I found the following video fascinating. Before a committee the other day, Al Gore was questioned about his "green" investments. The implications are obvious: is there a conflict of interest between owning stock in green companies and his advocacy of global warming.
What I found interesting is the diversionary tactics Gore employed. Not only did he get testy and on the defensive but notice that he diverted the discussion by declaring that all profits he's received he's given to non-profit organisations. Well, of course, the value of owning equity (i.e. common stock) in companies is mainly going to be the result of capital gain in the price of a stock. The "profit" or dividends are, as a rule of thumb, about 20% of the total value of owning a stock. And that percentage is usually much, MUCH less with start-ups because they almost always take profits that they make and feed it back into the company. So Gore is being disingenious by jumping all over the Congresswoman by declaring that he has given all his profits to non-profits because (1) that amount could be next to nothing; and (2) he didn't tell us what he intends upon doing with the stock. In other words, he simply didn't tell us ANYTHING: http://www.breitbart.tv/?p=326113&widget=1
