those corporations have to now out with the old in with the new that's all taking up time resources energy and so on and secondly it's also signaling to the people involved at the corporate levels that maybe this isn't going so well and if you remember those people are primarily in the class that I call Strivers they aren't necessarily super moral but they're only going to chase a good deal what's in it that's best for Them well if it looks like this whole deal is getting shaky the ESG program because they have to Rebrand it oh

no they have to Rebrand it again and people are really mad and people are catching on to the rebranding maybe this isn't the way to go and maybe a lot of people involved in this are going to get in trouble sooner or later sooner or later the House of Cards might come down and what's going to happen is a lot of these people are going to start getting Nervous they're going to jump ship and if they jump ship it's to their biggest advantage to start telling on the people that they abandoned and more and more

comes out and the the ESG program and in fact the entire uh neoliberal communism program starts to become it starts to fall apart and so that's ultimately to our good so for ing them to Rebrand is that good it costs them a ton they lose time they lose trust they have tons of resources they have to dump into the Rebranding the other thing is is there are people who are involved in this it's not like everybody in this is a lockstep committed Soldier to the revolution a lot of them are going along with it because

they kind of have to if it has to keep going through these expensive rebrandings there are a lot of people who are going along with it and going along with it and they maybe aren't all in or maybe they are even skeptical their skepticism goes up their trust Goes down and eventually they start saying why do I have to do this and the doubt in this huge program that they're getting dragged along in goes up and again the the thing starts getting more and more rickety and starts to fall apart you don't defeat an entrenched

organized crime syndicate like with this idea that there's this you know I did some action there's steady progress I did some action there's steady progress the way that it actually works is that It falls apart very slowly and then more or less all at once and those dynamics that I just talked about are actually the pieces that build up to that all at once critical mass divestment from the program that's going south and the whole thing falls apart very quickly um they've been building this out for I mean a minimum 50 years so don't get

too discouraged that it looks like we're not making progress or just rebranding that costs them a lot all this stuff starts Becoming a liability if they have to Rebrand ESG they have all these documents that they published so proudly through the 2010s and this and 2020 and since bragging about how awesome ESG is that are now part of their record they have to go hide that then they get accused of having to hide that stuff they have to like I said they have to rewrite all of it in terms of whatever the new measurement is

and put all that out and convince people it's just a it's Actually a disaster for them it's a huge win for us even if it doesn't feel like a huge win because they're just going to keep trying to do it huge expenditure it is not smooth sailing for them and it's going to cause people to to to get skeptical and others to get scared and jump out and then it's down Ward spiral from there okay so this is the again Harvard Law School Forum on corporate governance September 2020 the stakeholder model in ESG I want

you to Understand what Harvard was saying uh three years ago is what the stakeholder model in ESG looks like remembering again that this ultimately comes from uh CLA Schwab which is probably to say it comes from Henry Kissinger before CLA Schwab I'm checking real quick to see if CLA Schwab is cited in this and the answer is no he is not cited in this so um there's probably some effort in in disguising that by the way CL Schwab one more time was working in this kind of Harvard Consortium when this whole thing was cooked up

so this is really the stakeholder model is really the Harvard model and with everything going on at Harvard right now that should tell you a lot more about how crooked it is okay so it starts with an introduction in August 2019 The Business Roundtable released its new stakeholder model of the revised purpose of the corporation stating explicitly that businesses exist to serve multiple Stakeholders including customers employees communities the environment and suppliers in addition to shareholders okay so they're telling you straight up front that the business Round Table gathered in 2019 a year before this report

specifically to say that the corporation's purpose has to be redefined the entire purpose of Corporation needs to take on a new model and that's going to be the the stakeholder model businesses don't exist To serve their shareholders they exist to serve all of their stakeholders which includes customers employees communities the environment and suppliers so all of those entities the environment being literally Everybody by the way has a claim on the corporation they hold a stake in how the corporate environment behaves it's no longer the shareholders who have their money in the system invested in the

corporation they Have their skin in the game who are making the decisions it's now all the customers employees communities the environment and suppliers have a stake in the corporation so it's very important to realize what a big deal this is they are Harvard is trying to announce by Fiat here that thanks to the Business Roundtable meeting the purpose of the corporation itself has to be redefined in terms of this new model they then say This new model was publicly supported by 181 CEOs of major corporations so this is the standard trick that they always play

where they're trying to say look how many people already agree with us those people could be colluding those people could have um made backro Deals they could be part of the world economic Forum or you know some other uh very elite secret club that doesn't tell it's like when four out of five dentists agree that toothpaste is good um so this New model was publicly supported by 181 CEOs of major corporations it uh it could have a substantial impact on corporate incentive designs metrics and other governance areas as corporations continue or begin to operationalize a

stakeholder model into their long-term strategies as incentive plans are core to reinforcing and communicating the business strategy now hold on because this incentive stuff's important because this is where you start to see that the Incentive structure if you want to get a good ESG score in the G or governance component what you have to do is give yourself big bonuses for implementing ESG as an executive couldn't possibly be more corrupt than that but literally that's part of it so that's an incentive structure on CEOs to implement ESG they personally get paid to do it there

are other incentive structures um both carrots and sticks but that's a very interesting one and these incentive Plans are they say core to reinforcing and communicating business strategy but I want to turn tune you into a important quote by Charlie Munger who was war bu Buffett's business partner at Burkshire Hathaway until he recently died I'm not endorsing Charlie Munger fact I know very little about Charlie Monger I know this quote however and I want you to keep this quote in mind a lot which is if you show me the incentive I'll show you the outcome

and I might have that Paraphrased a little bit show me the incentive and I'll show you the outcome as the general idea and so here what they're saying is the way that this is going to work is by designing in specifically through corporate governance and related designs and metrics and so on that they are specifically operationalizing the stakeholder model through changing corporate incentive structures um what it says here to Finish the first paragraph is while there are many opinions on the business Round Table statement the stakeholder model is evolving in both importance and sophistication that

doesn't really say anything of any value further and now everybody go get your your shot because you're going to have to drink the covid-19 pandemic the associated economic impacts and increased focus on social justice illustrate the increasing expectations On and willingness of corporate leaders to address social issues that may extend beyond a traditionally narrower view of the business purpose of the corporation given these circumstances some companies are taking a fresh look at their impact on numerous stakeholder groups and their reinforcing impact on on Company Success now what is that what what are they talking about

what are these numerous stakeholder groups well they just said their issues to do with economic impacts And increased focus on social justice the covid-19 pandemic and of course the environmental stuff lurking somewhere in the background that's what they're actually talking about as it turns out so what they're saying very clearly remember they're revamping the entire purpose of the corporation around this um is that they want to take a fresh look at their impact on numerous stakeholder groups and their reinforcing impact on Company Success in other words Will these impact groups environmental lobbyists uh young people

in general um BLM activists and so on what what kind of PR are they going to generate against your corporation if you're not doing the right thing just stop oil is a great example um and what do they say for example will increased focus on employee Wellness initiatives enhance the resilience of Corporations will sustainable Supply chains in real estate differentiate a Company in both the consumer and talent markets or are these practices rapidly becoming Baseline expectations of employees investors customers and the broader Community nowhere in there do they say or is maybe this a bad

idea they say are these practices rapidly becoming Baseline expectations of who your employees in other words they won't work for you if you don't do like what they want investors you can't get investment unless you're doing all the Right uh ESG BS customers customers won't buy from your company unless it's um responsible enough and in ESG terms and the broader community so there's your pressure campaigns and other things the answers to these questions are beyond the scope of our expertise but these and similar questions are at the center of the discussion on ESG metrics and

their applicability to incentive compensation so what they're trying to do is say that the incentive Compensation means that they're going to pay Executives to do this to implement this um which is how basically they got a lot of it to get implemented there like I said there are other carrots and sticks including access to to Capital listing in the in the various uh index funds and so on directly getting pressured from you know majority ownership through these these these passive investment firms and so on there are other other aspects but corporate Incentive compensation executive should

say compensation as incentives tells you why they're implementing this in so many cases it says if the stakeholder model represents an emerging model for the Strategic vision of a company ESG meaning environmental social and governance metrics can be used to assess and measure company performance and its relative positioning on a range of topics relevant to the broader set of company stakeholders not as shareholders It's not about making money anymore and the same way that Financial me metrics assess company performance for shareholders see it's something completely different now they have to take into all of these

things like uh the Baseline expectations for employees investors customers broader Community covid-19 uh social justice environmental stuff all that has to go into there because they're going to do some kind of a broader performance measurement under ESG which involves things like ecological accounting and social justice metrics like the corporate equality index and so on so they can pos position the company in this stakeholder model that's not just about making money for the actual investors which is the shareholder model it says this post it's technically a Blog blog post will address at a conceptual level key

questions and guidelines for assessing a company's Readiness for and potential approach to implementing ESG metrics and goals in executive incentive programs yet again let me stress that this is about incentivizing Executives to implement it uh into the emerging Paradigm of ESG Focus goals in the context of the evolving stakeholder model so are you picking up what they're laying down I hope you're picking up what they're laying down because this is um this is the new model that they uh That they want all corporations to go on to which is to follow all of this uh

