...I'm pointing out that DeSantis or anyone else choosing to invest in or divest from companies based on non-economic factors is something that is done by institutions all the time. It's either okay or it's not, but it can't be selective. Don't be outraged by anything DeSantis might do unless you are equally as outraged by what CALPERS, U.Va., etc., already do, and my guess is that you're not quite as outraged by them.

Where do you see inconsistency in my argument? I'm not saying that I agree with government interference including potential action by DeSantis. I'm as free-market as you can get and oppose virtually all government intervention. Government pensions, for example, shouldn't even exist, IMO, and this interference issue is one reason why.

But that's not the world we live in, thanks mostly to rules made by the left and other statists. So, the right has every right to play by those rules. While I abhor the practice philosophically, I'm saying that, politically, it would be a winning issue to go after the tech monopolies. There's no inconsistency in pointing that out.

I'm not sure why you are so interested in my professional background, as it's irrelevant to this discussion, but I'm an old fart who's spent years in institutional sales/research/banking, much of which has consisted of working face to face with hedge/mutual/PE/VC fund managers all over the globe. Again, irrelevant, but setting the record straight since is seems so important to you.