# Do you have morals?



## Kaitlyn (May 13, 2011)

I'm just wondering what sort of restrictions you put on yourself when investing?

I like to create a divide, but sometimes it's not that easy. I absolutely hate smoking and I think it would be very hard for me to invest in a tobacco company, although it may be a wise financial choice.

One stock I always wonder about is BP. I bought them right after the oil spill. Quite a large disaster but I saw an opportunity. I got them below their 52wk low and now I'm both profitable and enjoying a nice dividend yield.

What are your morals when it comes to investing?


----------



## mrPPincer (Nov 21, 2011)

I'm adding etfs to my portfolio right now but when I see BP or Royal Dutch Shell as one of the top holdings that's a big turnoff for me.
I also have a problem making money off tobacco, I'd prefer to let the rest of you cash in on that.
On the other hand I drive a car and I just purchased 2 pairs of $15 jeans made in bangladesh probably from slave labour so I guess that makes me a hypocrite.
I should read that book on impact investing mentioned in another thread.


----------



## KaeJS (Sep 28, 2010)

I have no morals.


----------



## dogcom (May 23, 2009)

I have no problem investing in tobacco, liquor, oil companies or whatever. I don't smoke and I hate smoke but if people want to still do it despite all the information out there on smoking then that is their problem. I also don't see it as a moral issue at all unless the companies were doing something very wrong or illegal and then I wouldn't want them because of the law suits that would come up. Another thing that bothers me is everyone who lives in cities criticizing the companies who mine, extract oil or cut trees down and at the same time these folk use what is produced and get city office jobs from them. The people out in these small towns make a living from this and if people don't want them doing it they should help to find other ways and alternatives for these people instead of just saying don't cut the trees down.


----------



## jcgd (Oct 30, 2011)

Booze, Gambling, Tobacco are all fair game, IMO. I have morals and I would apply them to my investments if there was something obvious, such as it was proven a company was doing something horrific. I never understood those big three being considered immoral. My values are so to speak, self taught. I don't practice what others taught me (parents, church, etc.) because I typically disagree as they are ideals written down by who knows who years and years ago. I more go by the idea that if someone is hurt by it, don't do it. What I do to myself is nobody's business. If I want to smoke my lungs out I'm going to do it. Doing it inside with other non-smokers, or anywhere that it can be noticed by another is a no no.

Of course the line is always fuzzy, and I go with my gut.


----------



## Causalien (Apr 4, 2009)

I've probably turned into a socialpath. There was a moment in my life where I suddenly had a crystal clear moment of realization. That, laws, morals, loyalty are just instruments to control people's behaviour. A gentlemen's agreement that it is more profitable if we are not trying to kill each other all the time. Otherwise, the society will just devolve into what it is like in "The road". 

So my beliefs are different. I will carry out a deal I agreed on doing, even if I found out later that I got ripped off. Your gain, I was dumb.


----------



## doctrine (Sep 30, 2011)

I don't apply ethics to investing. The law takes care of that and more or less the law in this country seems reasonable. What the law won't take care of, the courts will. People can jump off rail bridges if they want, that doesn't mean you shouldn't invest in rail companies. I have no problem owning oil companies, tobacco companies, alcohol companies, you name it. 

Besides, where do you draw the line. Ethical investing is all about making yourself feel good, and I guarantee you that if you give me a list of "ethical" companies, I can dig deep enough to find a reason to call them unethical. It's all subjective, and a poor way to manage your estate. And I bet I wouldn't have to dig far.


----------



## indexxx (Oct 31, 2011)

I just posted this in another thread:

Great topic.

For many years I was an "Ethical Funds" investor, and some of my funds did OK. But then I decided to take control of my finances and stop paying ridiculous MERs, and now make my own picks- I don't believe in the attitude of making money any way you can ( I feel that this is is callous and EXACTLY what is wrong with society ...), so I don't touch tobacco companies or Monsanto. Or nuclear, for that matter; I am aware of the medical and other uses for nuclear material, but it's a personal decision as I feel there are equally good or better returns in other industries. However, I have no problem with offshore factories as I feel that the input of capital is better in the long term for the local economies; who cares if someone someplace is only earning $4.00 a day; if it's a good wage for their economy, feeds their family, and more importantly, allows education which leads to better working conditions in the long term.

