Group items tagged

Speaking of unicorns, the author says ..." Their eventual (and unavoidable) collapse may prove to be systemic, dragging down the market, not because of their size (which is insignificant), but because investors will reprice the market, taking the promise of an infinitely more efficient tomorrow out of the equation. Ray Dalio's dark prophecy may just be right: When the "dream companies" fail to deliver on their promise, and the only way for pension funds to make good on the obligations is to chase debt, there might be a moment when investors say "enough" and began pulling their money out of the system, causing massive repricing and a surge in rates."

Yves here. So now it's clear: some companies and their law firm enablers see their right to profit, even in the face of the Covid-19 pandemic, as more important than human lives. This has been an underlying theme of investor-state dispute settlement suits (which we've written about extensively), but it's never been as crass as here. On top of everything else, these actions will deplete government coffers, adding to public distress. The only upside is this sort of thing should kill incorporating meaningful investor-state dispute settlement provisions into future trade deals.

The starting point is to note that, for people to be held responsible for their actions, they have to know about certain features of the world. In many cases, even this minimal condition for blameworthiness isn't satisfied. For example, Chow would have struggled to predict that the rise of ridesharing apps would crater the market for taxi medallions in New York City - but so, too, did most of us. By their very nature, technological disruptions are difficult to foresee; if they were easy to predict, early investors in these technologies wouldn't get so rich. Such a low bar for blameworthiness seems too harsh to be plausible; how can any of us be blamed for failing to spot trends that almost no one was able to see, despite the significant material incentives for doing so?

A survey of ESG influencers shows the elusive side of investor responsibility. What to do? When the Covid-19 crisis exploded in winter 2020, we spelled out four different scenarios for ESG in times of pandemic.

There is a parallel between today's stock market and Fischer random chess. The last time we faced a global pandemic was in 1918, and this might as well have been in the BC era. Few of us were alive then, but even the history books are not that useful, as the structure of the US and global economy, the central bank system, the diversity and dynamism of society, and the state of technological progress are nothing like the world knew then. Most of the mental models we as investors rely on are based on an environment that no longer exists. The only common denominator between now and then is that humans have not really changed that much - it takes a few millennia to rewire our DNA and thus our fundamental behavior.