tHe MoSt EvIL cOmPaNiEs In theWoRLD!! BlackStone vs BlackRock 

Are there any ways on Brilliant to learn about Blackrock's ESG system, and how funding from entities like Blackrock are very closely tied to their ESG scores? Maybe even a clip on Brilliant demonstrating why content creators are afraid of bringing ESG up when discussing the company who created the system?

@@toughgamma Because ESGs are a scam, duhh!

12:40 Did you mean Blackstone?

How much have you been paid to say this?

@@ajrobbins368 ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-iYqVNrI-pKk.html as well; it's all in the section on BlackStone which is in the business of alternative investments rather than index funds.

Lmaoooo

i am starting to think that finance is harder than rocket science

The pioneers used to ride rocks for miles. Can't say the same about stones.

Come for the video, Stay for the Boyle wit

It's around the size of a small boulder.

In the first half - I thought that it was a bigger thing that's actually happening.... read the "boulder", lost my shit xD

and secretly ruled by a cabal that is called Black Mountain.

It's called BlackCock Both these companies are soon going to be labeled BlackBalls (left & right).

What about BlackPebble

Black1

Great advice! Diversifying my portfolio with blue-chip, growth, and dividend-paying stocks has paid off. Starting with $100,000 and staying informed with help from a financial advisor, my investment has grown to around $900,000. Diversification and informed decisions are key

The hidden truth is that working with a financial advisor can significantly amplify your success. Personalized advice and strategic decisions make a huge difference

Amazing results! Could you share how I can get in touch with your financial advisor? I'd love to work with them.

Angela Lynn Schilling is the Iicensed coach l use. Just research the name. You'd find necessary detaiIs to work with a correspondence to set up an appointment.

I searched for her full name online, found her page, and sent an email to schedule a meeting. Hopefully, she responds soon. Thank you..

First of all, it's Blackstone that's doing it, the video got it mixed up in the end. Secondly, it's really not just one or two houses that will increase the cost overall in an area. It has to be more than that. But yeah, you are right in that they can influence more than the very small number of 0.02% shows. Honestly, I didn't know it was such a small number. I had the impression it was a lot higher than that

⁠@@chicoktcRateables are what real estate agents use to determine the selling price of a home. It’s basically the price other homes in similar condition are going for so BlackRock or whoever paying inflated prices is driving up other peoples home values. The 0.02% number was the total number of homes in America. I’m wondering what the true percentage of houses for sale in certain markets is. Like, a neighborhood of 1000 homes has 10 houses for sale at any given time, that 0.02% jumps to 20%. Therefore it’s affecting the price on 2 of those 10 for sale and agents are going to notice the mark ups both for their selling clients and their commissions.

@@chicoktc fun fact: the only people upset over high housing prices are new buyers. People who already own their homes (2/3 of Americans) are just fine with higher home prices. With any transaction, there are always at least two sides: buyer and seller. One person's gloom and doom is another person's joy and delight. Funny... the media never talks about that.

@@chicoktc Its a small number but strategically done to drive up houses with being able to use that small number to seem like they are innocent. They control just enough of major cities, and towns to have quite the grip on the housing market without having to buy everything up. They just need to drive up prices and undercut slightly what they don't own.

@@sidwhiting665 Correction - thousand of americans gloom and doom is one persons joy and delight

Needs more upvotes.

@@THETRIVIALTHINGS Needs more upvotes.

Needs more upvotes.

This!

How on earth could BR kick a company out of the indexes? They are not S&P

Also the Concentration, .02% in a country could be way higher concentration*** in certain regions, from then its just the snowball effect

And what dose this mean

@@davisdelp8131 It means the stat makes BlackRock seem less "evil", than it supposedly is. Also taking the above comment into consideration, home valuations vary by region. 0.02% of a country may not seem that bad considering BlackRock's size, but that figure gives you fuck-all about their actual influence on the housing market.

He got you there

Yours is a bad argument because you're effectively making it such that anyone owning anything makes too much of a difference in the market. .02% is way too small to fucking matter. Every company that owns more than 10% of a market has monopoly power in your eyes.

That's why an asset manager should forget alpha gains and focus on maximizing efficiency.

@@samsonsoturian6013 none of these words are in the bible

@@zakkart vhut?

Yeah, they have a fiduciary responsibility to their shareholders, but no responsibility whatsoever to society. That's a dire systemic problem that we have to address. You should have a system that encourages companies to use overseas child slave labor to maximize profits for rich people at home

I would say That is not the problem. Investing is very much a long term game, even if you’re trading on short time horizons.

