 |
|
|
|||||
Right now, America is facing a traffic safety crisis unlike anything we’ve seen in decades. And its only accelerating: 2023 was the deadliest year for pedestrians and cyclists in 45 years. Crashes are rising in nearly every state. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration just warned that traffic deaths are staying at “persistently high levels,” despite fewer people commuting post-pandemic. Meanwhile, distracted driving deaths jumped nearly 12% last year alone, according to the latest federal data. Everywhere you look, its getting more dangerous to move through your own neighborhood, whether you’re walking your dog, riding your bike, or just driving home from work. It is a daily, growing threat to your family, your friends, and your community. A common nightmare Twenty-one months ago, my 17-year-old son Magnus was out on a training ride. He was on the U.S. National Cycling Team and was a U.S. National Cycling Champion. It was a Saturday at 12:30 pm. He was doing everything right. He was riding on a designated bike route, on the far right of a wide, 10-foot shoulder, wearing his Team USA cycling kit. A driver stayed up all night, drank whiskey and took prescription drugs, then got behind the wheel of her car. The driver passed out, crossed the white line into the shoulder at 60 mph, and drove straight through Magnus, never touching the brakes. Since Magnus’s death, Ive met countless other families living the same nightmare. Families who lost children, parents, siblings, good people who were doing everything right as a pedestrian or cyclist, but paid the ultimate price for someone else’s reckless choices. This isnt rare. Its happening every day, all over America. Technology can move faster The brutal truth is that humans are flawed. We choose to speed. We choose to look at our phones. We choose to drive drunk. Our infrastructure is flawed too, especially here in the U.S. Streets designed for speed, not safety. Crosswalks painted on four-lane highways. Stop signs placed where they dont slow anyone down. And rebuilding all of it would take decades and dollars that we don’t have. But technology can move faster. Technology can sometimes even compensate for human mistakes. It can spot dangers our eyes miss, respond faster than our reflexes, and protect lives even when people choose to drive recklessly. The technology exists today to save lives. Its real, its proven, and its ready. Safety features like lane-keep assist, automatic emergency braking (AEB), and blind-spot detection aren’t luxury add-ons. Theyre lifesaving necessities. AEB alone cuts rear-end crashes by up to 50% and blind-spot monitoring reduces lane-change crash injuries by 23%. And yet, carmakers still sell models without them. Insurers still treat them as optional. Buyers still skip them to save a few hundred dollars at the dealership. If we want to stop the daily slaughter on our roads, the bare minimum must be mandating that all cars in the U.S. have this technology that corrects for human error. Immediately. Smart infrastructure powered by AI is already saving lives too. Cities like Bellevue, Washington, have seen serious crash reductions of over 20% after installing AI-powered traffic systems that predict and prevent accidents. Impaired driving is also solvable. On-demand breathalyzers, smartphone saliva tests, and eye-tracking sensors are all tools that already exist to stop drunk and high drivers before they even start the ignition. Uber is already testing real-time driver sobriety verification. Why arent carmakers racing to put similar tech in every new vehicle? Better data Most importantly, we critically need better access to traffic incident data. Today, vital data on where, when, and how these vulnerable road user deaths and incidents happen is scattered, outdated, and buried behind bureaucratic walls. Advocates fighting for reform can’t build a case without it. Companies trying to engineer safer roads and smarter vehicles cant act fast enough without it either. Technology and data companies must come together to unlock real-time, public access to nationwide safety data. Lives depend on it. Evidence fuels change. Right now, we are starving for it. Heightened urgency The tools are here, and they work. Whats missing is urgency. Heres what must happen: Lawmakers must make safety tech standard in the U.S., not optional. Insurers must reward drivers and companies that use lifesaving technology. Consumers must refuse to buy vehicles without proven safety features. Technology companies must push harder, louder, and faster for adoption. Magnuss death was preventable. Hundreds of thousands of lives could be saved if we stop dragging our feet and demand better. Private industry and technology have handed us the tools to make death and injury on our roads obsolete. Its up to tech, business, and political leaders here in the U.S. to make them mandatory. The future we need is within reach. Now we have to have the will to make it happen.
