"We do a lot of solar and made a lot of money"

In the world of investment, "family offices" are what it sounds like they are. They are the offices that handle the investment portfolio of particular rich families, some of which seem to hire an outsider to the family to manage the portfolio in much the same spirit as that in which they might hire a live-in maid.

Sometimes running a family office is a young person's ticket into the investment industry, and he/she will get hired for bigger things by a Wall Street bank impressed by the demonstrated acumen. At other times, though, the families actually hire established bigwigs AWAY from Wall Street or the big London firms.

Anyway, family offices have themselves become a "beat" for financial reporters. In that spirit, I observe that FOs have as a group taken a lot of interest in the issue of "sustainable" investing. That is, investing in companies that do business in a way that will allow us to sustain ourselves on this planet.

The principal of a private multi-family office in Florida said, “We do a lot of solar and made a lot of money over the last year and a half. The whole sector is up.”

Separately: 69% of FO respondents in North America agreed with the statement, “The wealth community needs to do more to combat climate change.”

Those two statements are from different points of view, but they are not conflicting. You can "do well by doing good" by, say, looking for the new-but-scalable non-hydrocarbon energy system and getting in on its ground floor.

Just putting it out there.

Comments

A Story About Coleridge

This is a quote from a memoir by Dorothy Wordsworth, reflecting on a trip she took with two famous poets, her brother, William Wordsworth, and their similarly gifted companion, Samuel Taylor Coleridge. We sat upon a bench, placed for the sake of one of these views, whence we looked down upon the waterfall, and over the open country ... A lady and gentleman, more expeditious tourists than ourselves, came to the spot; they left us at the seat, and we found them again at another station above the Falls. Coleridge, who is always good-natured enough to enter into conversation with anybody whom he meets in his way, began to talk with the gentleman, who observed that it was a majestic waterfall. Coleridge was delighted with the accuracy of the epithet, particularly as he had been settling in his own mind the precise meaning of the words grand, majestic, sublime, etc., and had discussed the subject with William at some length the day before. “Yes, sir,” says Coleridge, “it is a majesti

Five Lessons from the Allegory of the Cave

Please correct me if there are others. But it seems to be there are five lessons the reader is meant to draw from the story about the cave. First, Plato is working to devalue what we would call empiricism. He is saying that keeping track of the shadows on the cave wall, trying to make sense of what you see there, will NOT get you to wisdom. Second, Plato is contending that reality comes in levels. The shadows on the wall are illusions. The solid objects being passed around behind my back are more real than their shadows are. BUT … the world outside the the cave is more real than that — and the sun by which that world is illuminated is the top of the hierarchy. So there isn’t a binary choice of real/unreal. There are levels. Third, he equates realness with knowability. I only have opinions about the shadows. Could I turn around, I could have at least the glimmerings of knowledge. Could I get outside the cave, I would really Know. Fourth, the parable assigns a task to philosophers

Searle: The Chinese Room

John Searle has become the object of accusations of improper conduct. These accusations even have some people in the world of academic philosophy saying that instructors in that world should try to avoid teaching Searle's views. That is an odd contention, and has given rise to heated exchanges in certain corners of the blogosphere. At Leiter Reports, I encountered a comment from someone describing himself as "grad student drop out." GSDO said: " This is a side question (and not at all an attempt to answer the question BL posed): How important is John Searle's work? Are people still working on speech act theory or is that just another dead end in the history of 20th century philosophy? My impression is that his reputation is somewhat inflated from all of his speaking engagements and NYRoB reviews. The Chinese room argument is a classic, but is there much more to his work than that?" I took it upon myself to answer that on LR. But here I'll tak

Jamesian Philosophy Refreshed

Search This Blog