• Jimmycakes@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      They are corrupt and if they want to help Trump get into office so their shady investments can continue then it wouldn’t cost them even pocket change to pump up trump stocks. It’s such a small amount of money to them they probably assigned an intern to the account.

      • rickrolled767@ttrpg.network
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 months ago

        Bud, I know it’s pretty easy to jump down into conspiratorial rabbit holes whenever talking about Blackrock, vanguard, etc but let me ask you this:

        Which sounds like a more solid plan? Investing in a platform that was dead in the water from the start, with no financial future. Or just donating to a bunch of politicians that are okay with your business practices?

        I’m not saying they aren’t causing a good bit of harm but you don’t become the largest investment management firm on the planet by being that stupid

        • A_Wild_Zeus_Chase@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          8 months ago

          I mean, the more solid plan is to back the president that cut taxes for the rich, as opposed to a president whose promised to increase taxes for the rich.

          So I don’t think a straight value proposition analysis applies to entities whose assets under management exceed the GDP of most countries and who are already deeply involved in the politics in the form of lobbying.

          • rickrolled767@ttrpg.network
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            8 months ago

            Then let’s assume the people in charge want Trump back in office. Wouldn’t it just make more sense to make political contributions to him and others sympathetic to his platform? That carries less reputational risk than investing in a known to fail platform.

            Plus it’s worth mentioning that those are assets under management ; they have to answer to their investors for every time they allocate. They can’t just freely swing that around like most people think

      • ArcoIris@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 months ago

        Maybe so, but they’re also on the opposite side of the aisle. The company that owns Sweet Baby Inc. and deliberately pushes inappropriate levels of DEI via bribery-with-extra-steps probably isn’t about to aid or endorse a Republican, especially one who’s that brazen about the shitty things he does.

          • ArcoIris@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            8 months ago

            Don’t believe everything you read on Wikipedia about that situation, it’s sourced from articles written by people with victim complexes who want to control the narrative. My point is that BlackRock is too liberal to support Trump.

            • Amerikan Pharaoh@lemmygrad.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              8 months ago

              my boi you literally went out of your way to implicate Sweet Baby Inc. of all people in political nonsense. I think I know the other places you post in your downtime. at least own your bullshit with your whole dogmade chest.

              • ArcoIris@lemmy.zip
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                8 months ago

                You’re the one jumping on me for merely mentioning them and now indirectly accusing me of being a Nazi. At this point you’re just deliberately ignoring the actual point that I very clearly stated. Don’t pretend you’re taking the high road, it’s not convincing anyone. Own your own bullshit instead of telling other people it’s theirs.