ESG stuff in the name of stakeholders this is the same communist trick always you know the queer Act do their stuff in the in the name of the so-called lgbtq Community which allegedly includes all gay people and all allies and so like literally like millions of people but in fact there really a few thousand queer activists and and and broken people um this is the same thing they're going To do all of this stuff in the name of the stakeholders most of whom have no say whatsoever no say whatsoever in what's going on um um

so I am going to cross reference this right off I know uh I know that this is um supposed to be the Harvard document but I'm going to cross reference this off of uh off of Good Old CLA Schwab here because it's very important to realize that um what they're doing here at Harvard is Identical to what CL Schwab has in his book The Great narrative for a better future and what is the great narrative for a better future well we have all these crisises these emergency crisises that are a major major problem and they're

really a disaster in the making and you know climate change pandemics cyber attacks the velocity of change blah blah blah all this and it's really um imperative that we could we can see an optimistic future by having greater Global cooperation greater Global uh you know uh handing over the power Co cooperation and collaboration are the words that they use but what they mean is centralization is the word I was looking for centralization of power in the hands of um the the stakeholder Council uh in the hands of the top Experts of you know Z as

it were I'm trying to find a spot by the way also I'm filibustering a minute while I try To find the spot of of um where klouse describes this in the in the great narrative Okay so I'll read actually a few paragraphs from him uh it thus took almost 50 years this is CL Schwab and better future it took it thus took almost 50 years to vindicate the idea of stakeholder capitalism so don't get the idea that Harvard invented this in 2020 is 50 years old when he was publishing this in in in 22 because

klouse proposed it to The world in 71 uh so that is to acknowledge that the purpose of an economy the purpose of an economy is to serve society and to recognize that no business can succeed in the long term without serving its workers and communities the world economic Forum took the US Business Roundtable declaration that's the exact same thing we're talking about here uh as an opportunity to refresh the original Davos Manifesto and expand it by Incorporating some of today's emerging issues this resulted in the Davos Manifesto 2020 so guess what these two documents are

working hand inand The Business Roundtable declaration which is exact from 2019 which is exactly what this Harvard thing is citing as its its motivation is what also led to the Davos Manifesto 2020 getting Rewritten what K CLA says is it reiterates the fundamental importance of stakeholder responsibility so it's not About you as a stakeholder and what you want or get out of the corporation it's your responsibilities uh stakeholder responsibility stating that the universal quote purpose of a company is to engage all its stakeholders in shared and sustained value creation now remember they Define value in

a very expansive way it's not Material value commodity value money value wealth it's this abstruse notion of value or wealth That includes Leisure Time relationship quality beauty beauty of nature um all these other kind of abstract things that come in under well-being economies and uh uh ecological accounting which of course means they're going to make up numbers and tell you that you know while you own nothing that you're happy they're just going to make up numbers to tell you that you're happy and Gaslight you into believing it it says it also highlights other important corporate

Principles one to accept and support Fair competition and a Level Playing Field and to have zero tolerance for corruption we just don't believe that because literally the gcore is in your your ESG score component G is increased by giving yourself bonuses for implementing ESG that's literally corruption so that's just a lie two to consider a company suppliers as true Partners in value creation and to integrate respect for human rights into The entire supply chain that's just Marxism right so it's the worker does all the work so the worker should have a share and then blah

blah blah now it's the supplier provides the material so the supplier is actually having a share and if you go down the chain that he's actually talking about in the entire supply chain it's not just supplier supplier supplier supplier eventually you have the workers are the suppliers of the individual suppliers who are Supplying the other companies so all the way down we're going to have to consider the company suppliers as true Partners In other words this this is just communism it's just Marxism with new words and uh kind of tucked around in complicated language in

one step removed so you can't see it for what it is in its naked form and then three to act as a steward of the environmental and material Universe for future generations and to Consciously protect our biosphere and Champion a circular shared and regenerative economy now if you don't know what a circular shared and regenerative economy is shared means communism let's just cut the BS circular economy means that it's a economy that consumes its own waste if you look at the degrowth communism model they actually have an emblem for it or at least the Socialist

monthly review publishes has published this uh Particular graphic in in conjunction with it it shows the circular economy as a circle in the middle and then it shows the existing economy literally is a downward spiral into that Circle so it's supposed to be a circular steady state economy that produces nothing new and consumes only what it produces which is all recycled this is why in the absolute zero document that we covered in another episode of the podcast you see things like no new steel creation All Steel Will be recycled no new cement creation blah blah

blah everything has to be recycled in this circular economy all waste products become there's no new extraction it's just everything gets endlessly recycled and reused in a circular fashion that's the model and what this monthly review image of degrowth Communism literally is then is a circle that's your steady state circular economy at the middle that's the Target and then a the existing Economy spiraling down to it in other words it's the existing economy going down the drain and if you think that this circular economy thing is going to work let me disabuse you of such

a fantasy first of all it's is not going to work recycling is not infinite there is loss every time you recycle there's material loss so if you recycle a quantity of Steel some of that steel during the process of heating it and then shaping it again which is part Of the recycling process hardens the scale on the outside of the material that scale is useless and has to be scraped off it's not easily recoverable you actually would have to smelt it again and so you actually lose some steel every time it turns out you also

can't recycle steel because of the very precise uh chemistry involved in doing it it's not easy to recycle steel and from what I've been told it's not even possible though this isn't my field to Recycle steel to the highest level of quality that we actually are producing steel uh to do highle BU you know building projects and things today um it's just this isn't it's just not real the circular economy is not real but that of course is point number three of corporate responsibility under the stakeholder model it says in a nod to the ongoing

false Industrial Revolution in English that's fourth Industrial Revolution which is what he believes is Happening as we um be turn everything into the internet including you uh and the technological changes engulfing us it adds new principles so the circular economy wasn't a new principle but this is a new principle one to ensure the safe ethical and efficient use of data in other words they're going to use data to control control the world meaning your data uh data are the new oil in the sense that um they're going to mine data out of people to control

people because Controlling people is going to be the most valuable commodity and then they'll pay you a universal basic income based on how much data they can extract out of you because your data is valuable uh so they can know how to control you and other people like you two to Foster continued employability through ongoing upskilling and reskilling that's just um corporate gobbley G three to keep the digital ecosystem in which a company operates reliable and Trustworthy and that's going to require central control of the internet is what that's going to mean so all your

shutting down misinformation disinformation and Mal information and what we're going to see in the coming months or years of preventing cyber attacks is all going to be relevant to that and then four to make customers fully aware of the functionality of its products and services including adverse implications or negative externalities In other words to make people feel guilty about everything so they can complain and accept a stakeholder view of things he says nowadays Business Leaders no longer consider the Improvement of stakeholder value as an option see so he's saying is a Business Leaders there's a

whole movement already happening Business Leaders have already abandoned the shareholder model they're now in the stakeholder model they don't always see this as an option it's just What's happening sounds like Mark cubin again for all the reasons expanded in other parts of this book they know that there is no alternative Way Forward yeah it's called the St holder model we're already doing it but the idea is to create a Mystique of inevitability that is the reason why in the coming years measuring ESG performance will be the gold standard of business adherence to stakeholder value this

was written in 22 how you doing Today CLA because we've broken ESG and it's going to break all the way soon he says many businesses do not have an interest in making the world better uhoh that's why they have to make it measuring ESG performance will be the gold standard of business adherence to stakeholder value which is what the Harvard document we're reading is about said why because many businesses do not have an interest in making the world better and some will be be tempted to Engage in green or woke washing which means pretending to

be more environmental or woke but they'll be forced CLA says to commit to ESG because es measuring ESG performance will become the gold standard of business adherence to stakeholder value they'll be forced to commit to ESG and ultimately all the commitments will be put to the test by government action and societal pressure okay so that's the business side of this or part of it I'm going to keep going with CLA and we're going to come back to the Harvard document but when they say that they want to remake the fundamental purpose of the corporation this

evil tyranny is that that CLA Schwab's describing is what they're talking about remember this link between that and this is not arbitrary they're both based off of the same Round Table discussion or document I guess CLA say contrary to shareholder capitalism that always saw government as The source of all evils stakeholder capitalism welcomed the idea of legislative action to Define with Precision the benchmarks for ESG reporting and performance in other words they want a collusion between government and big business in other words to create a corrupt oligarchical system of regulatory capture that benefits the monopolies

that get to rise to the top because of their loyalty to the ESG system in the corporate Hunger Games What are the corporate Hunger Games that's what's happening right now using ESG and Dei and so on to pressure the corporations to adopt actually destructive policies for themselves so that only the most loyal will be floated along carried along and they get to be the Monopoly heads in the future stakeholder model isn't that interesting that um his his point here is that a fusion together of the state of the public and the private sector into a

