Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
100 million or so American workers and retirees depend on consistently profitable corporations to fund their retirement. That's just the way it is whether you like it, or not.
You are making the assumption that since something exists, and because people have come to rely on it, then it is both necessary and good.
Look at it like this, lets pretend that every single grocery store in the United States was owned by the Federal government. You could then make the statement, "Hundreds of millions of people rely on these government grocery stores to eat. That's just the way it is, whether you like it or not".
Neither the existence of something, nor the fact that people use it, makes it either necessary or good.
The truth is, the reason a lot of people end up investing their money, is because it is basically impossible to just save the money. If you put it into a savings account, you actually lose money. And if you put it under your mattress, you lose the money even faster. Inflation destroys savings.
Secondly, people invest money because the government gives a variety of tax incentives for investing money for retirement. Of course, most of these tax incentives are not easily taken advantage of by individuals from the lower classes(for a variety of reasons). Which is why very few of them actually do.
But lets pretend for a moment that a hundred million people actually do rely on investments for their retirement. What does that mean? It means a hundred to two-hundred million people do not rely on investments for their retirements(IE members of the lower and middle classes).
And lets also agree that the financial system and the tax system, gives unfair advantages to those people who do have investments. And thus, the more you have to invest, the more advantages you have. And the less money you have to invest, the more disadvantages you have.
Does the fact that 33% or 40% of 50% of the people get some benefit from the stock-market, mean that it is both necessary and good? Considering that it effectively comes at the expense of the majority of people who don't benefit from the stock-market?
I'm reminded of the question, "What would you do if you win the lottery?"
The answer is always, "I'll invest the money and live off the interest".
No one ever stops to ponder what that even means. It means, you'll be able to buy the goods and services produced by the labor of others(mostly from the middle and lower classes), without ever lifting your finger ever again. And as long as you don't spend too wildly, you could actually live an incredibly lavish lifestyle, while doing no work, and actually get richer and richer and richer.
And while people dream of winning the lottery to live in that manner. They don't seem to realize that there are already people who live in that way. And not just a few lottery winners. We are talking about possibly millions of people who don't work(or at least don't produce anything of any tangible value), and who live relatively lavish lifestyles, and are actually getting richer every day.
Now, let me backtrack a little bit, I am not actually condemning the stock market as an entity all by itself. If the stock market was the product of the "free market", then I am not opposed to it whatsoever. But the stock market we have today, is about as far from a free market as there can be. Our entire economy is about as far away from the free market as it can be.
The stock market's value only goes up far faster than inflation, because of an influx of new capital. Without the influx of new capital, the stock market really couldn't go up in price(or would be heavily limited).
The government is doing everything it can to divert more and more money into the stock market, by incentivizing people to put their money in a variety of retirement accounts, by giving them tax breaks. And the Wall Street bankers want nothing more than to privatize social security altogether. Wall Street would love it if hundreds of billions of dollars surge into stock market speculation every year. Especially since treasury bonds are paying so lousy because of the ultra-low Fed rates.
Do you understand?
Last edited by Redshadowz; 06-24-2015 at 02:16 PM..
You are making the assumption that since something exists, and because people have come to rely on it, then it is both necessary and good.
No, I'm saying that it's the system we have, that 100 million or more Americans depend on it to fund their retirement, and that's why the federal government bailed out Wall Street and artificially props up the stock market with QE.
No, I'm saying that it's the system we have, that 100 million or more Americans depend on it to fund their retirement, and that's why the federal government bailed out Wall Street and artificially props up the stock market with QE.
I'm not disagreeing with you. But what I'm saying is that the system might benefit the top 30-40%, but it does so at the expense of the bottom 60-70%. There is no such thing as a free lunch.
I never said our system didn't benefit anyone. I said REPEATEDLY that it benefited those at the top. And that the benefits are exponentially greater the closer you get to the very top.
Do you get it? Or am I wasting my time?
Let me add InformedConsent, this is not me rambling from some communist/socialist position. I am actually making a libertarian argument.
Watch this video of Milton Friedman(about as far from a communist as there can be).
Actually, it's true. Take a look at which income group pays the same percentage of the federal income tax revenue that they earn of the income in Table 1, here:
The top 5-10% actually pay about the same percentage of federal income tax revenue as they earn of the income. The top 2-5% pay a slightly higher percentage of the FIT revenue than they earn of the income. The bottom 90% isn't pulling their weight, and the top 1% pays just under twice their fair share.
Maybe if wealth was distributed more equally, taxes would be as well.
I'm not disagreeing with you. But what I'm saying is that the system might benefit the top 30-40%, but it does so at the expense of the bottom 60-70%.
Your numbers are wrong. 69% of Americans are relying on pensions and/or retirement accounts for most of their retirement funding. The federal government alone, which has either pension plans or retirement account plans, is the US's largest employer.
You have the social-justice/economic justice people, who in the vast majority of cases, have absolutely no clue how the financial system actually works. They only look at tax rates, or arbitrary income/poverty numbers, and demand something should be done.
Obama supporters, those who think they are going after the rich, those who think it's good to force people to give more to the government don't know their asses from a hole in the ground. Your right, they don't know how the financial system works. They supported Obama as he took more money from the middle class and don't even know it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Redshadowz
In the same way that the creation of new capital enriches the wealthy in this country at the expense of the lower and middle-classes. It actually enriches the wealthy in this country also at the expense of the poor all around the world.
Do you know what a HENRY is? High Income Not Rich Yet. The left screwed people who get educated and offer high skills who have not had time to build wealth. If they voted for Obama they screwed themselves and I have no sympathy for them. Let them pay for the low class.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