I have unlimited optimism for the human condition and our creativity- sure, corporate greed is pathological, etc etc. I understand these things but also believe that time and the dissemination of information will eventually foster positive change- so if I invest in Ford, or an oil company, it's not because I am a supporter of oil- I believe that due to their infrastructure, these huge companies are the ones that will respond to public wants and change their product development accordingly, leading to mass-scale adoption of better technologies. So say that Ford developed an amazing, super-light electric car, and partnered with Exxon to develop a rapid charging system based on renewable green technology that was installed at highway service stations. They'd have a huge, sea-change level of product implemented and my shares would reflect it. (of course, this is just an example). So to answer your question, yes, I do give thought to my decisions for the most part; although sometimes I buy shares in things that I don't give a crap about but are mostly benign- like financial companies. Benign meaning that what they do might be cutthroat and meaningless, but they are mainly playing games with figures and takeovers, so I don't care. Yeah, I know that they in turn might be investing in something I don't approve of, but it's not a perfect world. 

Yet.


----------



## crazyjackcsa (Aug 8, 2010)

Do I have an answer for a ridiculously open-ended question? Yes.

It depends on what you view as moral. Tobacco is legal, as is alcohol. Can they ruin lives? Sure can. But so can a bank. Don't buy an oil company but still use gasoline or any number of other products? Who are you fooling at that point?

Is there any company out there that could really be considered ethical all the time? Can any of us?

Just another way to make yourself feel better than those around you. I'll pass.


----------



## Spudd (Oct 11, 2011)

I won't buy tobacco companies because I *really* hate second hand smoke, and in addition to that, I feel like smoking is on its way out (at least in Western societies). 

I wanted to buy Siemens, but then I found out they knowingly produce something that's used for torture, so I decided not to.


----------



## GreenAvenue (Dec 28, 2011)

KaeJS said:


> I have no morals.


 me neither.


----------



## Spidey (May 11, 2009)

I'm not fanatical about it, and is probably due more to my business logic than morals, but I don't invest directly in companies whose products I despise. For example, I'm amazed at the number of posters who claim that Investor's Group salesman are a bunch of shysters and that their product sucks and then will go and invest in Power Financial. When I buy a stock, I consider myself a business owner and generally invest in business models I agree with. That being said, a large part of my portfolio is index funds and I have no problem accepting that I will indirectly hold such businesses.


----------



## Homerhomer (Oct 18, 2010)

I didn't invest in BP after the spill and the thoughts and talks about uranium investments after the quake made my stomack turn, but for the most part I try to keep the emotions out of it.

I sleep well at night.


----------



## Nemo2 (Mar 1, 2012)

Never give a sucker an even break.


----------



## larry81 (Nov 22, 2010)

When it come to investing, i have no morals

Is there any ETF that track the human organs traffic market ?


----------



## Dmoney (Apr 28, 2011)

larry81: I might have to draw the line there 

I'd shy away from a company that knowingly and willfully harms people against their will (smoking/liquor is the user's choice). 

The issue with would you/wouldn't you invest in X company is that unless it's an IPO, you're not funding their activities. You're buying/selling from another investor. No harm done.


----------



## doctrine (Sep 30, 2011)

What company knowingly and willfully harms people against their will?


----------



## donald (Apr 18, 2011)

^You could make the case tobacco co's harm people aka"Children" against there will.There main target group i would think is pre-teens and i'm willing to bet(@least) 50% of there r&d is spent on physc advertising.They know(they have to)hook there customers young & fast,constantly insuring future revenues.Pre-teens don't/have'nt formed proper critical thinking skills and are easily swayed.I own (pm)for this very reason....Imo investing is hard enough-ethics and investing don't mix,it's the wrong arena to be in if your ethics foucused....Some think investing in & of it self is unethical(anything to do with capital markets)


----------



## Four Pillars (Apr 5, 2009)

doctrine said:


> I don't apply ethics to investing. The law takes care of that and more or less the law in this country seems reasonable. What the law won't take care of, the courts will. People can jump off rail bridges if they want, that doesn't mean you shouldn't invest in rail companies. I have no problem owning oil companies, tobacco companies, alcohol companies, you name it.
> 
> Besides, where do you draw the line. Ethical investing is all about making yourself feel good, and I guarantee you that if you give me a list of "ethical" companies, I can dig deep enough to find a reason to call them unethical. It's all subjective, and a poor way to manage your estate. And I bet I wouldn't have to dig far.