Single hyphenated public private sector is the mechanism by which corporations what was his word will be forced to commit to ESG and ultimately all the commitments will be put to the test by government action and societal pressure so those are the two levers we're going to get to those he says there is nothing wrong with governments creating the right incentives there's our Monger again in issuing the appropriate norms for Responsible behavior particularly when they represent the choice expressed by citizens in free elections so this is citizens in free elections remember that if you disenfranchise all

of the bis elements like Lennon said and ma said and Stalin said then you can have true democracy well that's kind of the problem here if you can get the citizens to all agree then it's all backed by what the citizens want then the government can Then add in all this power over people's private property in other words to control corporations and the stakeholder model is meant to do that he says there's nothing wrong with governments creating the right incentives and issuing appropriate norms for responsible responsible behavior which they in partnership with the stakeholders will

decide for all the corporations remember we were just reading in the introduction over here About Harvard that it is about creating um recreating the purpose of the corporation for example wa where was it that he said uh I want to read the same part here um given these circumstances some companies are taking a fresh look at their impact on numerous stakeholder groups and their reinforcing impact on Company Success imagine if you defined Company Success in terms of accepting the stakeholder model oh no you would Have this kind of circular situation where um accepting the stakeholder

model is good for business and what's good for business is accepting the stakeholder model uh because the governments are going to get more and more behind it but he says especially when they represent Choice represented by citizens in free elections all you have to do is brainwash the people you think I'm kidding we'll get to that that's actually part of his Plan Claus goes on he says this then gives them the authority to determine and societal rules that means how business is going to be done that's a stakeholder that's a social credit program for corporations

in the same way that companies have an obligation to report their financial results quarterly or annually depending on the countries and whether they are listed or not in the not too distant future they will have Similar obligation to report on ESG metrics as a matter of fact that's happening now they try this natural asset company scam and at the heart of it had ecological accounting well now they didn't get asset companies now they are trying to push forward and force ecological accounting or ecological reporting to the SEC in the not too distant future they will

have a similar obligation to report on ESG metrics this is all happening while ESG is collapsing So they're trying to shift the focus off of ESG specifically and shift the focus onto as a article that just came out said how do corporations can talk about ESG without talking about ESG in other words they have to call it by other names onto what what they're calling ecological reporting mechanisms he says several initiatives have been undertaken to determine the best way to achieve this the stakeholder capitalism metrics of the world economic forum is a major One okay

that sounds like it's probably super not corrupt great they will converge toward a standardized ESG performance metrics that works across Industries and countries and that is supported by global standard Setters those are the real Stak older people by the way the global standard Setters that's Bill Gates that's Larry thinkink that's CL Schwab that's uh you know any of these major corporation uh oligarchs would be tyrants over the world who will Decide what the global standards are not you as a stakeholder in the system so stop pretending that you have a stake in something and so

they have to listen to you this is to prevent you from having a say he says such initiatives tend to be led by business but a globally accepted system of sustainability reporting will be a con a concerted effort of business governments regulators and the official accounting community and voluntary standard Setters those are the different People we have to break on this businesses have to be made to think that this is a scam that's going to cost them money and maybe send people to jail for participation in corporate collusion governments need to be stopped from doing

this it needs to be found to be illegal we need to stop electing people who are pushing for it kind of like what K CLA said regulators need to be uh investigated for how they're contributing to this gigantic regulatory Capture scheme and maybe disempowered or or thrown out the official accounting Community that's his next thing he list yeah they're adopting they're they're moving away from um what they call generally accepted practices uh generally accepted accounting practices they're moving away from those and into this ecological accounting where they literally make up numbers like how much a

fish is worth to the Gulf of Mexico if you leave it in it instead of catching It and Hauling it out and selling it on the fish market um and of course what are they going to do they're going to make up a gigantic number they're going to say that the Marlin or whatever is worth like a trillion dollars to the freaking ocean if you leave it alone not really they'll probably say it's worth hundreds of thousands or millions of dollars far more than its market value and so they will award themselves by seizing control

of the the the waterways Or the Fisheries or whatever else they will afford assign themselves gigantic amounts of value this was the natural asset company scheme uh value creation by not letting people go out and catch fish literally that's I mean it's it's fish it's water it's air it's it's energy it's forests it's Farms everything and he's saying that it's all so like benign sounding just the official accounting community and voluntary Standard Setters the official accounting Community is Shifting this bogus Voodoo ecological accounting to create the ability to do this this isn't actually small it's

actually huge and we can go after that and break it so that we stick to generally accepted accounting principles and shareholder models of economic Prosperity um corporate governance that's super important right now breaking the stakeholder model and breaking voodoo economics and accounting Is key to us making sure that we can retain our Liberty he says in the end governments will make the last call for set setting the legal obligations targets and incentives around ESG standards and performance proposed by business why in the world would businesses age to this because the ones at the top of

the stakeholder model are going in a revolving door in the public hyphen private sector not public or private the single public private sector They in fact they are de facto part of the government remember when they reported that Larry fin was kind of like the fourth branch of government in the United States oh that's why they would go along with it because what did he say at top of the paragraph contrary to stakeholder Capital sorry contrary to shareholder capitalism that always s government is a source of all evils stakehold holder capitalism welcomes the idea of

government activity to Define With Precision the benchmarks for ESG reporting and performance so the corporations are going along with it because they're the sold they're the bought in or sold out whichever way you want to put it corporations who are going to become the standard Setters the global standard Setters that's them not you who are working hand in glove with the government to do a gigantic public private partnership uh scam that destroys the public and the private Sector and replaces it by a crony capitalist um frankly distributist model where they get to be the Distributors

that's why so in the end the governments but the governments are working hand in glove with the stakeholders who are their corrupt crony buddies at the top of the corporations will make the last call for setting legal obligations targets and incentives around ESG standards and performance proposed by business see there's the Proposed by business part at the end the governments will set the standards proposed by business oh that's how it works they will also ensure that stakeholder value is compatible with a rigorously defined concept of societal and planetary value so there's your well-being economy and

your ecological accounting that they're trying to switch everything to that's oh degrowth communism so the ESG program is going to be forced onto the corporate environment By the stakeholders working in collusion with governments creating top- down power top down pressure to force them into a communist well-being and ecological accounting societal and planetary value scheme in parallel however CLA tells us and this is what's relevant to what we just read over here on the on the stakeholder model document from Harvard remember because it said that um where did it say All the the people are going

to support this um the increasing expectations on and willingness of corporate leaders to address social issues May extend beyond a traditionally narrow view of the business purpose of the corporation fresh look Company Success it's all about how they're going to pay attention to what the stakeholders want all of a sudden or what the people um what were the questions that they asked uh let me see real quick will sustainable Supply Chains in real estate differentiate a company in both the consumer and talent markets are these practices rapidly becoming Baseline expectations of of employees investors customers

and the broader Community right so that was the money quote qu that's in the Harvard document over here in CL in the great narrative he says in parallel societal pressure and Rising activism will accelerate the pace at which companies Embrace stakeholder value and will force The Reluctant ones to convert to the cause well that's what's in the Harvard document oh my gosh just not with the word Force there is ample evidence CLA says that consumers increasingly favor products and services from companies that are more ESG compliant that's what we heard in the Harvard document accordingly

CEOs now consider that adopting sustainable practices as the new price of Entry to compete sounds like Mark Cuban but that's also what we Saw in the document we have to pay attention to what the employees want what the customers want what all these other stakeholders that are not the shareholders who actually have skin in the game K CLA says this trend will amplify as Millennials and gen Z acquire greater prominence in the workforce the young Generations continually Hammer home the truth that they have a majority stake in what the future yields because environmental degradation climate

change And rising and qualities will have a disproportionate impact in their lifetimes the latter already represents a major impediment in terms of accessing decent housing so that's why housing is so freaking expensive guys it's a manufactured housing crisis so they can freak out Millennials in gen Z so they'll become radicals for this stupid program don't you get this do you not understand what's going on but what they've done is they've brainwashed them Into thinking that there social justice issues environmental degradation climate change Rising inequalities everywhere and so their whole future is is a disaster and

if you don't go and they're using social emotional learning in the schools to do it and when you brainwash them into this they'll demand it but that's what's in the Harvard document it's amazing that that's what in the Harvard document um the part where it says something about uh employees um That we just read about it it's the same model these are the same people but this is CLA Schwab at the world economic Forum saying that not only will the government and the top largest monopolistic corporations working in collusion Force everybody into the ESG model

the young people are going to also because they're brainwashed to have existential fear about environmental degradation climate change Rising inequality he says in light of this Business adherence to ESG considerations will become increasing increas increasingly relevant to sustainable value creation the price of not doing so will just be too high in terms of the wrath of activists both social and investors doesn't that sound exactly like that second paragraph of this document let's just look at that again further the covid-19 pandemic the associated economic impacts the increased focus on social justice Illustrate the increasing expectations on

