My company is local and its easier for me to work from home. Companies that serve their communities need to focus on their communities, but internet and software companies use employees from anywhere.
I was shocked to see this was from 5 years ago. As I write this here we are in 2023. We currently are seeing the fruits of Blackrock's aggressive "social responsibility" business model. I give kudos for the the other panelists pressing the questions to Fink but they failed to present the clear question of ESG scores. How that will "force behaviors" (Larry Fink's choice of words) in regards to what business decisions they can make. I am uncomfortable with the manner in which Fink invoked Milton Friedman. Anyone with a modicum understanding of Friedman's philosophy is that freedom of choice --- both for the business owner and the consumer is the most viable environment for a functional economy and society. Freedom of choice is the true long term solution.
I totally agree w him long term profitability w a purposes in mind . I love listens to him talk as his visions are very similar to mine . I think he is at a place where he stabled and want to give back to the world but it has to be done tastefully where many future generations can benefits from it too and that where my visions is too . No money will ever be enough to give but best to invest into creating jobs, businesses , farms , manufacturing , educations , technologies , hospitals, healthcare , sustainability etc where everyone can benefits from it . As I believed successful peoples don’t mind giving back when they make it in life and that how I believed we can recycle those money in good uses . The harder you works the more rewards you’ll get . Just how much do you wants it is up to you
Why is it controversial to care about the world? Fink's having to justify his stance with the profitability of caring about social issues; isn't it enough to want to have a positive impact on the world? The planet shouldn't revolve solely around profitability
I hope that CNBC has reviewed this content from almost 3 years ago and are reconsidering their stance (and the appalling performance of their anchors). Public shame on CNBC, who was already lagging behind the times in 2018, I wonder where do they stand now? Such backward thinking and lack of any knowledge or perspective whatsoever.
They raise fund from investors that mean the investors as partner with the companies. But the owners did make deal and CEO did make deal different than investors alone they hide not share to let investors know
The bailout and stimulus and the lending monies to companies must meet terms and do things must meet terms and conditions in order for us to help. Not do thing reckless and earn big and recessions
The reason CEO make deal with other companies as lending monies or need services at low cost or products from other companies low cost. They should not make investors bankruptcy as well as more companies going out of businesses but they did in recessions
We need to know the companies that able to produce net income they do not have big debts from stimulus and bailout how many of those companies that we know
Profit is a consequence, purpose is the CAUSE! If the purpose is good, the profit is high and durable. If the purpose is bad, profit could be high at first but at the end of the day you will not survive. Is profit for profit a good cause? Not enough. Google didn't become one of the world largest company in the world having profit for profit as a mission, Apple too etc. So is nonsense to talk about profit and "may be" purpose, because purpose is what makes you profitable, and how good is your purpose gives the measure of how much you are profitable and how long your profitability will last.
I think what Friedman said was the first part of truth. Indeed, the only social responsibility to shareholder is profit. But when you push it further, does my shareholder want long term continuity of profit or just short term? If long term, how are we going to make sure it is long term profitable? Impact Investment and social investment will bring the retention of competent employees, meanwhile keep the profits of shareholders and raise it up. For short term profit, Friedman is right also. The sentence said by Milton Friedman was just half of the sentence and when you further push the sentence into next level, there shouldn't be any aggressive debate like this.
What is the deal with not letting someone finish making their point? Why would you ask this guy for 10 minutes of his time, only to spend half of this time shouting over him? Useless skills o the CNBC side.
![ILLSLICK - WINTER IS COMING [Official Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/dwTMeM1zIhQ/mqdefault.jpg)
Larry Fink at CNBC is home! Means that BlackRock owns CNBC
What's the deal with these interviewers?
I think it's pretty clear their representing opposing interests to BlackRock.
It's either they don't understand or have an agenda... but the quality of their questions is just terrible !
My company is local and its easier for me to work from home. Companies that serve their communities need to focus on their communities, but internet and software companies use employees from anywhere.
Regulators should step in for sure.... They are wayyyy too big and are now deciding they want to control all companies decisions effectively?
a purpose like a world wide event maybe.
This conversation is testimony as to why the poor stay poor and the rich get richer
From the Caribbean to Davos. "Connecting".
That's how business should be in the first place-working for a vision that unites all under common virtues
Under satan. Umbrella corp resident evil
CNBC is terrible, how could investors take their opinions seriously?
What the hell are these reporters asking?
I was shocked to see this was from 5 years ago. As I write this here we are in 2023. We currently are seeing the fruits of Blackrock's aggressive "social responsibility" business model. I give kudos for the the other panelists pressing the questions to Fink but they failed to present the clear question of ESG scores. How that will "force behaviors" (Larry Fink's choice of words) in regards to what business decisions they can make. I am uncomfortable with the manner in which Fink invoked Milton Friedman. Anyone with a modicum understanding of Friedman's philosophy is that freedom of choice --- both for the business owner and the consumer is the most viable environment for a functional economy and society. Freedom of choice is the true long term solution.