+1 Exactly what I was going to say.


----------



## dogcom (May 23, 2009)

I second that Four Pillars so +2.

Having said that I wouldn't invest in Monsanto which seems like a company that exploits everyone and uses the law as a hammer. When you think of Umbrella from Resident Evil you can also think of Monsanto.


----------



## Ethan (Aug 8, 2010)

doctrine said:


> What company knowingly and willfully harms people against their will?


Indirectly, any company on this list

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_modern_armament_manufacturers

I don't let a companies line of business affect my choice to invest in them or not from an ethical standpoint.


----------



## Ethan (Aug 8, 2010)

For those of you that don't invest in oil and gas companies, do you buy products from them? I'd find it hypocritical to not invest in an oil company due to environmental concerns, yet to drive a car regularly.

There's a lot I don't understand about the environmental movement. Al Gore flies his private jet around the world telling us to burn less fossil fuels. He's getting rich telling the world to reduce its fossil fuel consumption while personally consuming an extravagant amount of fossil fuels.

If fossil fuels are so evil, why are we as a society so dependent on them?


----------



## Argonaut (Dec 7, 2010)

I can't really think of anything out there I wouldn't invest in based on morals. Tobacco stocks have done famously, but I just can't see the opportunity for growth. Nobody I know really smokes; it's been phased out the culture here anyway. Couple years ago, a young girl asked me in France if she could borrow a cigarette, and I replied in a poor French accent, "Canadians ne fume pas". She laughed.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

Didn't we just have this discussion? 
http://canadianmoneyforum.com/showthread.php/10972-Ethical-Investing

I have morals, and I only want to invest in ethical companies.

Retail investers didn't make money on Enron, or Bre-X.

As far as bad companies tobacco, alcohol, arms manufacturers, sure, why not.

I don't smoke, and yes they try a bunch of stuff to push their product, but remember at one time they actually thought smoking isn't bad for you, there are STILL people who think inhaling smoke is just fine, just look at the marijuanna lobby.

Alcohol, I drink responsibly, I like wine, and beer etc. Not a problem for responsible users, though some people can't handle it.

Arms manufacturers, I don't want them selling to "bad people" but I do want "good people" to have the equipment they need. 

Given that you think companies like BP are immorral for their accident, is there any company that meets your definition of moral?
Apple and their various illegal acts, and that whole pushing employees to the point of suicide? (I love picking on AAPL)


----------



## brad (May 22, 2009)

Ethan said:


> If fossil fuels are so evil, why are we as a society so dependent on them?


Mainly because the technologies and infrastructures for alternatives aren't available yet. You can buy an electric car today, but you can't drive it from Halifax to Vancouver because there's no infrastructure in place for swapping out empty batteries with full ones like there is for filling up your tank with gasoline.

Al Gore could spread his message using video conferences, but as anyone who's been to a live event can attest, videoconferences rarely have the same impact. And instead of using his private jet he could fly on public airlines, but his security entourage would make it unmanageable. The biggest hypocricy I see in Al Gore is his home, which is huge and an energy hog. I think he's been working on that.But you could argue that Al Gore has more than offset all the damage associated with burning fossil fuels for his trips by educating people about their dangers. 

It's funny about BP, before the spill if you asked anyone which oil company was the most environmentally conscious and forward-thinking, just about everyone would have said BP, with Shell coming in a close second.


----------



## mrPPincer (Nov 21, 2011)

brad said:


> It's funny about BP, before the spill if you asked anyone which oil company was the most environmentally conscious and forward-thinking, just about everyone would have said BP, with Shell coming in a close second.


You could be right about BP, I guess it's because of the spill that I have the impression that BP has lax environmental safety standards.
Shell seems to have improved it's public image lately, attempting to get into sustainable energies in the 2000's. I had the impression they were the worst offenders, I guess from controversies in the 90's:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Movement_for_the_Survival_of_the_Ogoni_People
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brent_Spar



Ethan said:


> For those of you that don't invest in oil and gas companies, do you buy products from them? I'd find it hypocritical to not invest in an oil company due to environmental concerns, yet to drive a car regularly.