and willingness of corporate leaders to address social issues that may extend beyond a traditionally narrow view of the business purpose of the corporation given these circumstances some companies are taking a fresh look at their impact on numerous stakeholder groups and they're reinforcing impact on Company Success for example we'll increase focus on employee Wellness initiatives enhance the resilience of Corporations will Sustainable Supply chains and real estate differentiate a company in both the consumer and talent markets or will these practices or are these practices rapidly becoming Baseline expectations of employees investors customers and the broader community so

that was the Harvard document and then what do we have right here is that if corporations don't go along the price of not doing so will just be too high in terms of the wrath of activists both social and Investors that's CL Schwab he goes on to say the above doesn't mean that business should become involved in every social or environmental issue however it suggests that when a company has a stake and its actions can exert meaningful and positive change it should remember that he he's already said that they're going to be forced from top

down and bottom up here so it should since as argued consistently through these Pages Global challenges require Global and Concerted response so that's the great narrative why wouldn't business play its role now this sounds obvious CLA say but it may require going Beyond mere stakeholder value behind the stakeholder concept lies a basic recognition that in our interdependent world global challenges cannot be resolved by any particular group alone we all have to come together in the collective a collaborative right communist effort between government civil society and Business the essence of public private cooperation is required this

means that stakeholder responsibility must be exercised both at the micro level the corporate level and the macro level globally this idea of global corporate citizenship ding is INS sconed in the work that the world economic Forum has been pursuing for decades as expressed in an article published in 2008 Global corporate citizenship quote expresses the Conviction that companies not only must be engaged with their stakeholders but are themselves stakeholders alongside government and Civil Society International Business Leaders must fully commit to sustainable development and address Paramount Global challenges including climate change the provision of Public Health Care

energy conservation and the management of resources okay end quote so what K Claus is saying there is that the ESG program Is designed to create Global corporate citizenship or sorry corporate global citizenship so the corporations are being considered like citizens in a global society and they're the government of it so the ESG stakeholder people are going to be the government and then you have all the corporations operating in a subsidiary fashion just like I said before that are now uh its citizens and it's a global citizenship that's based off of the sustainable Development goals uh

of United Nations agenda 2030 and you know must fully commit to sustainable development address Paramount Global challenges including climate change provision of public Healthcare energy conservation and the management of resources so in other words what he's saying is that if you want to be a corporation in the new world that he's trying to create through the force of top- down government plus uh monopolistic corporate collusion and The force of bottom up social activism both in terms of uh people and investors which they're centering in a youth brainwashing program to think this way particularly located in

the millennial generation gen Z is not going as well for them I don't think I think we are reaching gen Z better than they had hoped um that that what's going to H if you want to be part of the New World Order you've got to be ESG compliant so you're going to be forced not just in Two Dimensions but three top down bottom up and inside out uh you're going to have to change all of your values as well and if you don't you're not going to get to be part of the global citizenship

model for corporations or if you're an individual the global citizenship model that they're pushing independently and teaching already in our schools global citizenship is going to be the one of the next big hot things James is a two years around the corner For you let me just tell you we should start doing it now he says klous says the ultimate role of business sorry I won't do it in German the ultimate role of business in society remains to do business but Global corporate citizenship is an extension of the stakeholder concept it involves the corporate in

other words the model that China is running the CCP is running needs to be Global and that is called Global corporate citizenship which is A corporate subsidiarity model affecting communist distributism this is the model this is the whole thing this is the whole game ESG is designed to get the West on the same program rather than having the government on top the collusion of Corporations is on top but they're still coordinating with one another just like in China so it's like I said it's communistic neoliberalism or neoliberal Communism whatever you want to call it and

it's the other way around in China so he says it's a global corporate citizenship is an extension of the stakeholder concept it involves the corporation acting as a stakeholder in the global Society in conjunction with government and civil society and it's a notion that can be considered as a long-term investment since companies depend on the natural and social ecosystem in which they operate surely It is in their best interests their ultimate interest I'm sorry to look to the well-being of that same ecosystem when it is beset by so many problems in fact he says it's

more than an interest it's an absolute necessity listen to the urgency to the conviction to the absolute lack of um of any the of of of any flexibility or Liberty this is total authoritarian it's actually totalitarianism he says companies today face an existential choice either they Wholeheartedly Embrace stakeholder capitalism And subscribe to the responsibilities that come with it by actively taking steps to meet social and government goals or they stick to an outdated shareholder capitalism that prioritizes short-term profits over everything else and wait for employees clients and voters to force change on them from the

outside that's the model Claus is talking about and I didn't even talk About the part where it's all about uh remaking the uh stakeholder capitalism is all about remaking rewriting the social contract ultimately uh which he also attributes to the youth primarily doing that or being successful in doing that so theide idea is that everything in society is going to focus in around this stakeholder model uh and force it on corporations and that's what Harvard's actually talking about now that we have some actual background from Klouse let's see what Harvard says the background is it

says the Business Roundtable statement we're now talking Harvard we're not talking clous The Business Roundtable statement Drew significant interest from the press and corporate governance Community the world economic Forum that's not in here though as it was viewed by many some investors the media academics and some legal commentators as social and economic enhancement to or replacement of the Concept of shareholder Primacy as popularized by Milton Freeman and supported by many institutional investors and their advisers others viewed it as a contradiction to or a distraction from the very successful shareholder model which has created Prosperity over

the decades for shareholders and many other stakeholders so let's acknowledge what they're acknowledging here they're saying that the shareholder model has Been extremely successful at actually creating stakeholder benefit the entire Society starts getting better when it's prosperous and the shur mod has been model has been extremely good at making Prosperity because the people invested and share and have a stake in the game are the ones to whom the businesses themselves owe responsibility we call that uh shareholder responsibility or fiduciary responsibility what they're trying to do with a stakeholder thing is To shift that out and

so that their their falty is actually to quote unquote everybody this the community of Global Citizens more specifically which if you're not on board you're not one as K CLA said and then um to make them happy instead the the the leadership of it the technocrats the experts and so they're acknowledging that in fact the shareholder model has been extremely successful and they are now wanting to shift away from that uh away from Shareholder Primacy and for business and reorganize business around stakeholder privacy where the stakeholders are are everybody who are represented by these Global

uh stakeholder leaders which is like Bill Gates and the rest of the wouldbe technocrats Harvard says pragmatically the business Round Table statement may be a continued evolution of corporate culture and strategy that seeks to place more direct focus on the role that Stakeholders have long played in the corporation from the corporate governance management and board perspectives this sentiment is reflected in the member quote included in the business round T's release as well as a recent Fortune CEO survey in which a majority of CEOs surveyed 63% quote agree with the business round T's statement and believe

most good companies have always operated that way end quote let me play the seal card or Any other communist thing Communists believe that the thing that they want to do that's crooked is what's always already happening but what's already happening is happening in a disorganized way that favors uh illegitimate interests so they should be allowed to do the Crooked awful thing but with their allegedly you know Noble and good purposes in more organized system for example if you read the handbook of social emotional learning They're very very clear that social and emotional learning thing uh

objectives are always happening in schools but in a disorganized and uncoordinated fashion so what you need is a uh organized and um coordinated approach to doing social emotional learning turning it not just into a class but integrating it into the entire School intentionally in order to uh take full advantage of the social and emotional learning that used to be called The Hidden curriculum the kind of Secondary back you know teaching people to be respectful social um you know norms and so on we're going to put that front and center and we're going to do it

in an organized fashion that's their argument it's always happening so we need to do it in our organized fashion but what they are doing is actually using that as an excuse to do brainwashing social emotional learning is brainwashing but they would tell you if you caught them on that and could Prove which I don't think is that hard that is brainwashing they're going to turn around and say well all education is brainwashing really and when you take your kids to church that's brainwashing and when you raise them at home that's brainwashing and what's already happening

in the schools is brainwashing so of course we're going to brainwash this thing that we want to do which is brainwash the kids or social emotional learning or in this case uh integrate These demands on environmental and social responsibility and certain uh government hierarchical models they say well it's already happening but what they're not telling you is that the very specific program that's being implemented is not at all happening and hasn't been happening it's just something that the the fact that the corporations have paid attention to these things in the past in a kind of

a organic fashion Um turns out to be real so this is communism marrying a truth and a lie the truth is that yeah corporations have cared somewhat about environmental and and social responsibility and governance models but in an organic way they have not done so in a coordinated way that's meant to force them into corporate Hunger Games so they can become uh corporate Global Citizens according to CL shab's definition so it's not that good companies have always operated this Way again I I bring you back to culturally relevant teaching which was created by Gloria Ladson

