Oklahoma fossil fuel blacklist could cost retirees millions

[BobbyV]

Why do Oklahoma politicians and other administrative types continue do junk like this?

https://www.readfrontier.org/storie...-fuel-blacklist-could-cost-retirees-millions/
Under Oklahoma’s Energy Discrimination Elimination Act, public retirement systems are banned from doing business with companies on a state blacklist for those accused of boycotting the fossil fuel industry.

A law prohibiting Oklahoma public retirement systems from investing and contracting with financial companies accused of boycotting the fossil fuels industry could cost the state’s second-largest pension fund at least $9.7 million.

The Oklahoma Public Employees Retirement System is the first to release an estimate for how much it might cost retirees to shed investments from blacklisted companies. And the cost could be much higher after other trading costs are factored in, the retirement system’s chief financial officer warned Thursday.

 

[SlugSlinger]

Because these woke ran companies believe they can enter the political arena free of charge. There is a cost to everything. If woke employees want to play politics behind the vail of a corporate name, so be it. Bud Light is a great example of the cost to a company.

 

[trekrok]

If my math is correct, $10 mill in expenses on $7 bill in affected assets, that would be .1%?

That seems worth it to make the point. Oklahoma may not make a dent in the Blackrocks, but if other states do the same, it might be felt.

 

[Gadsden]

Larry Fink of Blackrock, evil personified and the driving force of The Cabal

https://www.heritage.org/progressiv...-his-global-crusade-advance-identity-politics

 

[donner]

Why do Oklahoma politicians and other administrative types continue do junk like this?

Because they are desperate to find a way to signal their virtue to their constituents.

 

[BobbyV]

If my math is correct, $10 mill in expenses on $7 bill in affected assets, that would be .1%?

That seems worth it to make the point. Oklahoma may not make a dent in the Blackrocks, but if other states do the same, it might be felt.

But what point is being made and to what/who's benefit? How sad is that we're seemingly okay with potentially losing $10 million.


As The Frontier first reported, many firms on the list don’t actually qualify for inclusion under the law and the criteria for how companies can get off the list is murky at best.

The Frontier found the Oklahoma State Treasurer’s office applied criteria for blacklisting companies inconsistently, leaving some firms claiming they have been arbitrarily and wrongly banned from doing business with the state. The blacklist could have far-reaching effects on everything from financing for public works projects to how state payroll checks are processed.

 

[BobbyV]

Because they are desperate to find a way to signal their virtue to their constituents.

I mean, I get that the various financial institutions currently providing services might need to be re-evaluated and/or changed to get a better deal, but why would some ban list need to be in place to do that?

The State has botched the Real ID roll-out and I'm not confident they could seamlessly transition from one debit card processor/direct deposit management system to another without folks loosing money or not getting paid on schedule.

 

[trekrok]

But what point is being made and to what/who's benefit? How sad is that we're seemingly okay with potentially losing $10 million.


As The Frontier first reported, many firms on the list don’t actually qualify for inclusion under the law and the criteria for how companies can get off the list is murky at best.

The Frontier found the Oklahoma State Treasurer’s office applied criteria for blacklisting companies inconsistently, leaving some firms claiming they have been arbitrarily and wrongly banned from doing business with the state. The blacklist could have far-reaching effects on everything from financing for public works projects to how state payroll checks are processed.

The implementation of the list I'm sure could be done better. I mean it is government, after all.

But, the idea seems to have merit to me. If an organization is explicitly targeting a sector that is still very significant to the state, why should that get a pass? Why should we allow them to profit from us, but then screw us at the same time with their silly woke politics?

 

[Glocktogo]

If ESG is acceptable, then anti-ESG is acceptable, no?

In fact, both ESG and anti-ESG are bad faith acts that harm investors, most of whom are private or public employees with 401Ks. If investment corporations would stop playing World Police with other people's money, there wouldn't be any blacklist laws introduced as bills, much less passed.

 

[cowadle]

IF? this legislation" COULD" cost millions of dollars to Millions of retired Oklahomans per year? could this just be a way of saying ???? this Legislation "COULD" cost Millions of retired Oklahomans 1 dollar per year? it is all about how you say it??? and now the big question is "how much is ESG costing the taxpayers each year"?