Asset managers favor economies of scale because the overhead is about the same regardless how many zeros you add to them.

I'd say more, that it tends to be temporary good. But overall not good for everyday peoples long-term.

Shareholders should be the state

all corporations are by definition evil because their sole aim is profit, that's why regulations are necessary. if a person behaved like a corporation they would be considered a psychopath. what happened to the honest capitalists who just admit that but say self interest leads to greater good?

Sir they control the housing market, what we eat what we think, how is that not evil?

that could be true for any investment company, billionaire or average politician. They're no different, so the precautions have to be similar

An insignificant voting share isn't immense power lol. They own something like 5% of any given company. if there are other groups with 5% you're still 1/20.

​@@sor39995% is still a hefty amount and a lot of say when we're talking about owning chunks of a company.

Also the whole take on the market issue with DarkPebble is really shallow and dismissive. For a channel about economics it feels like a hard miss and the example is also really narrowminded

He was probably paid to create this video.

I'm subscribing from this fluff-filled garbage of a financial channel. The earlier videos were interesting. Now, the clown publishes anything to get more views.

@@CalebePriester its illegal to not disclose a sponsorship, its very unlikely he'd risk severe fines and his reputation just to not put the sponsor in the video.

@@sirbean5563 check who own brilliant, is there some black word in it's investor lol

I was going to write this myself. Yeah they clearly had a hand in this

Fr

This guy is just as much a finance bro as any other wall street guy.

Welcome to capitalism

Exactly! Well said.

And, that’s a bad thing!? [evil "I’m doing fine, what’s the problem?" laugh]

@@AS89898 *Corporatism. Capitalism would have the barrier for entry for any competitors to these companies remain equal and low, rather than have government-favored megacorporations get special treatment and bailouts while the startups and smaller companies get next to nothing as far as support or favor.

@@Darkrunn Quite a shock, then, that every system of capitalism that has ever seen use has led to corporatism. It's almost as though one is a logical consequence of the other. Also, gotta love how your solution to rampant capitalism is less regulation. I'm sure that'll prevent the monopolies from forming.

I agree with the last part but pensions have all but disappeared for the entire private sector. The only people still in pensions are public sector (government) union employees and trade unions. So 98% of the workforce does have control of their "pensions". They are called 401k funds. You seem to imply pensions are bad. They are actually better for the workers if company and fund are managed competently. Private companies didn't shred their pension benefits because it was better for the company.

Asset managers don't vote on shareholders behalf withoit specific permission to do so

@@samsonsoturian6013 Hit me up on ☝️📩

@@samsonsoturian6013 ehh that really depends on which index fund your talking about and how they structure the funds.

Exactly. The fact that the world economic forum ties didn’t come up means I will trust this channel for information on how markets work and how things technically function, but opinion wise I trust it as far as I can throw it. This was the biggest white wash I’ve ever seen. It’s like saying Ted Bundy didn’t deserve his reputation even though he forgot to shovel his sidewalk after it snowed, as if that was the big evil. I almost broke my finger smashing the down vote button on this video.

Hmmm 🤔

Why would they? The whole video is about how big they are and how much they supposedly control. Maybe get off the Fox News kool-aid scaremongering for a second.

Yep, that's where their evilness shines

It's the main reason Blackrock gets so much hate, way to completely miss the point... probably on purpose

It is gluttony.

@@sethtrey It is a necessity in an economic system which can only function if it grows. Almost like a Ponzi scheme rly. Trying to execute this never ending growth on a planet with finite resources is this collective madness going on for a while and what we call the "current socioeconomic paradigm", or shortly just rampant capitalism.

@@CraftyF0X this is literally wrong its not necessary for it to grow nigga but its regard as good when it is growing

@@tkokflux6322 Yea you know a lot about economy I can tell right away..... It is a necessity, and if you don't understand why that's fine, time to do some research and reading befor you call someone wrong.

Welcome to capitalism, I guess? The line must always go up. If it doesn't, you're failing your investors and aren't worth anything as a company.

There's no need to lie in this instance

Not practically. Their lobbying attorneys LITERALLY write the laws and then bribe politicians to back them.

@@hopefully2224 liars burn in hell

​@@samsonsoturian6013 what about all the money these guys spend on supper packs

Less bad doesn't mean there aren't still issues, basically. And you can't just ignore them.