Billings who was pushing for critical race Theory and literally Paulo fr's um FR I said that wrong uh his critical pedagogy model to be brought in to schools but under different names so that people wouldn't be quite so clear on what it is and what she called it was culturally relevant teaching but the title of the paper in which she argued for culturally relevant Teaching in 1995 was and I quote but that's just good teaching you could imagine Harvard publishing an article but that's just good business defining the or defending the ESG model which is

not good business and the evidence is mounting up that it's not good business which they're now saying oh it's going badly not because of uh it being bad business but but or literally corruption uh but instead because um people like Ronda santis and the conservatives are Going after it and destroying value we are now literally by the way there was an article the other day that came out I forgot which one bloom merg or or fortune or something calling us that are challenging ESG economic terrorists for destroying trillions of dollars in value allegedly no they're

bad business practices and the exposure thereof is causing the problem it has nothing to do with us exposing it this is just like how I got accused of attacking the University by exposing it with a grievance studies Affair do you see how this trick just keeps coming up again and again and again and again so here they quote some BS because it creates the illusion of consensus and there's consensus so we're all going to go along with it 181 CEOs said well here 63% of the of the fortune CEO surveys uh said that they agree

with the business Round Table statement and believe most good companies have always operated that way Um this is a typical communist trick and we shouldn't fall for it we should learn to see through it you don't actually have to go along with everybody if they're wrong you frankly just don't but anyway the the article continues in this context the business Round Table statement serves to enhance clarify and substantially debate the sometimes counterproductive dichotomy of shareholders versus stakeholders ESG metrics applied to this Clarified purpose of the corporation provide the quantifiable and generally accepted means to measure

the more nuance view of company performance okay guys red flag the more nuanced view versus the thing that's been working really really really well and the thing that looks a little bit sus the more nuanced view means they're going to fill you with communist about why it supposedly works even though with your own eyes you can see that it doesn't Work that's the more nuanced view so when you see words like nuanced or complicated those are red flags in communist land that means that what they're going to say is only the enlightened can really understand

this and you don't have a nuanced enough view or sophisticated enough view remember that was a word that showed up or an enlightened view of how things really work so they try to explain it a little bit the stakeholder value creation chain Below is a model developed by pay governance to illustrate the intersection of ESG strategy the stakeholder model and the creation of firm value so I told you they're going to try to Blind you with they created a model it's clearly like this is how it's supposed to work in um Theory okay the model

captures the reinforcing carryover effect of stakeholders contributions to the Economic success of the company an example of a quote positive externality is that many employees want to work for environmentally friendly companies and the increased engagement of those employees may also increase productivity customer satisfaction Etc so you'll own nothing and you'll be happy as a uh reason why things work out better so if you have a good environmental company you're going to attract more people who are excited to work there because They're happy to be doing the right thing or something that works as long as

the cult religion around climate change lasts by the way and only kind of because activist fatigue sets in and at the end of the day after however many months people are still going to let me say it the correct way people are still getting up in the morning and going to work and doing a job that's how they're going to feel about It after a couple of years and so that is like the honeymoon period when you get on testosterone when you try to transition or whatever oh yeah everything's great for a little while and

that's their positive externality it's a phony bubble that they can point to when it pops up and say see look and get companies hooked into these things to where it's hard to come back later they say all companies need to balance their stakeholders including Shareholders long-term interests it may be a they only have to balance that with shareholders because it's costing shareholders money when they throw that in there they're telling you shareholders they're cheating you if you are a shareholder and the company's talking to stakeholder stuff they're cheating you they brought it up twice in

this paragraph that there is something contradictory between shareholders and stakeholders no kidding exactly that's What's going on shareholders are getting ripped off and they're getting tricked through this Con Artistry they say it may be a greater challenge for economically stressed companies to make long-term Investments for other stakeholders than it is for top performing companies to do so okay so what that means is when you're Disney you have to do it when you're smaller we can kind of let you slide a little bit that's what it Means however our research and others find that overall companies

manage both short and long-term performance trade-offs efficiently these findings support optimistic outcomes for this stakeholder value creation chain which I'm just going to tell you straight out is but listen to this when they say that top performing companies have an easier time doing this this is just like saying that rich people should pay more taxes in socialism it's the exact Same thing it's the exact same thing so the big companies even though there's this conflict you should eat it because you're really wealthy you're really succeeding you're a top performing company you can eat it you

can you're privileged so you need to check your privilege this way whereas if you're a developing company or a developing country like China we can just let you slide on this I'd go through this model but it's hard descri describe a graph But it's really kind of silly um they have at the top ESG strategy feeding into employees Community suppliers and customers and shareholders in various ways and then uh they just say that there's the positive externality impact of employees communities and suppliers dumping into customers somehow they don't explain how that works at all they

call these intermediate outcomes and this leads to optimized stakeholder value creation which then by virtue of Arrows that are labeled literally desired results not observed results leads to enhanced shareholder value shareholders let me tell you something straight let me speak to you more straight than any of the people involved in this any of the corporate smoke blowers that you've ever spent one minute of your time I don't care how close you are I don't care how many deals you've done I don't care how much you drank together I don't care how many Hookers you bought

together let me tell you more straight than any of these people will ever tell you these people are you right now if you are a shareholder you should be suing these people they are your enemy they are destroying you and giving you a stupid graph that looks like it was made on PowerPoint by a MBA student out of a third tier University somehow saying that there's these magical positive externality impacts leading Into customers that somehow creates optimized stakeholder value creation as a desired result that will enhance sharehold older value this is this is their brilliant

Harvard graph for how the stakeholder value creation chain works this is so BS so they're screwing you start thinking about that really start thinking about that they say these developments and interest in this model of value creation generally have prompted an increasing questions about Whether and how to include ESG metrics and incentive plans that's the whole point of this document is to put it in the incentive plans which is something that CLA Schwab talked about below we we provide some key questions and guidelines for assessing a company's Readiness and potential for an Implement for implementing

ESG metrics in executive compensation incentive programs so we've talked in the past about lots of reasons why ESG is getting Implemented now it's the super corrupt one and the simple expression of it and that's what the rest of this document is about is that the gcore in ESG governance is partly determined by you you giving yourself as a corporate executive bonuses for implementing ESG if you are an honest executive or a shareholder pause and ask yourself this simple question is that legit is that legit is how is that legit let's Advance the question how is

that Legitimate your ESG score goes up for implementing ESG and giving yourself a bonus to do so is the could the corruption be more plain remember that CLA said it was about getting rid of corruption my goodness so let's see what Harvard has to say about this most corrupt of incentive structures for implementing ESG which is we'll raise your score if you give yourself executive bonuses for implementing our plan literally as corrupt as it could Get is your company ready to set or disclose ESG incentive goals that's a big section ESG incentive metrics are like

any other incentive metric they should support and reinforce strategy rather than lead it companies considering ESG incentive metrics should align planning with the company's social responsibility and environmental strategies reporting and goals another essential factor in determining Readiness is the measurability Quantification of the specific ESG issue so I'm not sure that it ever said what makes you ready for this but they're going to tell you in different tiers uh three different tiers in fact how to know why it's supposed to benefit you so companies will generally follow along a spectrum of Readiness to consider adopting and

disclosing ESG incentive metrics and goals the just the word incentive appearing again and again and again should tell you that this is Super corrupt okay so tier one companies ready to set quantitative ESG goals companies with robust environmental sustainability Andor social responsibility strategies including quantifiable metrics and goals like carbon reduction goals net zero carbon emission St uh commitments diversity and inclusion metrics employee and environmental safety metrics customer satisfaction Etc so if you are a corporation like that then you are Ready to set quantitative ESG goals so what does it require if you're a top performing

company you need to have carbon reduction goals net zero carbon emission commitments diversity and inclusion metrics employee and environmental safety metrics customer satisfaction and so on the whole woke Pantheon tier two companies ready to set qualitative goals companies with the who are they who are so if you're a top Performer you're ready for quantitative goals so you can get locked into the measurement scam the reporting scam and be stuck what if you're not quite there yet well you can know you're a company ready to set a qualitative goal instead if you are a company with

evolving formalized tracking and Reporting but for which ESG matters have been identified as important factors to customers employees or other these companies likely already have plans or Goals around ESG factors for example leadership in energy and environmental design certified office space diversity and inclusion initiatives Renewable Power and emission goals Etc and then third tier are companies developing an ESG strategy and they are some companies are at an early stage of developing overall ESG stakeholder strategies these companies may be best served to focus on developing a strategy for environmental and social impact before considering Linking in

incentive pay to these priorities so what this actually is about remember is incentive pay so if you have quantitative goals you need to be having your incentive pay tied to implementing carbon reduction goals net zero carbon emission commitments diversity and inclusion metrics employee and environmental safety metrics customer satisfaction and so on and if you are at the Quant qualitative goals well you should be looking at putting Attaching your incentive structure to in installing things like leadership in energy and environmental design certified office spaces again diversity and inclusion initiatives Renewable Power and Emissions goals and so

