4 ms·
> that only help to further inflate shareholder value, which large majority of population isn’t. This is incorrect, at least in the US. A majority of Americans
by the_watcher 7y ago
> that only help to further inflate shareholder value, which large majority of population isn’t.
This is incorrect, at least in the US. A majority of Americans are shareholders (Somewhere between 51%[0] and 55%[1]), since if you have a 401k or IRA, you are a shareholder.
[0] https://www.federalreserve.gov/publications/files/scf17.pdf https://www.federalreserve.gov/publications/files/scf17.pdf
[1] https://news.gallup.com/poll/211052/stock-ownership-down-among-older-higher-income.aspx https://news.gallup.com/poll/211052/stock-ownership-down-amo...
- 49531 7y agoWhile true that about half of Americans own stocks, 84% of all stocks owned by Americans belong to the wealthiest 10 percent of households.
- lotsofpulp 7y agoVia the defined benefit pension promises, all taxpayers are invested in keeping asset prices climbing otherwise they will get wrecked by even higher taxes.
- johntiger1 7y agoMost pensions are moving towards defined contribution plans now, so take that as you will (no promises)
- TaylorAlexander 7y agoAbout half of Americans are too poor to pay federal income tax.
- lotsofpulp 7y agoEvery year, property taxes, vehicle registration fees, business taxes, professional licensing fees, and myriad other government fees keep going up. It's all taxes as far as an individual is concerned.
- rayiner 7y agoExcept most of the pension bombs are in the state and local governments, which rely primarily on regressive taxation (sales taxes, property taxes, fees, etc.).
- bhupy 7y agoAren't property taxes progressive? That's one of the fundamental arguments behind Georgism.
- rayiner 7y agoAt the time, only the wealthy owned land. Today in the US, 2/3 of people own their homes. Meanwhile, rich people have less of their assets tied up in real property. Someone worth $100,000 probably has most of that in their house. Someone worth $10,000,000 likely will have only a fraction of that in their house, and the rest in financial assets not subject to property taxes.
- pcwalton 7y agoIt's an open debate among economists as to whether property taxes are progressive or regressive. Here's a nice article I found summarizing the debate: https://www.ntanet.org/NTJ/69/2/ntj-v69n02p413-434-local-property-taxes-regressive-progressive.pdf https://www.ntanet.org/NTJ/69/2/ntj-v69n02p413-434-local-pro...
- rayiner 7y agoThat is an interesting reference, thank you.
- the_watcher 7y agoSure, but that's different than the claim that increasing shareholder value isn't in the interest of most Americans due to the fact that most Americans aren't shareholders (which is false). [EDIT] I mean the claim that most Americans aren't shareholders is objectively false, thus claiming that increasing shareholder value isn't in the interests of most Americans because of this is objectively false. How valuable increasing shareholder value is to most Americans is not objectively false, as it depends on your opinion on the consequences of some people benefiting more than others.
- jewelry 7y agoFor Chinese in Shanghai, unlike US, in fact, 90% of families in the country own their home, giving China one of the highest home ownership rates in the world. https://www.forbes.com/sites/wadeshepard/2016/03/30/how-people-in-china-afford-their-outrageously-expensive-homes/#50f834e2a3ce https://www.forbes.com/sites/wadeshepard/2016/03/30/how-peop...
- sytelus 7y agoNo. Only half of the Americans have access to 401K. According to data from the U.S. Census Bureau, only 32% of Americans are saving for retirement in a 401(k). I would estimate much smaller percentage to have meaningful level of savings in 401K (> 10K).