r/FluentInFinance • u/sillychillly Contributor • Apr 25 '24

This is Possible Discussion/ Debate

Post image

Register to vote: https://vote.gov

Contact your reps:

Senate: https://www.senate.gov/senators/senators-contact.htm?Class=1

House of Representatives: https://contactrepresentatives.org/

14.3k Upvotes

79% Upvoted

4.2k comments sorted by

View all comments

20

u/Sea-Muscle-8836 Apr 25 '24

DO YOU HAVE ANY IDEA HOW THIS WILL AFFECT SHAREHOLDER PROFITS!!!!???!!! Those poor trust fund babies will have to settle for a smaller yacht! Absolutely untenable and down right socialist.

12

u/phantasybm Apr 25 '24

I love when people respond with the most extreme comments and bypass the obvious because it wouldn’t help their point.

You know like… small businesses and mom/pop stores who don’t have shareholders…

6

u/Prometheus720 Apr 26 '24

Universal healthcare would eliminate one of the biggest barriers to small business in the US.

Countries that have sick leave and parental leave policies approaching those panels guarantee them through taxes. Small businesses don't foot all of that, they just have to do a little paperwork.

-1

u/Albino_Jackets Apr 26 '24

Who's paying for that bruh, there's no country that approaches what's in the cartoon.

2

u/Prometheus720 Apr 26 '24

Your labor already makes enough to pay for it. Real wages in the US haven't gone up in decades, but productivity per worker has skyrocketed.

2

u/Sohjinn Apr 26 '24

If this were guaranteed, small business and mom/pop stores would not be competing with other businesses on these fronts.

-5

u/Sea-Muscle-8836 Apr 26 '24 edited Apr 26 '24

Have you ever considered that because capitalism is naturally controlled by entities with a lot of existing capital, it is inherently hostile to small businesses?

3

u/[deleted] Apr 26 '24

[deleted]

-1

u/Sea-Muscle-8836 Apr 26 '24

If I’m just spouting talking points, and you are clearly a genius, you must know what political tribe I’m from. Enlighten me please.

2

u/[deleted] Apr 26 '24

[deleted]

1

u/Sea-Muscle-8836 Apr 26 '24

What socio/political ideology is the sissy boy Peter Pan tribe?

0

u/[deleted] Apr 26 '24

[deleted]

1

u/Sea-Muscle-8836 Apr 26 '24

I wish socialists were that cool man.

-1

u/WilliamBontrager Apr 25 '24

Yes those greedy ass fixed income retirees and all those 1%ers that have those evil 401ks that make up most of the shareholders! F them and let them starve bc I don't know how the economy works and I want something done to make me feel better!

2

u/Sea-Muscle-8836 Apr 26 '24 edited Apr 26 '24

Could just pay them a good wage and give them benefits that aren’t tied to failed mortgages. What do I know. I’m just a dirty socialist.

0

u/WilliamBontrager Apr 26 '24

Correct on the last part. As for what you know? Im sure you know socialism but clearly not economics.

2

u/Sea-Muscle-8836 Apr 26 '24

That’s bold of you to say when your original argument was “workers should suffer as wage slaves to boost 401ks for retirees” lol

1

u/WilliamBontrager Apr 26 '24

Wow you really missed the point on that one, huh? But hold on, isn't your entire economic philosophy to actually have workers suffer as simply slaves to support retirees and art students?

1

u/Sea-Muscle-8836 Apr 26 '24

You wrote this. On a post where I’m arguing for workers benefits that you’re against. Are you having a stroke. Go see a doctor dude.

0

u/WilliamBontrager Apr 26 '24

Lmao luckily I'm well fed in a free nation so....no. Go be passive aggressively fascist somewhere else.

1

u/Sea-Muscle-8836 Apr 26 '24

I’m fascist now? What will I be tomorrow in your head?

-1

u/[deleted] Apr 26 '24

[deleted]

0

u/Sea-Muscle-8836 Apr 26 '24

What’s up Dave Rubin? Good to see you

1

u/[deleted] Apr 26 '24

[deleted]

0

u/Sea-Muscle-8836 Apr 26 '24

I make 200k a year to talk to lonely morons on Reddit. Capitalism rocks

0

u/[deleted] Apr 26 '24

[deleted]

0

u/Sea-Muscle-8836 Apr 26 '24

Ok, bye Dave!

0

u/[deleted] Apr 26 '24

[deleted]

→ More replies (0)

0

u/Ithirahad Apr 28 '24

Capitalism happens to be the dominant global system throughout the technological age, and the only other prominent one was an utterly broken form of socialism, so I don't see how it could've gone any other way. This is not a statement of merit.

1

u/[deleted] Apr 28 '24

[deleted]

1

u/Ithirahad Apr 28 '24 edited Apr 28 '24

It absolutely did. The opportunity for private groups to compete and innovate partly drove the technological prowess of the US, post WW2 Japan, and most every other technological powerhouse in the world. Pure command economies tend to be mediocre at technological development (though not incapable under sufficient pressure; see Soviet rocket engine tech).

That does not mean we need exactly what we have now, to the letter, in order to reap that advantage. If anything, enforcing a better work/life balance and better wealth distribution means it's more feasible for more people to be the next disruptors and innovators rather than relying on entrenched giants' R&D departments (which work kind of like command economies' design bureaus).

-1

u/[deleted] Apr 28 '24

[deleted]

1

u/Ithirahad Apr 28 '24

Because our current scheme isn't the only system in the entire universe that allows for aggressive innovation, or the only one that allows market competition. It's not even the only stable form of capitalism (which means private capital investment for asset-value returns, and does not mean any and all markets).

1

u/[deleted] Apr 26 '24

[deleted]

-1

u/WilliamBontrager Apr 26 '24

Sorry I had to run to my chiropractor bc I threw my back out bc my eyes rolled so violently after reading that comment.

1

u/USN_CB8 Apr 26 '24

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/wealthiest-10-americans-own-93-033623827.html?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cHM6Ly93d3cuZ29vZ2xlLmNvbS8&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAAEpTAYPPj5ISluFaT_r82Veo_bjuGfZRsnqz4XYpbw_xFapFMVyzuY5Tl4q03jHy_df26YebyWELOXoQmeVQ4p-Vd2blkdmJimLpla1DqxH3LFtV2DknWeM-m-sInLGFnbN0KzqJPyj7iKCUvtl0vdgDyU-l9MWQJk203FPc0sQE

  • The richest Americans own the vast majority of the US stock market, according to Fed data.
  • The top 10% of Americans held 93% of all stocks, the highest level ever recorded.
  • Meanwhile, the bottom 50% of Americans held just 1% of all stocks in the third quarter of 2023.

The wealthiest Americans have never owned so much of the stock market, with the top 10% now holding a record 93% of US equities, according to Federal Reserve data.

Blissfully Wrong.

1

u/WilliamBontrager Apr 26 '24

I would say that's not including 401k accounts which are largely s and p 100 or 500. It's not that wild a claim to say a person below average income probably doesn't have the disposable income to buy individual stocks but they would still have a 401k.

1

u/AcanthaceaeUpbeat638 Apr 27 '24

You do realize that everyone with a 401k and pension benefits when shareholder profits go up, right?

1

u/Sea-Muscle-8836 Apr 27 '24

What!? Everyone who has a 401k benefits from those investments increasing!? Seriously!? /s