4 ms·

> Nobody saves money in Scrooge McDuck cash vaults. Why do I feel like you're reading half my comments and responding to that? > The majority of people do inv

> Nobody saves money in Scrooge McDuck cash vaults. Why do I feel like you're reading half my comments and responding to that? > The majority of people do invest in the stock market. You're right. A slight majority, at less than 60%, based on sourced I found. Is that where we're at now? As long as you're part of that almost 60% then it's all good? > brokers like Robinhood have made it easy for anyone with a phone to invest. And my point is that many people don't have enough extra income to be able to usefully benefit from this, regardless of how much easier it's become. Someone that can only afford $100 a month to invest will see far less benefit than someone that can afford to invest $1000 a month, yet the person than can afford $1000 a month is likely not making 10x the income. Expecting everyone to be able to benefit equally from stock market gains is ridiculous, yet suggesting people buy stock if they are worried about too much profit being directed towards companies is suggesting the problem is solved by by that, and is thus itself ridiculous.

WalterBright 4y ago
> Expecting everyone to be able to benefit equally from stock market gains is ridiculous That's your strawman. > many people don't have enough extra income And yet people find the income to buy lottery tickets, go to the movies, go to the bar, etc. Investing does mean giving up some of this spending. > Someone that can only afford $100 a month to invest will see far less benefit Of course. But they are also seeing far more benefit than not investing. Remember that Gamestop stock craze a year ago? Many people playing that game were very low income people, including kids. Somehow they did have money to invest, when they thought it was worthwhile.
- kbenson 4y ago
  > That's your strawman. If it's a strawman than your original statement was a non-sequitur, as I cover below. > Of course. But they are also seeing far more benefit than not investing. I believe your statement was that people can invest in the stock of these companies that would theoretically be getting most the profit to get "your share" of the profits, as opposed to it being slurped up by the wealthy. This isn't about benefiting in some small way, it's about the benefit not ending up disproportionately in the hands of those that already have it. That was the context in which your statement of how you can just buy stock to get your share was made, because that's what this thread of the conversation was about. > Remember that Gamestop stock craze a year ago? Many people playing that game were very low income people, including kids. Somehow they did have money to invest, when they thought it was worthwhile. You mean the bunches of young people that took out loans to invest, or took their saving from living at home with their parents that they could have used to actually become independent? Is that what we're encouraging now? Because that was my take on that situation. A bunch of desperate people taking a risky gamble that happened to pay off, at least for some.
  - WalterBright 4y ago
    > disproportionately You get the benefits in exact proportion to how much you invest in it. > You mean the Yes. And if they used the money unwisely, they're responsible for the results. The point is, they got the money, and were able to invest it. The same thing happens to wealthier people - if they invest the money unwisely, they lose it.
    - ClumsyPilot 4y ago
      > You get the benefits in exact proportion to how much you invest in it. So if you started off poor, you have nothing to invest and you will be poor forever. Nice. Are you even arguing in good faith? Do you think this encourages hard work? You know what you are encouraging? Crime. Or a revolt. Because thats what people do when they realise that playing fair won't let them get ahead.

WalterBright 4y ago

> Expecting everyone to be able to benefit equally from stock market gains is ridiculous That's your strawman. > many people don't have enough extra income And yet people find the income to buy lottery tickets, go to the movies, go to the bar, etc. Investing does mean giving up some of this spending. > Someone that can only afford $100 a month to invest will see far less benefit Of course. But they are also seeing far more benefit than not investing. Remember that Gamestop stock craze a year ago? Many people playing that game were very low income people, including kids. Somehow they did have money to invest, when they thought it was worthwhile.

kbenson 4y ago
> That's your strawman. If it's a strawman than your original statement was a non-sequitur, as I cover below. > Of course. But they are also seeing far more benefit than not investing. I believe your statement was that people can invest in the stock of these companies that would theoretically be getting most the profit to get "your share" of the profits, as opposed to it being slurped up by the wealthy. This isn't about benefiting in some small way, it's about the benefit not ending up disproportionately in the hands of those that already have it. That was the context in which your statement of how you can just buy stock to get your share was made, because that's what this thread of the conversation was about. > Remember that Gamestop stock craze a year ago? Many people playing that game were very low income people, including kids. Somehow they did have money to invest, when they thought it was worthwhile. You mean the bunches of young people that took out loans to invest, or took their saving from living at home with their parents that they could have used to actually become independent? Is that what we're encouraging now? Because that was my take on that situation. A bunch of desperate people taking a risky gamble that happened to pay off, at least for some.
- WalterBright 4y ago
  > disproportionately You get the benefits in exact proportion to how much you invest in it. > You mean the Yes. And if they used the money unwisely, they're responsible for the results. The point is, they got the money, and were able to invest it. The same thing happens to wealthier people - if they invest the money unwisely, they lose it.
  - ClumsyPilot 4y ago
    > You get the benefits in exact proportion to how much you invest in it. So if you started off poor, you have nothing to invest and you will be poor forever. Nice. Are you even arguing in good faith? Do you think this encourages hard work? You know what you are encouraging? Crime. Or a revolt. Because thats what people do when they realise that playing fair won't let them get ahead.