|
|
|
|
|
|
by rwallace
5144 days ago
|
|
|
> I don't see any compelling reason why the choices of an entrepreneur are a variable that the VC should ignore. Many people agree that e.g. the entrepreneur's religion and sexual preferences are variables the VC should ignore, even if they were statistically correlated to success. Do you disagree with that position? > I also see no reason why shareholders of corporations should have any special obligation to subsidize parents. I do: the parents are subsidizing the future. The shareholders' money is going to be pretty worthless to them in the long run if there is no next generation of workforce from whom to purchase goods and services. |
|
|
Yes.
But lets ignore my position, I'd like to extend your logic. You want VCs to make suboptimal investments for political reasons. Should you also be obligated to invest some fraction of your 401k in businesses you think are a suboptimal investment? If not, why not?
I do: the parents are subsidizing the future. The shareholders' money is going to be pretty worthless to them in the long run if there is no next generation of workforce from whom to purchase goods and services.
This argument is far more broad than you realize.
For example: "parents are subsidizing the future. The childless career woman's money is going to be pretty worthless to her in the long run if there is no next generation of workforce...".
Therefore, we should force childless career women to subsidize parents.
Do you believe the latter as well? If not, why not? What distinguishes childless career women from shareholders?