Comment on NBA star Stephen Curry faces backlash over investments in ‘Israeli’ firms
pdxfed@lemmy.world 2 days agoI would say generally the problem is the structure of capitalism is a moral; if you looked at the investments of anyone who has a 401k, there is awful shit companies doing horrific things that go against the need and interests of the person who owns the 401k that they are likely unaware of or at best hold their nose at because it’s part of a bundle of investments or an index fund like the s&p500.
None of that excuses the effects of providing funding, but it’s systematic; rich people just have more money to invest in largely the same system The rich might potentially have better access to those who could help then understand their options but many likely outsource their investment choices to someone with the mandate simply to “responsibly manage” their funds, which for most people unfortunately means to maximize the return. Someone like Steph ostensibly doesn’t want to be funding genocide but unless you are hands on reviewing every opportunity, screening every company, etc. it’s little surprise that Joe schmoe int heir 401k or Shaq in his burger franchises supports horrible outcomes for employees, consumers, or those in other countries.
No excuses for the responsibility any of us bear, and perhaps it’s fair to hold the very wealthy that much more accountable with the opportunities and resources they have to make more informed or deliberate decisions but at the end of the day they are part of an amoral, supremely corrupted system that has been twisted horrifically to be even worse than it need be with no sign of slowing.
The rich don’t deserve any sympathy but they’re not really much different(other than scale) than anyone else in supporting an inhuman system.
David_Eight@lemmy.world 2 days ago
Investing for retirement is way different than owning a venture capital firm. Steph doesn’t need more money, nor does Lebron, nor do those golfers. It’s not about capitalism or lack if money, the problem is lack of backbone. Again, how much money do these people need before they stop making decisions based on money?
pdxfed@lemmy.world 2 days ago
I’d challenge that idea if you’re trying to pass a moral judgement. It’s no less wrong or immoral to uncaringly invest in companies that do horrible things for ones retirement in a 401k than it is in invest uncaringly in companies that do horrible things for VC, starting a new business or any other investment decision. We all bear responsibility for the effects of our own decisions, whether small in scale or large. Whether small or large investments, if we all took care and interest and time to receive and made changes where we see immorality, the world would be better for it.
Who gets to draw the line between those who are just “retiring” and bear no responsibility for the effects of their investments and those who are so wealthy they should? Who gets to decide what that amount threshold is? You? Why wouldn’t everyone be held to the principle if you’re making a judgement based on morality? Gets to be a very slippery and subjective slope otherwise.
David_Eight@lemmy.world 1 day ago
If a person give a company money to invest for their retirement they can look into the investment company itself but its unreasonable for them to look into every company they invest in. Normal people generally don’t have time to check new investments that company makes everyday. Once an individual is made aware of their money being invested into immoral companies then its there responsible to act.
That’s a quote from their website, see the difference? Steph didn’t just give someone money to invest and they did something without his knowledge.