Không thể nào tập trung làm việc được

-----

A second risk (rủi ro) is that social impact investing (đầu tư tác động xã hội) simply redistributes (phân phối lại) wealth from investments — maybe to less socially conscientious (tận tâm) individuals. Imagine a socially conscious investment firm that declines to participate in the initial public offering (đầu ra công chúng) of a company that pollutes (gây ô nhiễm) the ocean. That might create downward pressure (áp lực giảm) on the price of the IPO. But there is a problem: The value of the actual investment (giá trị đầu tư thực tế) has not declined, so at a potentially lower IPO price other investors will step in to fill the demand. In fact, those investors may have the chance to buy at a discount (mua khi giảm giá) and earn a higher return than otherwise.

The net result is that conscientious investors have missed out on a profitable (có lợi nhuận) opportunity, while less socially aware investors have earned more. Over time, the less socially aware investors will become richer, and their greater wealth may translate into greater political and economic influence.

That also put less conscientious investors in control of the firm. And:

It is also difficult to monitor the performance and social efficacy (hiệu quả) of the funds focused on doing good. In actively managed sustainable equity funds, for example, the most commonly held stocks are estimated to be Microsoft, Alphabet, Visa, Apple and Cisco. I have nothing against those companies, but you have to wonder exactly how much social improvement those investment funds are buying.

So many matters in today’s America are increasingly performative, and so:

It is increasingly difficult for businesses and investment funds to perform their proper work under the glare (ánh sáng chói) of perpetual debate (cuộc tranh luận không ngừng) and periodic condemnation (lên án).