|
|
|
|
|
|
by rosterface
2677 days ago
|
|
|
"If every investor would make it a non-negotiable term that the companies they invest in must make diversity a priority, the results would be huge. It might not be easy to do, but it can be done." That's pretty brutal. Don't investors have enough power in the relationship that they need to start dictating stuff like this and further filtering down who they will give money to? "This is what I tell every woman founder I know who is in a relationship or married and who wants to have children: just do it and do it now." She is very wealthy and so is her husband (Fred Wilson). I think it's a bit tone deaf for her to just give such stark life advice as if it's that easy for 99% of the population. |
|
|
This is already a thing, and it is starting to look like an incredibly bad idea. Well over a year ago I had lunch with my financial advisor and he tried to sell me on a portfolio balanced on some kind of social responsibility metric (female board member ratio, carbon credits, etc). At the time I thought it was just a new way to separate morons from their money, but now I'm starting to think that the US markets are setting themselves up for a fungibility attack. I remember, many years ago, the debate on bitcoin tainting - keeping a register of illegally obtained coins (and leaf transactions) and refusing to accept them. That is obviously an attack on the utility of the currency - a unit of value.
So what is the metric here, what is the new unit of value? The best case outcome is a Tower of Babel pandemonium, worst case is an irreversible further consolidation of kingmaking power.