4 ms·

Shareholders are the public, it's a public company.

• hermitdev 7y ago
  Shareholders are a subset of the public. I'm probably a member of the class, because I likely hold some shares of Exxon indirectly through index funds.
• gruez 7y ago
  That's true, but it's very much biased towards the rich[1]. I think what the parent is trying to say is that the only reason this issue got legal action was because the rich were the primary victims. Had it been some other public issue that doesn't disproportionately affect the rich (eg. fracking/mining contaminating ground water), there wouldn't be similar action. [1] https://finance.yahoo.com/news/the-richest-1-own-50-of-stocks-held-by-american-households-150758595.html https://finance.yahoo.com/news/the-richest-1-own-50-of-stock...
  • toast0 7y ago
    If this were about shareholders, it would be a shareholders lawsuit, not an attorney general lawsuit. This is about (in theory) distorting the public market through fraud.
• esailija 7y ago
  Nice job dehumanising anyone who is not well-off enough to afford risky investments. Vast majority of people who participate in this system will never be able to own shares by design. So 80-90% of people are not the public?
• chiefalchemist 7y ago
  > "Shareholders are the public, it's a public company." Yes, they are a subset of the broader public, but it's unlikely they are a representative sample of the whole. In fact, being shareholders immediately bakes a bias into their thoughts and actions. That bias alone separates them from The Public. Yes, they are members of the public. No, they are not synonymous with The Public.