on so if you're implementing those you should be considering giving yourselves corporate bonuses and then if you're not quite there yet uh you should probably start developing your ESG strategy before you start tying uh your own money To it people might think it's corrupt it doesn't have all these measurements where you say oh no look at all these measurements look at these things we implemented that's why we get to give ourselves a $3 million bonus at the end of the year what they tell us is we note it is critically important that these ESG stakeholder

metrics and goals be chosen and set with rigor yeah right in the same manner as Financial metrics what that means is they're going to have Voodoo well-being and ecological accounting measurements like the corporate equality index score so it looks rigorous but it's actually you just doing the agenda and that's to ensure that the attainment of ESG uh goals will enhance stakeholder value not shareholder value shareholders you should sue these people and not simply serve as quote window dressing or greenwashing remember when CLA said greenwashing and woke washing wow they Have to be real they have

to be commitments they have to be intentional implementing ESG metrics is a company specific design process they tell us for example some companies may choose to implement qualitative ESG incentive goals remember that means giving yourself more money for doing this even if they have rigorous ESG Factor data and Reporting now the here's a question for you will ESG this the next section will ESG metrics contribute to the company's value creation let me short answer this for you no no no it will not no it won't it might kind of in the short term under the

cartel environment because everything's super corrupt but eventually this house of cards is coming down and in fact what's you're really doing is you're rolling the dice the answer is on in in a in a free enterprise system the answer is Most definitely not no chance in fact it's the opposite of that however in the the current cartel um you're basically going to lose value in order to pay clouse the gun not to destroy your corporation so you can be part of the uh what does he call it corporate global citizenship model that he's building out

so here's what Harvard tells us the business case for using ESG incentive metrics is to provide line of sight for the management team to drive the Implementation of initiatives that create significant differentiated value for the company or or align with current or emerging stakeholder expectations so you might make more money but you might just do things that the agenda wants you to and not make more money or you never know companies they say first must assess which metrics or initiatives will most benefit the company's business and for which Stak sorry I messed that up companies

must first assess which Metrics or initiatives will most benefit the company's business business and for which stakeholders see so the shareholders are stakeholders that you used to be the ones you had to care about now you have these other ones and maybe it's the environmental Lobby you want to make happy or maybe it's Papa Claus you want to make happy but you've got somebody else you've got to make happy too so you've got to figure out who you're trying to make happy are you Paying off the cartel or are you trying to make money for

the shareholders those are different they are actually different they're very different um stakeholders within the whole stakeholder Network they must also develop challenging goals for these metrics to increase the likelihood of overall value creation overall value like what do you mean money do you mean shareholder value no no no no no overall value what's overall Value include well it includes more environmental responsibility so you can feel good about yourself which is allegedly going to cause these positive externalities so it's the well-being economy and ecological accounting plus the standard accounting practices relevant to to GDP or

bottom line analysis so shareholders I'm telling you you are getting the screw here for example they tell us who are some of these overall value creation Stakeholders in terms of employes they say are are employees in the competitive Talent Market driving the need for differentiated environment or social initiatives well initiatives related to overall company sustainability building sustainability renewable energy use and Net Zero carbon emissions contribute to the company being a best-in-class employer best-in-class employer that seems like okay diversity and inclusion and pay Equity initiatives have company and social benefits do they really such as ensuring

fair and Equitable opportunities to participate and thrive in the corporate system so they're just blowing smoke and saying it basically that because employee something or another that the woke crap is good for them they can more they can go brag to their friends that they work at a best-in-class employer where best-in-class is defin and implementing The agenda and everybody can feel good about themselves honeymoon period lasts who however many months it lasts and then they're just going to effing work again what about customers they're a stakeholder that we're now caring about I'm to shortcut you

here State shareholders aren't even mentioned they're not even listed shareholders are not even mentioned here customers are customer preferences driving the need to differentiate on sustainable Supply Chains social justice initiatives Andor The Product Company environmental footprint notice how this are the same things that Claus Schwab said that your customers your employees your your supply chain all of them are going to pressure you to adopt the model this is this is what they really mean as they're building out a cartel environment where everybody's pressuring everybody it's literally a corporate social credit system and somehow that's create

that's Value creation guys that when the customers are engaging in a sustainable supply chain or so social justice initiative activity against your corporate practices that's creating overall value Creation in terms of the well-being economy sustainability and inclusion blah blah blah long-term sustainability so let me explain long-term sustainability to you in you know cold simple language just cut right to the chase we're going to Talk turkey as they say what's long-term sustainability that is a vessel way out into the future where the stakeholder calculation people can make make up to tell you that that's what you're

you're developing value in terms of something that might happen in 40 years according to their models that's what that is in other words it's a box it's a stakeholder box the future is a stakeholder in your corporation where they get to run models And blow smoke remember how the world was going to end like every five years for the last five like 50 years because of climate change or whatever the hell they tell us Greta was wrong AOC was wrong polar bears are still here glaciers are still on the mountains sea level hasn't risen an

inch Obama still got Coastal property like what do you their covid-19 models were completely bogus all their climate change models have to get revamped every year even With the temperature adjustments they do so they can pretend that they're more right than they actually are like that's what long-term sustainability is talking about they have projections out into the future which the future becomes a stakeholder that they alone can predict with their magical predictions like with the club of Rome and their limits to growth predicted we'd run out of copper in the year 2000 so obviously we

have to like get rid of people or something like That that was the original limits to growth uh turns out that was long-term sustainability prediction was a little bit wrong um consequentially wrong so that's what that's about so what you're supposed to ask yourself about so you can assign your corporate incentives for being a good a good positive externality producer is our long-term macro environmental factors like carbon emissions carbon intensity of product Etc critical to the company's ability to Operate in the long term let me just tell you if you're in like virtually any sector

steel Aviation energy Transportation shipping um literally any industry hot Hotel Hospitality tourism you name it Cruise industry you name it doesn't really matter the answer is yes they are critical energy is critical producing steel and concrete is critical to the long-term operation of your program if you have been lied to About this and are confused let me disabuse you yes long-term macro quote environmental factors like carbon emissions that's a scare word carbon intensity of project those things don't matter those are the things where they make up BS out into the future to tell you that

you have to change what you're doing now and they're asking you in terms of Val this is stakeholder value creation is it critical to your company's ability to operate in the long Term uh yes it is it actually is it sure the hell is and they want you to think it's not and more than that it's like the fish thing I told you before what is the value of you using some energy say that was produced by burning natural gas and putting carbon emissions into the air are you producing concrete which required you to crush

Limestone and to make it make it into Quick lime by liberating CO2 from the the what is it calcium bicarbonate so it Becomes calcium carbonate or whatever the chemistry is so that's a carbon intensive process is it critical to your concrete industry to be able to emit CO2 yeah you damn right it is it turns out but what they want to tell you is that there's more value in not causing climate change trillions of dollars of value $180 trillion dollar in Damages was the number they used to say that it was going to cause so

if we stop climate change you that's $180 trillion doar of Madeup value that they claim that you are actually participating in so the value creation here is actually crushing your business but it's creating abstract value in terms of future value that's not being cost it's the same thing as the fish how much does it cost to pull a fish out of the the Gulf of Mexico well you need your equipment you need your boat you need your time you need your expertise you might need this or that you know other Stuff and that gives you

a cost to to go out and catch a fish the the fish is in the Gulf of Mexico you find the fish you pull a fish out you come back you sell a fish you make some money to offset your cost and ideally make a little bit of profit that's the idea of catching fish but nobody stops to ask how much is the fish Worth to stay in the Gulf of Mexico and that's what this is saying long-term sustainability of the Gulf of Mexico requires that fish to stay there so it's Actually worth like $300

million or probably more like $300,000 for the fish to stay in the Gulf this is what it's saying here with carbon emissions it is long-term more valuable the value value you're creating is feeling good about the future that's not going to be climate change disaster that they might have made up based on their models you're not producing real value but ecological accounting will allow you to create carbon offset credits and all These other phony baloney things that push the agenda that you can then sell and trade and buy and so on and so forth so

that you can make basically the equivalent of funny money off of all this that eventually that all falls apart and they call it long-term sustainability because they want to rub it in your face so yet again shareholders look at what's in front of you the the the next value creation the Fourth value creation thing you're supposed to include remember it has nothing to do with shareholders here is brand image does a company want to be viewed by all constituencies including those with no direct economic linkage as positive social and economic contrib as a positive social

and economic contributor to society in other words do you want the open Society Foundation to say that you're a bad guy and come in and do uh the equivalent of activists Busting your need kneecaps brand image most people most of the time really actually don't care all that much about this stuff it turns out it just they just don't they can Jin up this whole thing the Millennials are kind of a weird uh exception because their heads aren't quite screwed on straight but other than that most people just don't care and if they're hungry the

hungrier they get if the lights go out because There's no energy I can tell you right now they're going to stop caring at all the brand image is the is the that's good is the brand that's delivering something to them that actually makes their life work right now they're cushy enough to where they can care about these kind of wishy-washy things but they have huge activist sectors that go out and create bad press for you know this is how it works you know they write corporate hit jobs on you we all saw What happened to

