‘Shark Tank’ Business Tycoon Reveals Why He Does Not Invest in Democrat-Led States

“ “Shark Tank” investor Kevin O’Leary revealed that he does not invest in Democrat-led states because of their left-wing policies that hurt businesses.

“I'm not trying to get involved in the partisanship of this statement. Just a fact, I don't invest in New York, I don't invest in Massachusetts, I don't invest in California. In my mind, those are examples of states that are uninvestable because of bad policy,” O’Leary explained in the episode, which was shared with Townhall.

“So, I’m looking for the path of least resistance. If you make it hard for me to make money, I just take my money and go somewhere else. So, in America today we have this giant competition of states, which is really incredible. The states that have lowered taxes, reduced regulatory environments are getting all the spoils. That's where people are putting their money,””









https://townhall.com/tipsheet/madelineleesman/2024/01/13/marsha-blackburn-interview-n2633578







He’s absolutely right of course. Blue states are toxic for investment opportunities. Money is easily movable. State borders can’t contain it.

 

As a small investor I try to do likewise. Avoiding ESG and DEI pretty much does the same thing. As a resident of a blue state I’ve seen the movement of working and middle class people, jobs, businesses, and investment out of California. Living in a large rural red area of the state we’ve captured a small amount with local incentives of people needing a west coast presence without the progressive urban problems….

 

Hm, so O'Leary no longer invests in things like Apple, Pfizer, or J&J? He suddenly changed his mind and dumped all of his stock? I call bull ****.

 

He’s talking about investing in places for micro and small cap as well as in local businesses within states with good business friendliness, lower taxes, and fewer regulations. He’s not taking global multinationals that are everywhere. People are voting with their u-hauls as to where to live and work and also now invest accordingly too. Look at all the budget surpluses in red states and deficits in blue ones.

 

So he is, in fact, still investing heavily in places like California, New York, and New Jersey. Glad we cleared that up.

 

i'm sure you're quite proud of yourself, but the reality is that investing in any multi-national means investing in a number of rather unsavory nations and many places with business unfriendly atmospheres. those companies always back up their play by utilizing more business friendly climes and often end up eliminating their holdings in places like new york and california entirely. yes, california is still raking in the bucks from their role as a birthplace of the tech boom, but that cash cow is drying up and there seems to be no replacement for the industries that this democrat led hell hole has alienated.

 

Be honest, would you open a business in California?

 

These states are not business friendly.

 

Remember when California tried to force corporations to put minorities on their boards?

 

Yet we have some of the biggest businesses in the history of our planet headquartered there. Hmmmm.

 

Remember when RWers tried to lie about Kevin O’Leary no longer investing in California?

 

I think the thrust here is that things are harder for small to medium sized businesses in solidly blue states because of taxes and regulations. The big companies have a lot of clout and sometimes get breaks. A liberal friend was commenting about how big almond farmers in New Mexico were getting away with environmentally destructive practices despite the fact that Democrats control the state. One party rule results in corruption.

 

Apple did. Facebook did. Plenty of startups have. Plenty of Fortune 500 companies have. But you can't talk about any real world examples, only hypotheticals. So we'll just pretend that the rest of the tech business world doesn't exist for a second, since that is what you demand, and just talk in hypotheticals. I can answer very easily: it depends on the company . . . and that is also my answer for all other states.

 

As usual, you didn't answer the question.

 

As per usual, you didn't read. I did answer the question . . . and we both know you don't even remember what the question was.

I know you will fail to read again, but I will try again: "I can answer very easily: it depends on the company . . . and that is also my answer for all other states." I look forward to your next failure to read simple sentences.

 

I'm sure you are proud about your refusal to read, but I'm going to challenge you again to try being honest for a second. Read again: So he is, in fact, still investing heavily in places like California, New York, and New Jersey. Glad we cleared that up.

If your next post does not prove that he is not investing in these states, you will go on iggy for your dishonesty.

 

Of course he is going to favor places where companies can squeeze out the maximum amount out of their employees.

It’s a race to the bottom though — which is why so many companies export their jobs as even the lowest American will eventually say enough while someone in the third world will gladly take it.

And the cycle continues

That you are cheering this is expected, and is why red states are largely welfare states.

 

That doesn't change facts. Businesses and earners are fleeing these states. There are still some left.

 

The claim was that he had abandoned these states. That was a lie.

 

and let me guess, he voted for Trump.... 2x?

 

Then why did you have to reword the claim? These states are not business friendly. That doesn't make the statement a lie. I also avoid investing in these states even though some ETFs include companies in these states.

 

I didn't have to reword it. I'm calling you guys out for having to reword it.

 

No, you did not answer the question and it seems you're the one who forget what it was even when you quoted it. In case you forgot, I quoted the posts below.

Do yourself a favor and never debate with my mother-in-law because she debates like you do - as long as she gets in the last word, no matter how nonsensical it is, she thinks she won.

California Business Exits Soared in 2021, and There Is No End in Sight
https://www.hoover.org/research/california-business-exits-soared-2021-and-there-no-end-sight

 

Kevin Oleary being labeled an investor is a stretch to say the least

if he was such a great investor, he would not be a TV celebrity.

what are the chances investors such as warren buffett or peter lynch being on a game show??

has anyone else watched shark tank?? I watch the show occasionally

Oleary is truly a shark

a loan shark that is...

his reply to every presentation is the same

"I'll give you what you ask for, then when I have doubled my money I want a royalty in perpetuity"

he basically loans money to high risk clients for 100% interest

this is the definition of a loan shark, not an investor

 

I did answer the question. I will do so again if you want to pretend, again, that you were incapable of reading it. I'm not responsible for your issues with your mother-in-law. Try using reason and logic for a change.