Yes, he actually made that argument. Just shows that he might actually be a untrustworthy RU-vidr all along. Also the part that supposedly shows how little percent BlackStone controls is BlackStone's own clever misdirection to fool people into thinking that they don't have that much of an impact on house prices.

Exactly this. Dude said that they're not evil while also describing the greediest shit I've heard all year.

He doesn’t realize that whatever way he puts it, these investment companies have immense influence over shit that we consume daily now, affecting the public perception and propaganda. Literally everything around us is trying to say “You need this! or this is bad/good” i think he’s forgetting the psychological aspect of it

Exactly this. Dude said that they're not evil while also describing the greediest shit I've heard all year.

😂😂😂😂

I was waiting the whole clip for HMW to mention ESG even in his typical objective way. The power for Blackrock to demand [woke] values from the companies it holds or risk being sold off is dangerous.

As we sadly have to deal with ESGs influencing our lives and the companies management. I hope ESGs fail by proving to be a hindrance in the long term. Like Disney shoving propaganda in every piece of culture just leading to a long and painful failure for Disney. They’re not evil for maximizing profits. They’re evil by aiming ever so strongly to make everyone an alienated, indebted consumer with little else to be.

@@rdln4313 for sure. Recently, my company outed that they have a senior management head of ESG. I hope it's mostly for show, because otherwise the culture will be getting more distracting.

@@rdln4313 🤦🏼 You just said they're not evil for trying to maximize profits and then call them evil for the exact things that they do to maximize profits... ESG is a failed attempt to make capitalism less exploitative, because capitalism is inherently exploiting.

@@WanderingExistence the issue here is the very attempt to make capitalism less exploitative ends up making it more exploitative. Especially given how there's more not-wealthy white people than not-wealthy not-white people in America

They manage the companies assets, they don't own them. That doesn't mean they can't influence things, but companies can still act independently.

@@starmorpheus the stock owners (i.e. Black Rock) are the owners...

Like Microsoft and apple, people think they are different companies that compete with each other when both their assets and stocks are owned by the same people...

Except the issue with your argument is that individual people still buy the homes at the increased prices... The general market (normal/rich people) are still buying homes at the increased prices...

@@killerhurtalot Normal people ain't buying shit, they're moving to a different part of the country to the desert cuz it's somehow more affordable than an area actually suitable for life

@@killerhurtalot Normal.. above-average middle class? Or are they theoretically taking on long-term mortgages? Both? Regardless. Renting in my area, by yourself *might* be doable. If you have someone you care for who can't work, then it isn't.

Housing scarcity is a lot more nuanced then "Blackstone owns everything lol!" But IMO, the commodification of housing is a big part of the problem (which Blackstone is one part of). The invention of REITs in the 70s is when median income and housing prices started to diverge which culminated in 2008 crash and the problem we are seeing now. Even average Joes are salivating at their own on paper wealth.

The best investment strategy can turn into the worst if you don't have the stomach to see it through. can you handle staying in when everyone else is jumping ship?

@@kendrickdonor2017 The biggest risk of all is not taking one. If investors stick to the low_risks assets like the money market and bonds, then they run a high risk of low long term returns. How can I contact Carissa?

@@emmacreame4889 I mean I'm not doing a referral service ma'am. But you can look up the name and contact her on the web

This chain of comments is a SCAM

Scam

So?

@@Toxic-th4si he's a brainwashed treehugger lmao

And?

@@Toxic-th4si perhaps unelected investment funds shouldn’t be controlling how you live. The market is no longer controlled by the consumer. It’s controlled by oligarchs who tell you what to do. Get in the pod and eat the bugs.

ESG isn't inherently bad, it's only bad if it's communicated to people as an alternative to government regulation.

What if you just want to make money for retirement because it is profoundly expensive to exist in America and you don't want to work until you die, but don't give a damn about the actual policies of companies because your tiny middle-class vote won't change things anyway?

@@Demmrir If your investing in ETFs than there isn’t much you can do about it. If your buying individual shares then make sure they are through a proper stockbroker where you actually control the shares. I’m in Australia and I use CMC Markets to buy shares with. The shares are registered with the ASX in my name and any correspondence from companies I own shares in comes to me. I used to use Vanguard and I didn’t realise what was happening until I changed over (because I was new to share investing at the time). With Vanguard I never received any letters from companies I “invested” in and no letters from the ASX to say I’m a shareholder, because Vanguard owned the shares, not me!

