"Improbably, though, the Libermans see this endeavor as part of an effort to stem twenty-first-century inequality. If they can sell life shares, they think, oth

"Improbably, though, the Libermans see this endeavor as part of an effort to stem twenty-first-century inequality. If they can sell life shares, they think, others can, too." This may work for them, but idea cannot be generalized and absolutely will not solve the problem they say it would solve which is inequality. Young people who haven't achieved anything yet will have very little potential value to investors, in general. But, those who have rich or well connected parents are statistically more likely to become wealthy themselves, and therefore are better investments and so those people, who already have systemic advantages, will be the primary beneficiaries of such a system. Also, it is the already rich that are making these investments, so if it pays off they become richer still. So inequality is re-enforced with this system. Exceptional people like prodigies in sports or music etc. might also get a higher prices for their shares, but for them its probably a bad idea to sell them because they will themselves lose out on future earnings because they will have to pay out to the shareholders. They would be better off getting a fixed rate loan if they needed funds as their success is very likely. In other words, those people that would make the best investments and get lots of money from this are the ones who don't really need it, and those that do need it won't get it because the investor would most likely lose money. Again, this idea may work for specific cases, but it is not generalizable.