Category:
E-Commerce
The first time I met with a financial adviser who wasnt my dad, I told him that I wanted to avoid fossil fuels, weapons manufacturers, and health insurance companies in my retirement investment portfolio. The adviser paused, sighed, and said, Ive got some bad news for you. He explained that since I was unwilling to pick individual stocks, it was virtually impossible to avoid investing my money in those industries. And even if I had the time and temperament to trade individual stocks to keep my investments from oil, weapons, and health insurance, my money might not keep pace with the market, or even inflation. In short, my adviser believed I could either grow my money or feel good about my investments, but not both. This conversation took place more than 15 years ago. In the intervening time, socially responsible investing became mainstream. These days, every brokerage and retirement plan offers at least one ESG (environmental, social, and corporate governance) investing option for concerned investors. But just how much have things changed since my adviser poured cold water on my investing idealism? Does the existence of ESG funds truly give you the option of investing responsibly? And considering the way Trump has declared war on the very idea of corporate responsibility, will ESG investing be around much longer? In a financial world that thinks morals are paintings on walls, heres what you need to know about investing your values. Rating companies on ESG performance The ESG rating system measures the performance of a fund, security, or company in environmental, social, or corporate governance issues. Specifically, analysts look at how the company fares in terms of its environmental sustainability, its social impact, and how its internal governance promotes equity. The goal of the ESG rating system is to provide an objective analysis and rating of the companys relative performance compared to other companies in the market. The rating is no more than a snapshot in time, since industry changes, market conditions, social and environmental shifts, policy adjustments within the company, and other situational changes can affect a score. ESG doesnt mean what you think it means If ESG investing specifically highlights companies for their environmental or social impact, or for their commitment to equitable corporate governance, then investing in highly rated ESG funds means you are not only doing right by your money but also helping the planet and your fellow humans. At least thats what youd assume ESG investing was all about. Unfortunately, thats not necessarily what highly rated ESG investments are doing. According to Kenneth P. Pucker and Andrew King, writing for Harvard Business Review in 2022, the ESG ratings which underlie ESG fund selection are based on single materialitythe impact of the changing world on a company profit and loss. This is in contrast to companies considering double materiality, which looks at environmental impact in both directions: How do the organizations decisions affect the environment and climate, and what potential effect will the climate and environment have on the companys bottom line? By looking only at single materiality, highly rated ESG funds are only interested in providing value to shareholders. The underlying companies may pay lip service to sustainability or social responsibility, but their business practices dont accept responsibility for actually making any changes that will help the environment or social issues. Paying more for less Even if highly rated ESG companies arent necessarily playing fast and loose with the definition of socially responsible, its likely that youre going to pay more to invest your money with an ESG fundand get less for your investment. Thats because ESG funds typically charge higher management fees than passive index funds while providing worse returns. This means ESG investing is an emotional decision rather than a sound investment in improving the planet, society, or your nest egg. Gaming the system The ESG rating system isnt set up to reward companies that are doing the hard work of mitigating negative environmental and social impacts. This doesnt necessarily mean that all highly rated ESG funds are full of companies headed by Gordon Gekko types. But there are certainly a number of companies that are happy to use the ESG rating system to their advantage. For instance, in 2023, presidential pal and hat weirdo Elon Musk decried the ESG rating system for ranking Tesla below Philip Morris (of cancer stick fame). Although Teslas business model is about reducing greenhouse gas emissions, Philip Morris earned a significantly higher ESG score for promoting diversity, equity, and inclusion policies within its C-suite. Musk claimed that Phillip Morris gamed the rating system to garner its 84/100 ESG score, compared to Teslas measly 37/100. And as much as it pains me to admit it, Musk was probably right. Theres not much a cigarette company can do to improve its environmental or social impact, so if it wants to improve its ESG score, it has to focus on corporate governance. Despite having an eco-friendly product, Tesla was dinged for the lack of diversity within its corporate governance. Instead of ESG spurring environmentally friendly companies like Tesla to embrace DEI initiatives in the boardroomwhich is what most idealistic investors probably would have preferred to seethe rating system created a way for companies like Philip Morris to greenwash their image. Navigating the ESG landscape in the Trump era It may come as no surprise that the current president is no fan of ESG investing. Between rolling back environmental regulations, disproportionately affecting women and people of color in his mass layoffs, and axing all diversity, equity, and inclusion within his line of sight, Trump has made it abundantly clear that he does not share any of the ESG values. His distaste for these values is shared by man within the Republican party. Even before Trump returned to D.C. for his second term, multiple Republican-led states had adopted anti-ESG legislation generally aimed at keeping ESG investing out of state pension funds. While the backlash against ESG is going strong, its unlikely that investors interested in putting their money in ESG funds will be shut out. Not only is ESG a good marketing strategy for businesses (see Philip Morris, above) but it is also popular globally, with 68% of global retail investors stating that their ethical views are an important consideration when choosing an investment, according to AXA Investment Managers. The ESG rating system isnt going anywhere. There are too many forces keeping it in place, even though high-profile tantrum throwers would prefer it to be gone. Invest like a cynical optimist I felt pretty low after my meeting with my financial adviser 15 years ago. Other than trading individual stockswhich will never be my investment stylemy only option was putting my retirement money into companies I hated. When ESG investing first gained traction a few years later, my cynicism kept me from becoming too enthusiastic about the new socially responsible investing options. It was no longer my first rodeo, and I knew that there was no easy answer to values investing. And that is the trick to investing your values: recognizing that there are no easy answers. It is possible to invest your money only in companies and organizations that you truly believe in, but you will have to handpick your investments and live with the risk of low returns or potentially losing principal. You can accept the flawed ESG rating system as the best option among a bad lot, but you will have to accept higher management fees and lower returns compared to index funds. Or you can invest passively in index funds, pay lower fees, and expect average returnsbut you have to accept that your money is flowing to companies you do not support. None of these options can relieve you of your ethical guilt, provide you with the investment returns you need, and require little-to-no active management on your partbecause no investment can do all of that at the same time. Accepting that the perfect investment doesnt exist is the fastest way to finding an investment strategy you can live with. As for me, Ive chosen to stick with the passive investing strategy that best fits my skills and temperament while committing to donating a percentage of my returns to organizations working to make the world a better place. Its an imperfect solution, but it works for me.