@@Demmrir . The top ten largest firms on the S&P500 have 99.9% correlation with the index itself. You don't need to own an ETF or mutual fund with the entire index to get index returns. However, the way to fix the issue with share ownership is through regulation so these large asset managers can't use your money against your best interest such as encouraging your employer to fire you to cut expenses.

@@Demmrir then don't vote, nothing compelling you to vote.

@@David-lr2viLol the shares are still not in your name. It’s in CMC name (or who ever holds the shares for them)

Very interesting. I would also like to see well researched videos instead of these fluff filled videos.

"Institutional owners only own 0.5% of single-family homes in the US." Only 0.8% of homes are currently for sale. So "only 0.5%" is 62% of the housing market. Brutal. And they just put it in your face knowing people wont check.

@@jcslowry . You nailed it!

They don't actually need to own or buy a large percentage of homes to have a huge affect on prices. Pricing of houses is based on what other similar nearby houses were sold for. If they buy just a few houses well over asking price in an area, that will have a huge affect on the asking prices of other nearby homes.

I'm reminded of Downton Abbey and the decline of the landed gentry in 1870s England. Because ownership of the land was in few hands, the nobles and gentry were able to elevate the price of land to well beyond what ordinary people could afford and extract enormous rents from tennant farmers. However, once factories began to generate much larger amounts of wealth on small plots of land it was all over. People could make more money working in factories, taxes went up and factory owners could afford what had been outrageous sums for land only a generation or two ago. Industrialists would then buy large plots of land from poorer gentry and either build company towns or subdivide and sell what they didn't need at prices the market could actually afford. This crashed the value of land and grew the middle class, thus making it even harder for other gentry to stay afloat financially. It may take decades, but many of the big private equity firms currently buying up the housing market are going to suffer the same fate. If the world's population really does start to decline starting in the 2050s, the housing market will be perpetually over-supplied and prices will crash. Start saving those down deposits now!

Because the owner of the channel is a shill for the industry.

Atleast he isnt personally advocating for the World Economic Forum like Johnny Harris or using sources directly from biased billionaires like kurzgesagt Omission of information is one of the lesser crimes in comparison :/

He didn't miss it accidentally tho

I always advice new members to have an orientation on how it works before getting involved. Trade offers more benefits than just holding.

Kate Floretta Face book

Google " katefxfloretta " anywhere take classes to learn to trade.

having a mentor is also very important when it comes to Trade, with out that, it can be very frustrating.

you must have these things in mind 1. Have a long term mindset. 2. Be willing to take *risk*. 3. Be careful, if you're not spending to earn back, then stop spending. 4. Never claim to know - Ask questions and it's best you work with an assistant.

Thank you for your feedback,for more information on how to be successful in trading,☝️📊

Indeed. Very shallow take and argument there

this! bump!

Idk if you want an answer, but I'd like to give my 2 cents: People tend to always think of either diversity or environmentalism when it comes to ESG. There's quite a bit more involved, especially beyond the US where diversity quotas and policing play a significantly smaller role. Fundamentally 2 things: 1. the logic of ESG can (in some cases) be simplified to "ppl pressure government to enact anti climate change regulation -> some businesses benefit from that regulation (solar companies, recycling, etc.) while others are hurt (certain automotive companies, dirty chemicals, etc.) -> if you invest in the former businesses, you make money from this legislation. So if you assume that the probability that this happens is larger than it not happening, you should bet on that (whether that assumption is true or not is a different discussion), making it actually completely in line with fiduciary duty. 2. When it comes to topics such as social and governance (the latter being the sadly unappreciated one), this can be viewed in different ways, e.g. companies with better brand perceptions among their target audience make more money. If you sell to Gen Z, who value certain things, you want to be aligned with those values in order to sell as good as possible to them (making e.g. diversity actually financially viable). In addition, there is actually research that for example female CEOs are less likely to commit fraud than male CEOs and that more diverse teams and by extension boards (in this case meaning diverse not only in race or gender, but also in age, academic background and experience) actually perform better than more homogenous teams. Happy to look that up if you'd like. Stakeholder management is a bit more buzzwordy IMO than ESG, but the way that I believe BlackRock thinks is this: We and certain companies have a bad rep for not caring about ppl. This will lead to more image-conscious investors (as Gen Z for example seems to be) to not invest in us and for a lot more bad press and legal scrutiny. By pushing stakeholder value we can improve our perception and counteract that. Stakeholder management is a relatively new concept trying to replace Shareholder Management (of which even Jack Welch, who used to be its biggest advocate, was more and more critical in his later years). There are concrete examples of stakeholder management actually improving returns. There was a case in which KKR did a form of stakeholder management a few years back. They bought a manufacturing company (again, happy to look up the details again) in the US and instead of keeping all shares, distributed some of the shares to all employees of the company, making them co-owners. The project was a huge success and both KKR and the employees made a fat profit (I think they all got a good 6-figure sum on average) because the employees were thinking as business owners instead of only employees. This is only one example of course, but I want to bring it up just to show how many things fall under stakeholder management. And these things lead to tangible, positive results, making it wise to push for that. Just to be clear, I don't want to say we should run after every trend and that everything has have great ESG ratings and I'm not a fan of quota-based hiring either, just wanted to point out that there's more to these buzzwords and that they can actually be good for investors. Of course all of these strategies are based on assumptions, if you disagree with these assumptions, you can, especially if you are based in the US, invest in what some call "conservative" funds that bet on the exact opposite and don't invest in companies that focus strongly on ESG. Great way to make some impact, live your beliefs and actually make some money on it.