Uber for example um huge corporate hit job uh back in what I guess 17 or thereabouts um we know they do this and that was all orchestrated from you know freaking taxi uh Union it was orchestrated literally by like a society for the blind trying to extort them out of money I mean it's insane to think that that's organic so what they're telling you there with brand images it's a nice nice brand image you got there it would be a Shame if the open Society Foundation the Rockefeller Foundation dumped a bunch of money into activists

into wrecking it for you because that's how this game really gets played it'd be a shame if CNN ran story after story after story after Story week after week after week after week for the next year until everybody who works for you first of all your businesses drops cuz because people are like spooked customers are spooked and suppliers are like H I don't know But then your employees become increasingly embarrassed because they the the bad news that they keep reporting on you in this hit job leaks into their friends and families and they're like ew

you work for so and so I couldn't work for them look at the stuff in news that's just horrible and they create a struggle session environment inside your your your uh company and break it from within and they know they can do this they know that they're good At doing this they know that you know that they're good at doing this so what the brand image thing is is them threatening you again shareholders it is time to blow the whistle on this whole stakeholder model because this is bad stuff they tell us here at Harvard

though that there is no one-size fits-all approach to ESG metrics and companies fall across a spectrum of needs and drivers that means it's vague so nobody can actually pin down anything That affects the type of ESG factors that are relevant to short and long-term business value depending on scale industry and stakeholder drivers like the you know the activist groups coming and busting up your brand or some complete BS about the carbon impact of you in the future every time I buy a plane ticket I have to see how many pounds or tons or whatever the

hell of CO2 it releases kilograms I think it tells me like I know what a kilogram is Um that that I'm releasing by flying on the plane and I'm like yeah okay this is this has got to go that your stupid models are not convincing me the airlin should be pushing back on this crap that's a tool that the airlines I guarantee you are forced to implement in order to get their ESG score to stay up which they need for other reasons and what its goal is is to make some of their customers think I

don't want to take a flight because it increases my Carbon footprint in other words the airlines are experiencing stakeholder value creation by helping climate change by convincing some of their customers not to buy plane tickets think about that are you a shareholder guess what there's a fiduciary responsibility lawsuit waiting for you somewhere unless Harvard is successful and these entities are successful in changing the purpose of a corporation and how are they going to Achieve that through government action in partnership with the executives who are incentivized to implement this stuff by assigning themselves incentive packages compensation

packages which is what this document is about could this be more corrupt this is ESG guys this is how corrupt it is ESG are three letters that mean corruption okay so conceptual design parameters for structuring incentive goals this is how you're Supposed to in structure your incentives for those companies moving to implement stakeholder and ESG incentive goals for the first time the design parameters range widely which is not different than the design process for implementing any incentive metric see it's the same as what you already do all the time anyway except this one just happens

to be super corrupt and you have to give yourself a bonus in order to increase your score which you need to do other things Because it's you know getting away from Corruptions of all kinds as CLA said and marxists always lie for these companies considering the following questions can help move the prospect of an ESG incentive metric from one idea uh sorry from an idea to a tangible goal with the potential to create value for the company remember creating value for the company might mean in some abstract sense not in terms of creating revenue or

profit notice is how they say create Value create value create value and they don't say create Revenue create profit no they're scamming you they are scamming you value means lots of things it means well-being it means ecology it means the future it means positive externalities in terms of employers or sorry employees and customers BS straight BS they are straight scamming you not once are words like revenue or profits mentioned here It doesn't say anything about increasing shareholder return or dividend value for stakeholders and shareholder return is just one stakeholder variable okay one quantitative goals versus

qualitative Milestones the availability and quality of data from sustainability or social responsibility reports will generally determine whether a company can set a defined quantitative goal for other companies lack of available ESG data Goals or the company's specific pay philosophy May mean ESG initiatives are best measured by uh setting annual Milestones tailored to selected goals remember the purpose of this section is to say on what basis are you giving yourself a bonus for implementing ESG so that your G part of your ESG score will go up in a clearly not corrupt method in other words they're

helping you outline the BS you're going to tell yourself and your employees and your shareholders for Why you're creating bogus value at the expense of genuine revenue and dividends two selecting metrics aligned with value creation unlike Financial metrics hey shareholders did you hear that for which robust statistical analyses can help guide the metric selection process for example Financial correlation analysis unlike that unlike actually real numbers about real Money the link between ESG metrics and Company value creation is more nuanced oh okay and is significantly impacted by industry operating model customer and employee perceptions and preferences

Etc in other words all that vague stuff where they're going to make up fake value well-being ecological future blah blah blah given this the my favorite one is still the positive externalities of Employees and customers your custo your employees will be happier to work there because you're doing your ESG stuff so feel great about giving yourself a huge bonus to implement the agenda given this company should generally apply a principles-based approach to assess the the most appropriate metrics for the company as a whole for example assessing significance to the organization the hell does that mean

measurability achievability Etc notice How revenue and profit aren't mentioned appendix one which I'm not going to drag you through provides a list of common ESG metrics with illustrative mapping to typical stakeholder impact in other words it's a bunch more three determining employee participation generally stakeholder and ESG focused metrics would be implemented for officer and executive level roles in other words Executives who get to decide whether or not they're going to do this Get to give themselves bonuses for doing this but it's supposedly not corrupt as this is the employee group that sets companywide policy impacting

the achievement of quantitative ESG goals or qualitative Milestones alternatively some companies may choose to implement firmwide ESG incentive metrics to reinforce the positive Employee Engagement benefits there's your so-called positive externalities of the company's ESD strategy or to drive a Whole team approach to achieving goals shareholders you should be screaming about this this is so so bad this is is the kind of stuff where you should be demanding you know people get kicked off the board and out of the Executive Suite it's just unbelievable that this is tolerated four determining the range of metric waiting for

stakeholder and ESG goals historically us companies with existing environmental employee safety And customer service goals as well as other stakeholder metrics have been concentrated in the uh extractive industrial and utility Industries metric waiting on these goals have range from 5% to 20% of annual incentive scorecards we expect that waiting this we expect that this waiting range would continue to apply with remaining 80 plus% of annual incentives waiting focused on financial metrics further we expect that proxy advisers and shareholders May React adversely to non-financial metrics weighted more than 10 to 20% of annual incentive scorecards so

Executives listen up shareholders this how they're telling so Executives only award yourself up to 10 to 20% of your total incentive scorecard for doing this because otherwise the shareholders might get pissed off shareholders let me talk to you for a second you should be pissed off five consider whether to implement shareholder ESG goals in annual versus Long-term incentive plans as noted above most ESG incentive goals to date have been implemented as weighted metrics in balanced scorecard annual incentive plans for several reasons however we have observed increased discussion of whether some goals particularly greenhouse gas emissions

goals may be better suited to long-term incentives there is no right answer to this question some Milestone and quantitative goals are best set on An annual basis given emergency industry sorry emerging industry technology and Company developments other companies May set a robust long-term plan for which longer term incentives are a better fit that's straightforward enough don't need to go through too much of that six considering how to operationalize ESG metrics into long-term plans for companies determining that sustainability or social responsibility goals fit best into the framework of a Long-term incentive those companies will need to

consider which vehicles are best to incentivize achievement or Strate uh strategically important ESG goals while companies may choose to dedicate a portion of a pause why is an ESG goal strategically important let's play the Jeopardy soundtrack while we try to figure that out the shareholders with me why is why is it strategically important to implement ESG goals well let's see There's a strategy of navigating the business environment captured by the ESG cartel where you can't get great access to credit or you might get your stock delisted from their index funds okay that's corrupt there might

be activist pressures levied against you these hit campaigns in the media if you don't play along so you got to be strategic and you got to appease the just stop oil people for example that's strategic oh lots of corrupt stuff That's why lots of stuff that's made to look spontaneous like these protests that's totally paid for by NOS that's not spontaneous those NOS are in direct Cahoots with the same people forcing you to do this crap which is allegedly not corrupt according to CLA Schwab while companies may choose to dedicate a portion of a three-year

performance share unit plan to an ESG metric that is or sorry for example waiting a plan 40% relative uh total Shareholder return 40% Rel Revenue growth and 20% greenhouse gas reduction so there's your sh your shareholder return just got cut down because it has 20% greenhouse gas reduction now right so it used to be that we're going to take our three or I guess plan or whatever performance share and it would have been split maybe between revenue growth and shareholder return but now we're going to cut both of those down by a little bit so

we can add a 20% Greenhouse gas reduction program shareholders should probably be upset about that there may be concerns for shareholders Andor participants in diluting the finan oh really there might be concerned hey shareholders you might have concerns or participants in diluting financial and shareholder value focuses on these incentives so what are you going to have to do you're going have to I haven't read it in a few weeks so I'm not quite sure what it says next But I'm going to guess you have to trick them into believing that the greater value you know

the greater good has some more value in it or something as an alternative companies could Grant performance restricted stock units vesting at the end of a period of time for example 3 or four years contingent upon achievement of a long-term rigorous ESG performance Milestone what do those look like this approach would not dilute the Percentage of relative uh what is it total shareholder return and financial based long-term incentives which will remain important to shareholders and proxy advisors ooh okay so you can actually you don't have to trick them into believing in greater value creation you

can just use a different program where you award yourself Stocks by uh so you don't you don't actually like you know reduce the the payout instead you give yourself Stocks which if you just kind of create more stocks shareholders you might want to call these people out on this stuff conclusion as priorities of stakeholders continue to evolve the priorities of this let me make a real point about this the whole podcast about this that the real danger of ESG isn't what it demands it's that it can change what it demands it's that it's Arbitrary but