Category:
E-Commerce
Branded is a weekly column devoted to the intersection of marketing, business, design, and culture. Earnings season has an important new element this quarter: President Donald Trump. Wall Street is hungry for clarity from big consumer brands about the impact tariffs may have on pricesand thus inflation. But Trump has been making it clear what his administration believes companies should do to the prices they charge shoppers: nothing. EAT THE TARIFFS, he berated Walmart recently, after the big-box giant indicated during an earnings call that price increases might be in the offing. Given the magnitude of the tariffs, CEO Doug McMillon said, we arent able to absorb all the pressure, given the reality of narrow retail margins. Trumps blunt rejoinder on social media waved that away, insisting Walmart need not charge valued customers ANYTHING extra in response to the tariffs, adding: Ill be watching, and so will your customers!!! (Walmart reported quarterly revenue of about $165 billion, up 2.5% over the same quarter last year.) Trump has also attacked toymaker Mattel for suggesting it could move production to dodge tariff costs, as well as Amazon for reportedly considering a plan to spell out tariff cost increases to consumers. The message seems to be getting through. This week another big-box giant, Home Depot, reported earningsand made it clear that it claims to have no tariff-driven price increases planned. We dont see broad-based price increases for our customers at all going forward, CEO Billy Bastek said in an earnings call. Target also reported earnings, and while its CEO acknowledged tariff pressure, he called price hikes the very last resort. Even Walmart has since sounded a somewhat conciliatory note: We have always worked to keep our prices as low as possible and we wont stop, the company said in a statement this week. Well keep prices as low as we can for as long as we can, given the reality of small retail margins. It’s unclear how long presidential jawboning can stave off retail price increases, but the apparent effort is remarkable. In the last election, Democratic candidate Kamala Harris was slammed by critics who dubiously characterized her proposal to crack down on price gouging as essentially government price control. Attempting to publicly micromanage companies considering tariff-related price rises doesnt have the force of law, but it certainly seems like government marketplace meddling, aimed squarely at controlling prices. Public companies in particular are left to thread the needle of serving shareholders by maximizing earnings and keeping investors informed of riskswhile avoiding hostile publicity from the White House. Polling data suggests consumers expect further inflation, so maybe at this point of Trumps pressure campaign, it is just about who (companies or government policy) gets blamed for the trade wars inevitable impact on costs. That said, any attempt at actually staving off tariff-sparked price increases with loud rhetoric seems doomed: A poll from insurer Allianz found that 54% of U.S. companies say they will have to raise prices to cope with tariffs. Not even Trump can bully a majority of American businesses to eat the tariffs. And in fact, Home Depots high-profile distancing from tariff price increases had some caveats. Some toolmakers have already raised prices, and Home Depots CEO noted that one way it might avoid hikes is with less inventory: There are items that we have that could potentially be impacted from a tariff that, candidly, we wont have going forward. Of course, there is nothing surprising or unexpected about tariffs driving up prices or narrowing consumer choice. Its exactly what most economic assessments said would happen, what companies large and small have anticipatedand indeed what many of the big-box giants’ leaders reportedly warned Trump would happen earlier this year. Even Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent now admits that prices are going to rise. Ultimately, these businesses will take the steps they need to, and consumers will muddle through the consequences. But perhaps, if the Trump administrations pressure campaign works, all that will happen with as little talk of tariffs as possible.
Category:
E-Commerce
All news |
||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||