Being an index investor I do hold those companies, but if I were to cover that sector in individual stocks I'd do my due diligence and try to find the ones I'm more comfortable with.
I drive a car but limit it's use and I heat with natural gas as a backup to wood heat.
Even hypocrytes can try to minimize their impact 

I think you can be a consumer of these products and still try to invest ethically if that is possible (I suppose a lower liquidity & share value along with public opinion could have some impact). 
The best way to do that would be to invest in the most progressive ones in their sector. 
There's a chance those ones are gonna be more profitable in the long run than the ones that are constantly fighting law suits and clinging to old technology, so this could be one arguement in favour of ethical investing.


----------



## brad (May 22, 2009)

I see ethical investing more as a positive opportunity (putting your money into companies you support) than a negative force (boycotting companies you think are evil). In the begining, ethical investing was mainly about avoiding the "bad," but in the past 10 years or so the focus on positive screening has increased. In addition, I've seen a few studies demonstrating that strong corporate environmental and social performance is a good indicator of strong management performance, so as a general rule you could say that companies that have their environmental act together are likely to be safer investments over the long term than those that don't.

As for being hypocritical, I see no disconnect between using investments to promote social or environmental change while living our daily lives as best we can given the constraints of economics, available/affordable technology, and infrastructure.


----------



## ddkay (Nov 20, 2010)

Ethan said:


> If fossil fuels are so evil, why are we as a society so dependent on them?


The fossil industry employs more people and the resources are scarcer (re more profitable) than renewables. Why use brain power when we can just pump a bunch of liquid out of the ground? Renewables will probably only take off as a last ditch effort when everything else is actually close to running out.


----------



## gibor365 (Apr 1, 2011)

Argonaut said:


> Tobacco stocks have done famously, but I just can't see the opportunity for growth. Nobody I know really smokes; it's been phased out the culture here anyway. Couple years ago, a young girl asked me in France if she could borrow a cigarette, and I replied in a poor French accent, "Canadians ne fume pas". She laughed.


I don't agree! Don't look for opportunity for growth in NA., but growth opportunities in Eastern Europe, China, India and so on are huge... When they have more cash, they will prefer buying Marlboro as this is a brand


----------



## mrPPincer (Nov 21, 2011)

What about credit cards?
Once you've attempted to educate the people around you about credit card debt and failed, isn't it somehow a moral perogative to retrieve that money in dividends if practical?


----------



## gibor365 (Apr 1, 2011)

imo , where money starts, moral ends


----------



## upstream (Mar 22, 2012)

I'd like to say I have morals, but that is subjective. Investing sucessfully involves cold analasis, fact, logic and mass mood, but not morals. I elect officials more based on morals than logic, because I wan't to live in a certain type of society. Logic and politics don't mix. I select investments based on everything but morals because I wan't to make money with them.

Here is an example of subjectiveness. I disagree with the premise that Humans are what is making the climate change. It has been fluctuating for millions of years. We live next to a sun stupid. I belive the main proponents of this propaganda are clueless, manipulative, elitists with clear agendas for profit and political power. They use fear, lies and connections instead if ingenuity and hard work to advance themselves and thier theories. They are sadistic hypocrites of the first degree. Some may call me immoral. I dissagree. I do the moral thing and invest in coal and nuclear.

See. Subjective.


----------



## Ethan (Aug 8, 2010)

brad said:


> Al Gore could spread his message using video conferences, but as anyone who's been to a live event can attest, videoconferences rarely have the same impact. And instead of using his private jet he could fly on public airlines, but his security entourage would make it unmanageable. The biggest hypocricy I see in Al Gore is his home, which is huge and an energy hog. I think he's been working on that.But you could argue that Al Gore has more than offset all the damage associated with burning fossil fuels for his trips by educating people about their dangers.


Instead of flying commercially or privately, he could also do a bus tour. When he was touring to promote his book, he would start his day in Nashville, fly to the city he was presenting in, then fly home that same night. While asking me to make sacrifices, such as turning down the heat in my house in the winter or take public transit, he made no efforts to do so in his life. He maintains several large homes and ensures his private jet gets him to one of his homes each night, rather than staying in a hotel. If he was serious about reducing mankind's carbon footprint, you'd think he would make an effort to reduce his own footprint. Sacrifice is only convenient to Al Gore when others are the ones making it.


----------



## brad (May 22, 2009)

Ethan said:


> Sacrifice is only convenient to Al Gore when others are the ones making it.