Well said.

This.

Hiking up prices for human necessities is basically Evil - land lording is new age Slavery

Exactly, they are the key perpetuators of a system that simply seeks to make money off of resources that people need to live... If they price people out of living, "oh well, not our problem". These are the people that cause houses to inflate faster than inflation, and have large influence to suppress wages so they barely keep pace with inflation.

Worth a video to itself

Whose

Always has been

The irony of someone calling this propaganda while the overall narrative of these companies being some Illuminati is... propaganda. The propaganda that gets to you first is the one that's true. That's the rule!

Greedy ibn-sharmouta only dish out hate and lies towards the biggest in class. I.E. Mr. Musk started receiving hate mail simply because he was briefly the richest man in the world.

Negative. They would still get a nice RIO on the recouped insurance payments. It would be funnier if a bunch of homeless people just started squatting in them and refused to leave without payment.

There's no need to lie in this instance

Absolutely!

He's just sponsored 😊

What was the original?

🤔

what about rock and stone?

I think it is a secret as in not a lot of society realizes that they do this.

@@HTV-2_Hypersonic_Glide_Vehicle but... that's not what a secret is. a secret is something actively concealed. not something that is not general knowledge. most people don't know about Kessler syndrome. but it isn't a secret in fact we are actively trying to tell people about it before we end our ablity to go to space forever. if it is public. it isn't secret even if people don't bother to learn.

​@@HTV-2_Hypersonic_Glide_Vehicle By that definition, Ohio is a secret as a majority of Americans couldn't find the state on a map.

@@badluck5647 are you really comparing a state to a company that is likely less known about than a state?

@@badluck5647 it is likely that the majority of Americans know that Ohio exists, but not likely that Blackstone caused a housing scare.

This. I can’t believe he said that with a straight face like we’d be too dumb to keep up. They make that much because they HAVE to in order to afford it. Everyone else is pushed out in the name of the fiduciary duty they have to the elites that they service.

Creating A s s e t s can make one successful in life like

.Stocks .shares .Bit coin

That's true , In-vesting in bit coin now is the best thing to do especially with the current state in the market

therefore in-vesting in it wouldn't be a bad idea 💡

This is definitely correct and I agree with you on this

when the market goes down and the value of your portfolio decreases significantly, it’s tempting to ask yourself or your financial advisor (if you have one) “should I pull my money out of the stock market?” that’s understandable, but most likely not the best course of action.

That's right, a bias for action can be your worst enemy in the stock market whereas, to avoid the hustle and bustle, I'm better off using an invt advisor, saves me time and earns me weekly to monthly income since the rona-outbreak in 2019 till date. I'm about 15% short of reaching my first $1M, I may consider rtrmt.

@@ocean9861 amazing! mind if I look up the advisor that guides you? I'm 25 just completed my BSC and ACCA, and also have inheritance money that I intend to dump on stocks to hedge against inflation, I've been doing my research, and in conclusion, I'll need an expert to know if what I'm doing is right or wrong.

Karl Marx. A critique of capitalism by someone who had no concept how energy and capital equipment can exponentially increase a person's economic output.

+

Thank you for your feedback,for more information on how to be successful in trading,