first one: The amount of liquid assets they have is probably based on the amount of liquidity they currently require. They would suddenly require more liquidit

first one: The amount of liquid assets they have is probably based on the amount of liquidity they currently require. They would suddenly require more liquidity, which very likely would mean they would need to liquidate, from any initial condition. And this repeats every year. 2: if only a few people need to liquidate, it will increase supply and lower the values 3: don't pay 2% and what do you think they'll take? your freedom? that is arguably worth more than your holdings. your criticism of my criticism doesn't even scratch it, much less negate it like your bias confirms. And you missed the main counter you could have made.. which would be that middle class people could buy funds of the newly liquidated assets. It doesn't counter the point that it would hurt these businesses, but it would at least counter the protectionist alarmism. Sheesh, I have to do everything myself