In an op-ed in Friday’s Wall Street Journal centered on the foolishness of “sustainable” investing, Burton Malkiel had this remark:

The most effective way to reduce an economy’s carbon intensity is to change the economic incentive to pollute.

Not at all. The most effective way to reduce an economy’s carbon intensity—even assuming that’s a useful thing to do—is to provide viable alternatives to carbon intensity. So far, all the Left and their Progressive-Democratic Party is willing to offer is punishment for carbon intensity.

All that does is punish the successful because the less successful don’t or can’t keep up or do better.

…on the way out.

Norway’s largest private money manager, Storebrand Asset Management, excluded and divested itself of more than two dozen listed companies under its new climate change policy, citing concerns with lobbying, coal, and oil sands.

Virtue signaling climate justice is more important than making money for a company’s owners. Which money and associated investment profits are the only means of amassing the wealth necessary to do anything substantive about our environment (which is useful) or about our climate (which need is dubious at best).

Facebook is upset with Apple because the latter, with the privacy changes (improvements?) it has made to its upcoming iPhone software, will greatly hinder the former’s ability to generate targeted ads on apps outside of Facebook’s.

Note, though: Facebook can’t deliver targeted ads without first tracking us.

Apple’s move, then, to the extent Facebook’s characterization is accurate, can’t be all bad on two counts: users won’t be limited in what they see regarding specific products or products in general, which is what targeted ads do, and users won’t be tracked as effectively, which is another purpose of ad targeting.