Marc Joffe of Reason Foundation writes about the excesses of the ESG movement:

Individual investors should be free to consider ESG when deploying their own capital, even though it may not be economically efficient for them to do so. But this idea should not scale to the activities of large investment managers with billions of dollars in assets. Not only do their decisions have much greater impact than those of virtually all individual investors, but they have a fiduciary responsibility to manage the funds with which they have been entrusted in the best financial interests of those whose money it is or, in the case of retirement funds, will be.
Like many movements in America’s past, the ESG-investment crusade has taken a reasonable idea and stretched it well beyond reason. If institutional investors continue to deploy funds according to shifting criteria other than long-term profitability, and relying on imprecise metrics while doing so, they will undermine the ability of the U.S. economy to grow and to thereby improve our standard of living.

Will Duffield of the Cato Institute writes about the FTC’s misplaced antitrust concerns on VR technology:

In late July, the Federal Trade Commission filed a lawsuit to stop Meta from acquiring VR fitness-app developer Within. The commission’s arguments play fast and loose with market definitions to conjure threats to competition where none exist. The suit illustrates how, under Lina Khan, the FTC has departed from established antitrust law in favor of policy that is based on hostility toward large firms. This approach will ultimately make consumers worse off.