• Willy@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    8 months ago

    would that involve getting rid of publicly traded/owned companies? would that in turn mean only one person could own a company and not allow investments?

    • bort@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      8 months ago

      would that involve getting rid of publicly traded/owned companies?

      no

      would that in turn mean only one person could own a company and not allow investments?

      also no

      • Willy@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        even then, with one person owning a stock or a company, what would stop a person from selling what they considered to be shares why wouldn’t I tell you that you get 100th of only thing if you buy 1/100 of a piece of what I consider to be the value of the company?

        • Liz@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          8 months ago

          Some eutopia idea they will never come close to implementing. Here’s a reasonable fix for the stock market.

          1. Have capital gains add to income instead of having a separate tax rate. (Really unlikely) Keep the exception on the first half million.

          2. Remove the duty to investors that publicly traded companies have. (Also crazy unlikely)

          3. Require all shares in a company pay out annual dividends tired to gross profit. Let’s say 1% of gross profit must be handed out as dividends. (Unlikely, but not absurdly so)

          4. Institute a 1% per-trade tax paid by the buyer. (Never gonna happen)

          Anyway, we’re fucked.

          • hannes3120@feddit.de
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            8 months ago

            I don’t understand the reason for #3 - could you explain?

            The rest are great - number one is my personal favourite, too, since it would either result in much more money for the government to invest or (if the tax income stays the same) much lower taxes for most people

            • bort@sopuli.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              8 months ago

              many stocks are fantasy values, which are disconnected from the actual performance of the underlying company. #3 would reconnect the stockvalue to the company value (my guess)

              • Liz@midwest.social
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                8 months ago

                Yeah pretty much. It would increase the amount of value the stock holds that’s directly tied to the performance of the company. Comparatively, then, buying and selling for a profit would be less attractive. Buying and holding would be more attractive.

                You’d have to play with the numbers to get it to an “ideal” ratio, and fantasy and speculative stocks would still exist, but it would still help reduce their prevalence.