I totally agree w him long term profitability w a purposes in mind . I love listens to him talk as his visions are very similar to mine . I think he is at a place where he stabled and want to give back to the world but it has to be done tastefully where many future generations can benefits from it too and that where my visions is too . No money will ever be enough to give but best to invest into creating jobs, businesses , farms , manufacturing , educations , technologies , hospitals, healthcare , sustainability etc where everyone can benefits from it . As I believed successful peoples don’t mind giving back when they make it in life and that how I believed we can recycle those money in good uses . The harder you works the more rewards you’ll get . Just how much do you wants it is up to you
We need to enforce the main road drivers move forward but bump to other traffic around
interesting, but what happens if this "purpose" collides with the purpose of a nation?
Why is it controversial to care about the world? Fink's having to justify his stance with the profitability of caring about social issues; isn't it enough to want to have a positive impact on the world? The planet shouldn't revolve solely around profitability
I hope that CNBC has reviewed this content from almost 3 years ago and are reconsidering their stance (and the appalling performance of their anchors). Public shame on CNBC, who was already lagging behind the times in 2018, I wonder where do they stand now? Such backward thinking and lack of any knowledge or perspective whatsoever.
For Purpose, read Branding
Very irritating interviewers. They are just incompetent.
They raise fund from investors that mean the investors as partner with the companies. But the owners did make deal and CEO did make deal different than investors alone they hide not share to let investors know
The supplies and the natural environments they are not all for cities peoples. Things enjoy must watch out
Traffic own cars but fail apart for jam and accidents with brake and steering overwhelmed it must find way to stop these enjoying drivers
The chairman too
The bailout and stimulus and the lending monies to companies must meet terms and do things must meet terms and conditions in order for us to help. Not do thing reckless and earn big and recessions
This chairman is the crook. He saw the poker face
"Cut from the cloth" by the Evens
A rare man. Ahead of the curve. Personally inspiring for sure.
taj ce da pomogne ukrajinu
The reason CEO make deal with other companies as lending monies or need services at low cost or products from other companies low cost. They should not make investors bankruptcy as well as more companies going out of businesses but they did in recessions
You are a shill, whereas Friedman was brilliant.
We need to know the companies that able to produce net income they do not have big debts from stimulus and bailout how many of those companies that we know
And we need investigators and FBI to do prosecute or we will do the same fail
Profit is a consequence, purpose is the CAUSE! If the purpose is good, the profit is high and durable. If the purpose is bad, profit could be high at first but at the end of the day you will not survive. Is profit for profit a good cause? Not enough. Google didn't become one of the world largest company in the world having profit for profit as a mission, Apple too etc. So is nonsense to talk about profit and "may be" purpose, because purpose is what makes you profitable, and how good is your purpose gives the measure of how much you are profitable and how long your profitability will last.
Amen
We do not have forest too fall back if farms fail
The long term for 300% or 3000% return it is the crook for hold long. We alway faced with the crook run the nation only 4 years.
On true documents and deal document they are not fully let the working investors know the plans
#heartofeuropeisfrankfurt
#blackrockisnotcool
The health of the citizens must come first. This chairman and Trump release prisons sale arms and drugs and alcohol and cigarettes
I think what Friedman said was the first part of truth. Indeed, the only social responsibility to shareholder is profit. But when you push it further, does my shareholder want long term continuity of profit or just short term? If long term, how are we going to make sure it is long term profitable? Impact Investment and social investment will bring the retention of competent employees, meanwhile keep the profits of shareholders and raise it up. For short term profit, Friedman is right also. The sentence said by Milton Friedman was just half of the sentence and when you further push the sentence into next level, there shouldn't be any aggressive debate like this.
Whatever in the past we will not do the same model for next 4 years under Biden
#flow
And no audits.
What is the deal with not letting someone finish making their point? Why would you ask this guy for 10 minutes of his time, only to spend half of this time shouting over him? Useless skills o the CNBC side.
#noflow
#energy
This chairman is crook he did saw poker face
#time
look at all the sheep fawning over their overlords in these comments. Total NPCs.
#exist
#ok
Punkt
#waterormilk
#blackrockiscool
#airporttoceooffice
#30
#99
#buddhaforenergysanddontneedalevator
#fengshui
😎😁✌️
#73
#hmmmm
#tiktok
#helikoptersisok
#hokuspokusbullshit
#bähhhh
#weristklausgehrig
#ätsch
#frankfurtisafinancecenter
#fiveminutesfromceoofficetopenthouseappartmentoverstairs
#energy
Punkt