ESG is the demands or priorities of stakeholders and so what do they tell us here as the priorities of stakeholders continue to evolve so what they're telling us is that guess what this program will continue to change and ask different things of you at different times masks are an important thing for the environment during Co but then they're an environmental disaster when they're in the ocean afterwards oh my kind of get The idea defense stocks are a social bad because we don't want to have you know war and stuff until there's a conflict with Ukraine

and then they instantly become ESG good Tesla one of the most environmentally responsible companies Great ESG score everything's on the front line front end of everything Elon Musk buys Twitter starts speaking up about Free Speech next thing you know it's escore plummets and allegedly he's a racist and runs a very corrupt company And now he's lost like his whole compensation package because it's somehow unfair and unjust or something which is just like literally straight jackma CCP communism levied against Elon so as the priorities of the stakeholders continue to evolve they're going to f you more

later shareholders you are one of the few things that can do something about this but let's just read the conclusion as priorities of stakeholders continue To evolve in addressing these becomes a strategic imperative companies may look to include some stakehold holder metrics in their compensation programs to emphasize these priorities as companies and compensation committees discuss stakeholder and ESG focused incentive metrics each organization must consider its unique industry environment business model and cultural context we interpret the business Round Table's updated statement Of business purpose as a more nuanced perspective on how to create value for all

stakeholders inclusive of shareholders notice it's going to increase value in some abstract way shareholders are actually going to lose value or sorry they're going to lose dividends but they're going to increase in abstract value but there's all the stakeholders all the stakeholders are actually going to increase in value including shareholders but the Shareholders are going to do so by losing the kind of value that they're actually invested in got it while optimizing profits will remain the business purpose of Corporations the Business Roundtable statement provides support for prioritizing the needs of all stakeholders in driving long-term

sustainable success for the business but that's the opposite of how it began when it said that it was to change the Purpose of the corporation for some companies implementing incentive metrics again this is super corrupt isn't it aligned with this broader context can be an important tool if you don't understand how this broader context means full-blown distributist communism I don't know how to help you at this point the broader context means ecological accounting uh future assessment of future the future Impacts through various models that the stakeholders get to run and nobody else has any control

over it means um well-being economy for the happiness of your employees and customers and the society at large uh I think that one of these things right now like the President Biden is pushing right now is that people when they fly so people are stakeholders right the customers of airlines are stakeholders and that and so they would be a lot happier if their Children could sit next to them and fly for free so Airlines should be required to give children free airplane tickets next to their parents is that going to increase shareholder value is that

in the best interest of United's business plan or American Airlines business plan or Delta's is that really in the best interest of the business is that maximizing shareholder value or is that um taking into account other share Stakeholders I'm sorry in this case parents with children and prioritizing them because the government said you have to which is what CLA said is normally business people are like wait a minute don't do that don't interfere but because that's called shareholder Primacy but now stakeholder model says no no no no no we're going to let the government help

us decide what the right thing to do is So while optimizing profits will remain the business purpose of Corporations it should say within the controlled public private partnership environment the business Round Table statement provides support for prioritizing the needs of all stakeholders like having little kids fly for free now instead of on a child Fair ticket uh on the plane and driving long-term sustainable success for the business is that going to I mean do Airlin is how are Airlines going to cover the cost of kids flying for free well they're either going to not cover

the cost in which case they're running on a thin margin often as it is or or they're going to start cutting costs by making other things much less expensive or they're going to pass on the costs to the other people flying and make it more expensive for them oh no for some companies implementing incentive metrics aligned with this Broader context can be an important tool to drive these efforts in both the short and long term that said appr appropriate timing design and communication will be critical to ensure effective implementation see you're going to have to

time it right organize it right and communicate it right or else your shareholders are going to call you out on it because what's happening is you the executive is deciding to give you the executive an incentive to go along With the agenda which is super corrupt that's this document it ties straight into good old CL Schwab and the great about the future this is Harvard Law School this is ESG this is the business Round Table this is what ESG is about it is a plan to use super corrupt methods to force a super uh frankly

degrowth communist or distributist model onto corporations through as klouse said and as is in this Document top down bottom up and Inside Out pressure they are going to Target a fusion of the corporations and the government to force behaviors in alignment with ESG that was Claus's word Force rhymes with uh Larry Finks remarked that he says that corporations don't always want to do these things sometimes we have to force behaviors through incentive structures which is exactly what this is including the corrupt incentive structure to pay Yourself more for adopting the corrupt incentive structure then there's

the bottomup pressure the customers the employees whatever those are stakeholders and we know that they we they have to be made Happy in the millennials and the genen Z are going to be brainwashed thinking it's a total Calamity if we don't address climate change carbon emissions that are going to end their life social injustice oh my God oh my God social Injustice I don't want to work for a racist company I couldn't buy from a company that BLM decided to extort Ed adopting all these Dei policies unless they adopted them like faster and more and

somebody cried on TV and a struggle session do you get the model and then Inside Out by rewriting the social contract which is part of class idea didn't read um where the goal of rewriting the social contract is to make these values the standard values of what People expect in the literally global citizenship environment where global citizenship was defined in terms of supporting these initiatives super backwards and corrupt to quote Claus one more time he had an interview last summer uh where he said that the West is rapidly because of the ESG frankly West is

rapidly rewriting its social contract he said and what he said is is doing is the social contract was being Rewritten to move away from an economy of Production and consumption and into an economy of caring and sharing so they are going to tell you what to care about and who to share with in other words communism the brand names for this are degrowth distributism is a sometimes word that's going to run through corporate subsidiarity the stakeholder capitalism model or the stakeholder model ESG as its implementation the well-being economy um it uses tools like well-being and

ecological accounting to Assess the future value of very abstract things so that they can claim that they're producing more value by restricting you from producing actual revenue or product uh and this is the corrupt model of ESG and it's we're making Headway against ESG we need to continue making Headway against ESG in fact we need to destroy ESG and I'm not positive that this podcast helped people understand why and in fact how like shareholder Shareholders need to start pressing hard on some fiduciary responsibility questions here because shareholder Primacy still the still a thing we also

need to be working very hard to prevent them from being able to implement these reporting standards we need to go after the SEC we need to go after the bu Administration and the states that are trying to force this on the corporations it's time literally for a gigantic shareholders and corporate revolt Against this system to break free of it so we can get back to free enterprise and prosperity and I hope this podcast has um helped help you understand what's going on and why straight out of the words of their own words which I mean

to be fair I do have to pull back the the veneer of um communist BS so that you can understand it but it's not actually that hard to to make sense of what what they're doing and what's going on and who's actually getting cheated in this Besides the abstract Everybody by us falling into Global communism run through corporate subsidiarity and if you don't know what that means means or looks like again the CCP is doing it in China and has been for uh get nonsense about you know the 80s so they looked like China we're

going to look like China ESG is made to make us look like China after we degrow our economy so that we're weaker and so that we don't have the ability to really fight back Against it and um it's going to be ultimately most bad for the actual shareholders that are involved who are actually getting massively deprived of lots of value by the corporate Executives having perverse incentive structures to force this system into play uh at the expense of of shareholder uh return and they say so and try to dance around it very explicitly in this

document so I'm hoping that shareholders are ready to um Revolt I'm hoping that corporate players are well are ready to be whistleblowers including Executives I'm hoping that uh more people are willing to push back on this get information out about it uh and start looking to file lawsuits against it whether it's Dei initiatives whether it's ESG requirements challenging the carbon emissions thing these industries that are are being pressed out of uh pressed into Net Zero need to speak up like hey yeah airline industry Cruise Industry blah blah blah you maybe you're going along or whatever

no they're really trying to kill your industry you're helping them kill you're they're help you're helping them make your industry commit suicide they really do want that you really are helping that I know that some people and these industries probably don't fully realize what they're doing but it's right there in front of you and it's time for people to start opening Their mouths speaking up speaking back and eventually you know blowing whistles and filing lawsuits I hope this uh helps because this is why we have to take down ESG and we have to stop actually

it's corrupt incentive structures that are putting it into [Music] place [Applause] [Music]