Spread the love

What Is ESG (Environmental, Social, and Governance) and Its Negative Economical Impact

ESG stands for Environmental, Social, and Governance, and it’s a term used to describe the way companies approach “sustainability, ethical practices, and accountability”. ESG has become a buzzword in the business world in recent years, as investors and consumers increasingly demand that companies take responsibility for their impact on the world. These “demands” however are forced by governmental regulatory fiat. Essentially, businesses have a forced fiduciary responsibility to adhere to ESG compliancy or face fines, penalties, loss of business, and even closure.

Environmental

The “E” in ESG refers to environmental concerns. This includes a company’s impact on the natural world, including issues such as climate change, pollution, and resource depletion. Companies with strong environmental practices will work to reduce their carbon footprint, conserve natural resources, and minimize waste.

Social

The “S” in ESG stands for social issues. This includes a company’s impact on its employees, customers, and the wider community. Companies with strong social practices will prioritize things like fair labor practices, diversity and inclusion, and community engagement.

Governance

Finally, the “G” in ESG refers to governance, which relates to a company’s internal practices and policies. Companies with strong governance practices will have clear policies and procedures for things like ethics, risk management, and executive compensation.

ESG and America’s Economy — Unseen Effects. Climate Change and Social Justice Take Over

Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) factors have been gaining significant attention in recent years as an ethical investment strategy. However, what many fail to realize is that ESG criteria is harmful to the United States economy. The obsession with ESG has become nothing more than a virtue-signaling trend that only serves to harm American businesses and investors.

Firstly, the focus on environmental concerns ignores the reality that fossil fuels continue to be a vital component of our economy. Policies aimed at reducing carbon emissions will cripple manufacturing and other industries that rely on cheap energy sources. Furthermore, regulations aimed at reducing greenhouse gas emissions will lead to higher energy costs for consumers, making it even harder for everyday Americans to make ends meet.

Secondly, the social aspect of ESG investing threatens free-market principles by pressuring companies to align with politically correct values rather than focusing on their bottom line.

In recent years, there has been a rise in Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) pledges from big corporations and banks. While these ESG standards appear to be beneficial for the planet, the truth is that it is having negative impacts on the US economy.

These ESG policies are preventing economic growth across the country by blocking businesses from accessing capital and resources needed to keep their operations afloat. Furthermore, they impose high costs on companies that don’t meet certain sustainability criteria which further weakens capital investments in these businesses. As a result of these policies, fewer opportunities are available for entrepreneurs due to tougher lending standards, making it difficult for new businesses to get off the ground.

As the United States scrambles to address the economic fallout of the Covid-19 pandemic, ESG (Environmental, Social, and Governance) criteria is making matters worse. At a time when businesses are struggling to stay afloat and jobs are being lost at an alarming rate, ESG criteria imposes costly and unnecessary environmental protection standards on corporations that divert funds from important investments elsewhere in their business.

Rather than focusing on job creation or economic growth strategies to help Americans weather this storm, companies around the country are instead being forced into expensive updates to factories or manufacturing processes for things like renewable energy use or carbon neutrality. This critical capital which could have been used to retain existing employees is instead going towards green initiatives with questionable returns on investment.

A growing trend in the banking sector is the implementation of ESG (Environmental, Social, and Governance) policies. The adoption of such policies has become a primary focus for many banks as they strive to be socially responsible and meet stricter regulations. Unfortunately, this approach may also lead to serious problems if not executed properly.

For starters, ESG criteria can be hard to assess accurately due to their subjective nature. Banks must invest a significant amount of time and resources into conducting research in order to make sure they comply with these standards and avoid any potential penalties or litigation. This puts an additional strain on bank resources which could have been put towards more profitable activities.

In recent months, several large banks (Silicone Valley Bank) have experienced major losses due to their investments in ESG-compliant securities. These losses are attributed to heightened scrutiny from regulators and investors alike, who are increasingly concerned about how these investments could impact the environment or social justice issues. For example, one bank had invested heavily in clean energy projects that ended up being too costly and inefficient; resulting in significant financial losses for the bank.

The world of banking is changing – and it’s not for the better. Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) criteria are taking over the financial system, creating unprecedented risks for banks across the globe.

Furthermore, ESG criteria unfairly favor certain countries and sectors at the expense of others as there is no standard set of criteria that is applicable across all markets or countries.

Jeniffer Wexton on:

public Safety

Crime has vaulted near the top of voters’ concerns, just after the economy and inflation. According to Gallup, 80 percent of Americans worry “a great deal” or a “fair amount” about crime, the highest level in two decades.

 

Such fears pose yet another midterm election hurdle for Democrats, on top of public angst over soaring prices and President Biden’s dismal public approval ratings.

 

As a former prosecutor, substitute judge, legal advocate for children, state Senator, and as a legislator, Jennifer Wexton should be well aware that our society is a dangerous place. Wexton should understand that our children, the elderly, and everyone else in between needs to be protected from violent criminals and repeat offenders. She ignores this and advocates on their behalf with light sentences, “no cash bail”, Criminal Justice Reform, and Restorative Justice.

 

Do you recall the rape of a (15) year old girl in a Loudoun County High School bathroom in May 2021 by a transgendered student? If this wasn’t bad enough, “Criminal Justice Reform” allowed for the rapists sentenced to be reduced, removing him from the sexual assault registry and providing supervised probation. To make matters worse, the Loudoun County Public Schools Superintendent Scott Ziegler IGNORED the federally mandated processes and procedures when incidents of this nature occur, and now Wexton is abolishing Title IX protections under HR5-Equality Act.

 

Jennifer Wexton got the ball rolling on the rapists lenient sentence by introducing Bill NO. 1082 in 2017, which passed (and she’s proud of it, see video during meeting with NAACP).

In 2019, Wexton proudly endorsed Buta Biberaj for Loudoun County Commonwealth Attorney. Prior to being elected, Biberaj was the legal redress for the Loudoun NAACP; this is not an insignificant detail. Biberaj also belongs to the Virginia Progressive Prosecutors For Justice. The VPPFJ’s primary goal is “Criminal Justice Reform” or “Restorative Justice”.

 

Wexton, Biberaj are closely aligned Progressive ideologues and share questionable associations with a variety of organizations and people.

Who could forget the Black Lives Matter riots of 2020 over George Floyd. Wexton is so radical that she sponsored the “George Floyd Justice Policing Act” (defund the police) and the “Mental Health Justice Act” that allowed for increased funding for social workers that are meant to take the place of police officers around the country.

 

These are only a few examples of what Wexton and the Progressive Democrats “Criminal Justice Reform” and “Restorative Justice” look like for Public Safety:

 

More on Wexton and Public Safety

%d