Believe me, I am not a big fan of Al Gore and I actually think he has contributed a lot to the strange situation we are faced with, in which liberals tend to believe in climate change wheras conservatives tend not to. The validity of climate change is a scientific question, not a political one, but it doesn't help when one of the leading messengers on the issue is a politician.

Still, the world is full of examples of "do as I say, not as I do," and knowledge alone rarely changes behaviour. There are plenty of fat doctors, crazy psychologists, and even financial advisors who file for bankruptcy. It doesn't mean their advice shouldn't be trusted, it just means they aren't very good at following their own advice.


----------



## Toronto.gal (Jan 8, 2010)

Ethan said:


> Instead of flying commercially or privately, he could also do a bus tour.


LOL, so true!

At any rate, I think Kaitlyn has hijacked JustAGuy's thread, which he just started last week. 

I suppose 'Ethical Investing' is not as catchy a title as everyone has jumped to the latter thread & forgotten about the 'ethical' thread.

Why not move these posts to the original thread?

http://canadianmoneyforum.com/showthread.php/10972-Ethical-Investing

And what a question is that; yes, I most definitely have morals!


----------



## kcowan (Jul 1, 2010)

Ethan said:


> Instead of flying commercially or privately, he could also do a bus tour...


That would be considered worse because the bus would likely be made in Canada!


----------



## Andre112 (Apr 27, 2011)

Everyone draws the line differently. The line also changes from day to day, hour to hour.
So just do what you think is right and sleep well at night.


----------



## orange (Oct 23, 2011)

I don't think it has anything to do with morals. You can demonize BP or Monsanto or the tobacco companies or big pharma or whomever else you want, and only invest in a non-profit generic drug maker who only produces anti-malarials, anti-retrovirals and antibiotics for third-world contries, that runs out of a production facility fueled by solar panels and the human waste of its employees, the by-product of which is sunshine and rainbows...then turn around and spew racism, beat your wife and only pay cash and be paid in cash, under the table, to avoid taxes. You are still a sucky person. Or you can invest in Phillip Morris and Monsanto, and then spend your days being an active and positive force in your community, a loving and caring person, and a productive member of society. Morals are subjective and too many people are hypocrites. I think, AS AN INDIVIDUAL, how you live your life trumps where you put your investment dollars (i.e. I am not talking about economic sanctions against totalitarian regimes  ).


----------



## mrPPincer (Nov 21, 2011)

orange I'd agree with most of that sans the and caring part.
Compartmentalization is a great thing isn't it?


----------



## Jungle (Feb 17, 2010)

When I grow up, I want to be a mutual fund salesman.


----------



## Just a Guy (Mar 27, 2012)

If the products are used in moderation, does it make them immoral? If you have no self control are you immoral? I question how many "ethical" things aren't just marketing...when I've looked into them, you can usually find some "moral" dilemmas as well.


----------



## JustAGuy (Feb 5, 2012)

Every time I see a forum post by you I question my sanity as to why I don't remember writing a comment.... and then I realize oh... it _wasn't_ me.


----------



## 44545 (Feb 14, 2012)

crazyjackcsa said:


> Do I have an answer for a ridiculously open-ended question? Yes.
> 
> It depends on what you view as moral. Tobacco is legal, as is alcohol. Can they ruin lives? Sure can. But so can a bank. Don't buy an oil company but still use gasoline or any number of other products? Who are you fooling at that point?
> 
> ...


^^^ SPOT ON.

I'd add this: I wouldn't invest in tobacco simply because it's an industry under siege. Smoking is on the decline in Canada and it's reviled enough that new legislation could be enacted that would make it far less profitable.

How about Coca-Cola? Obesity and childhood diabetes are rampant. How many people would turn down Coca-Cola stock on those grounds? The world has a love affair with Coca-Cola that doesn't seem to be going away, despite some evidence their products are unhealthy.


----------



## donald (Apr 18, 2011)

Everybody seems to think smoking is on the decline(this might be true in canada esp out west)but all the majors are way up!PM has been killing.(im up $2200.00 on a 100 lot of shares in the last 8 mths)Gibor knows what im talking about,i know he hold pm also.Emerging markets=high smoking rates.Ko has been a gem also,come to think of it a portfolio of un-ethical investing might just be the way to go lol.On the ethical side of things i have been scoping out whole foods(if one can call them ethical leaning)


----------

