Permanent Portfolio Forum
https://www.gyroscopicinvesting.com/forum/
https://www.gyroscopicinvesting.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=9214
Yeah the excerpt in question was pure "facts and logic" rather than "clear white-supremacist opinion." :/Libertarian666 wrote:Their views are that saying anything politically incorrect isn't allowed. Facts and logic are racist!
He's been living under the "economic and political sun" of a critical mass (not all, certainly) of wealthy conservatives who do not give a f'k if you're dead-wrong about the economy as long as you stroke their political and cultural jingoism while you hammer out predictions that don't pan out.TennPaGa wrote:But surely you understand that someone's placement on the Board of Directors of a company has little to do with facts and logic.Libertarian666 wrote:Their views are that saying anything politically incorrect isn't allowed. Facts and logic are racist!
Here's a longer bit from the article linked in the opening post:Here's the offending part from Faber's newsletter:Veteran investor Marc Faber left the boards of money manager Sprott Inc. and mining companies Novagold Resources Inc. and Ivanhoe Mines Ltd. after he claimed in his newsletter this month that “the U.S. would look like Zimbabwe” if it had been settled by black people instead of whites.
“The recent comments by Dr. Faber are deeply disappointing and are completely contradictory with the views of Sprott and its employees,” Sprott Chief Executive Officer Peter Grosskopf said in announcing Faber’s departure from the board. “We pride ourselves on being a diverse organization and comments of this sort will not be tolerated."Broadly speaking, I would say that the last clause in the second sentence is factual. But I'm not seeing the fact and logic in the other parts.And thank God white people populated America, not the blacks. Otherwise, the U.S. would look like Zimbabwe, which it might look like one day anyway, but at least America enjoyed 200 years under the economic and political sun under a white majority."
It seems to me that the company's view is that they get to decide who is and who isn't on the board. Which is the way it has always been. Are you saying that they should not have this prerogative?
Indeed. Facts and logic would have dictated that he should have been removed long ago.moda0306 wrote:Anyway, I'm glad to see any highly-compensated investment analyst calling for hyperinflation back in 2009 fired, like he should have been in 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015 or 2016...
