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.
Of course we are. But of the 100 million shareholders you quoted, nearly 99% of stocks would be owned by a 1 million people. Rest 99% own the rest 1% of the stocks. The
Nope. The richest 1% (that's 2.56 million adults, not 1 million), own 56% percent of the stocks, not 99%. Furthermore... The ownership of capital has never been more equal. For example, 2/3 of the stock market is owned by institutional investors, including pension funds who invest their assets on behalf of working people who make up the bottom 90%. Pension funds also are among the biggest investors in private equity.
Again with the nonsensical business-worshipping libertaryan Ayn Randian moral grandstanding schtick.
Why shouldn’t we worth the business? We have lifted billions out of abject poverty through capitalism. How is that not worship-worthy? Almost everyone alive today is alive because of those businesses.
Nope. The richest 1% (that's 2.56 million adults, not 1 million), own 56% percent of the stocks, not 99%. Furthermore... The ownership of capital has never been more equal. For example, 2/3 of the stock market is owned by institutional investors, including pension funds who invest their assets on behalf of working people who make up the bottom 90%. Pension funds also are among the biggest investors in private equity.
If i am invested my 4000 in my 401, which is managed by fidelity, by investing in the fzrox zero market index fund, i m only worth that much. And my dividend was 40$ last year.
There may be 1000s of them holding the shares, but the majority of it is iwned by by a number which is shrinking. Pls correct if my understanding is wrong.
Are you saying that the institutions are barren, since they invest money on my behalf? Other than fees how do they make money?
Once again,for numbers sake, if our networth is more than 5 million we could be in 1% . But bezos and buffett also are within that. Do we have the power ? No.
High taxes on corporations put there by legislators chase away companies to other countries where they can make a profit..The globalists love this..They do not put America first. They rather build up Communist China's economy so they can eventually rule the world with state of the art cities, large factories and the biggest fleet of ships and airplanes to make sure they will rule.
.American legislators just got the hint from Trump that building up Communist countries is not too good of an idea. We are now being infiltrated by communists in our educational system, our government has many higher ups who are Communists . It is here folks.. the Chinese have taken over many minds of Americans. Get ready for higher taxes, and destruction of our economy.
We are now seeing the start of third world conditions in all the liberal cities in America. This job killing so called president is also helping out.
If i am invested my 4000 in my 401, which is managed by fidelity, by investing in the fzrox zero market index fund, i m only worth that much. And my dividend was 40$ last year.
There may be 1000s of them holding the shares, but the majority of it is iwned by by a number which is shrinking. Pls correct if my understanding is wrong.
Are you saying that the institutions are barren, since they invest money on my behalf? Other than fees how do they make money?
Institutional investors? No, I'm saying that they can't be counted as owning the investments they manage. The investments belong to those who have the pensions and retirement accounts.
Quote:
Once again,for numbers sake, if our networth is more than 5 million we could be in 1% . But bezos and buffett also are within that. Do we have the power ? No.
You'd be surprised. CalPERS (California Public Employees Retirement System) is the largest institutional investor in the US. They vote the shares for everyone who has a CalPERS pension, both working and retired. They've been able to leverage that massive amount of votes to do the following in regards to forcing Boards of Directors to act in a certain way:
Quote:
"A review of the California Public Employees’ Retirement System’s (CalPERS) corporate governance program shows that 53% of companies engaged by the pension plan in the 2019 proxy season added diverse members to their boards of directors.
Under new guidelines implemented several years ago, the largest US pension plan began voting against the reappointment of some board members at all white, male boards.
Nzima said the approximate $380 billion pension plan voted against 225 directors at 97 companies in the last proxy season."
High taxes on corporations put there by legislators chase away companies to other countries where they can make a profit..The globalists love this..They do not put America first. They rather build up Communist China's economy so they can eventually rule the world with state of the art cities, large factories and the biggest fleet of ships and airplanes to make sure they will rule.
.American legislators just got the hint from Trump that building up Communist countries is not too good of an idea. We are now being infiltrated by communists in our educational system, our government has many higher ups who are Communists . It is here folks.. the Chinese have taken over many minds of Americans. Get ready for higher taxes, and destruction of our economy.
We are now seeing the start of third world conditions in all the liberal cities in America. This job killing so called president is also helping out.
Which companies came back after the tax cut in 2017, name them.
Institutional investors? No, I'm saying that they can't be counted as owning the investments they manage. The investments belong to those who have the pensions and retirement accounts.
You'd be surprised. CalPERS (California Public Employees Retirement System) is the largest institutional investor in the US. They vote the shares for everyone who has a CalPERS pension, both working and retired. They've been able to leverage that massive amount of votes to do the following in regards to forcing Boards of Directors to act in a certain way:
Yes, some lost their homes through foreclosure. Others got their homes for free. It depended on who bought their loan on the secondary market. Loans bought by Fannie and Freddie were bundled and sold as MBS to the Federal Reserve. Those are the loans in what has essentially turned out to be the $2 trillion Federal Reserve free home giveaway program.
Loans that were bought, bundled, and sold as MBS by other than Fannie and Freddie (known as Private-Label MBS) were not allowed to remain in default for years because the investors who bought them actually expected a return on their investment.
The Federal Reserve does not expect a return. As I've already explained, the FR created the $2 trillion out of thin air to buy Fannie and Freddie MBS, and has the luxury of being able to change the MBS line item on their H.4.1 as the loans mature and roll off, whether paid or not. If they're not paid, it doesn't matter. There are simply no negative consequences whatsoever suffered by the FR for reducing or deleting a H.4.1 line item.
Do you understand?
I understand you have still not provided any supporting evidence of even 1 person who got their homes for free.
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.
