Page 1 Page 2 Page 3 Page 4 Page 5 Page 6 Page 7 Page 8 Page 9 Page 10 Page 11 Page 12 Page 13 Page 14 Page 15 Page 16 Page 17 Page 18 Page 19 Page 20 Page 21 Page 22 Page 23 Page 24 Page 25 Page 26 Page 27 Page 28 Page 29 Page 30 Page 31 Page 32 Page 33 Page 34 Page 35 Page 36 Page 37 Page 38 Page 39 Page 40 Page 41 Page 42 Page 43 Page 44 Page 45 Page 46 Page 47 Page 48 Page 49 Page 50 Page 51 Page 52 Page 53 Page 54 Page 55 Page 56 Page 57 Page 58 Page 59 Page 60 Page 61 Page 62 Page 63 Page 64 Page 65 Page 66 Page 67 Page 68 Page 69 Page 70 Page 71 Page 72 Page 73 Page 74 Page 75 Page 76 Page 77 Page 78 Page 79 Page 8011 Investing Trends 2016” in mid-November 2016. You can access it on their website at http://ussif. org. It will be interesting to see if and how the growth has continued. The Deeper Issues One of the challenges faced by investors inter- ested in applying ESG criteria is that you run the risk of “fighting the model.” In our current economic model, “the central banking – warfare model,” economics are driven by central bank and government policies that re- flect a significant investment in ‘control by force and superior intelligence’ based on invasion of privacy and individual rights. Central banks and govern- ments are bureaucracies that represent private investors – whether represented by secret societies and/or the leadership of significant in- tergenerational pools of capi- tal – that are not transparent and enjoy high-margin returns on warfare, financial fraud, and other forms of organized crime. In short, the privilege that accrues to the few who dominate by force and secrecy and enjoy legal immunity represents a significant tax on the general population. Another way to say this is that the size of the total pie is ‘sub optimized’ by design. The system goal is to ensure the control and command of resources by an invisible elite. Despite what we learned in economics class or business school, the global economy is not run on a basis designed to optimize the whole. We should beware designing ESG criteria on the assumption that “everyone wants things to work.” We are in a period where new powerful tech- nology and weaponry are being applied with criminal means to serve centralization. They are making the rich richer, but shrinking the total pie, and a growing population is debasing the en- vironment. The reality is, however, that the pow- ers that be can continue to centralize far longer so we can remain solvent, trying to reverse the flow with socially responsible investment. This reminds me of Reg Howe’s excellent open- ing in his essay “The Golden Sextant,” as he described the harm done to the economy and society by fiat currency and unsound central banking practices: A recent book entitled Good Money touts “SRI” – socially responsible investing – , or how to do good (socially) while doing well (financially). But what- ever the legal currency – dollars, marks, yen, francs, or pounds – in which practitioners of SRI make their investments, they cannot make bad money good. SRI cannot repeal Gresham’s law. Properly understood, good money is good, not because of the motives of its owners, but because of its own intrin- sic character. Truly good money will produce far more social benefits than any amount of bad money spent with good intentions. – Reg Howe, The Golden Sextant http://www.goldensextant.com/goldensextant. html Another one of my favorite quotes along this line is from GATA Treasurer Chris Powell: “fiat currency has done far more environmental damage, than all the mining companies have ever dreamt of doing.” In both instances, Messrs. Howe and Powell are looking to address the root problem and are concerned that SRI investing runs the risk of addressing only the symptoms. The solution is to bring sufficient transparency to root causes in order to support SRI efforts. “ Fiat currency has done far more envi- ronmental damage, than all the mining companies have ever dreamt of doing. ” – GATA Treasurer Chris Powell