Here's a statement of the obvious: The opinions expressed here are those of the participants, not those of the Mutual Fund Observer. We cannot vouch for the accuracy or appropriateness of any of it, though we do encourage civility and good humor.
Support MFO
Donate through PayPal
Bloomberg - Trump Plan to Block Green 401(k)s Stirs Fund Industry Fury
KISS=keep it simple stupid in the lowest expense ratio and eliminate all the rest. If you can have a fund with ER under 0.1% I'm for it. Let me know which green fund has ER under 0.1%
@rforno I don't think FD1000 really cares if a fund has an expense ratio of less than 0.1%. He routinely recommends and invests in funds with higher expense ratios on MFO, according to his own posts. This is about defending POTUS's anti-ESG actions.
He's just echoing the same flawed reasoning used by the administration in promulgating the rule blocking ESGs. Zenbrew highlighted this flaw in the previous thread. Quoting from his post:
As pointed out in Rekenthaler's piece:
The second implication is that corporate plans will profit by switching from actively run ESG investments to lower-cost indexers. That may be true. But once again, the same logic would seem to apply to all actively managed investments. This book, after all, has been written. We know that active managers of all stripes, both retail and institution, tend to lag index funds. It is strange that the DOL’s counsel extends only to one flavor of active management, rather than the entire field.
Comments
Gotta save the old industries....coal, oil, etc.
Keep your political nonsense out of my investments, Tweety.
https://mutualfundobserver.com/discuss/discussion/56500/new-labor-department-guidance-takes-aim-at-esg-investing
If you can have a fund with ER under 0.1% I'm for it. Let me know which green fund has ER under 0.1%
SUSL: 0.1%
USSG: 0.1%