55% of Americans have shares in the stock market...

Given the situation going on with Gamestop and how only a few million investors caused such a ruckus, I'm still inclined to support some legislation that's at least like this. You'd quickly see a properly regulated stock market if everyone was even just a little bit invested into the market and could collectively pull off what happened at Gamestop. And correction. Only 48% of Americans are invested in the stock market in some form. Not even 55%.

 

Eh if you read all the pages I elaborated starting at $100/month per American citizen up to 65 years of age totalling $78,000 over time. Roughly $400 billion in taxes per year pumped into the stock market as stimulus from which all Americans benefit including your homeless on the streets and Americans in the penal system.

 

I mean it was roughly 3 million users that frequented the reddit wallstreet section that caused this right? Imagine if 328 million Americans had that kind of influence. You'd see all the ways the stock market can be manipulated fixed right away so it would then become properly regulated. A properly regulated stock market means a less likelihood of criminal activity that requires a government bailout as past precedent has determined the stock market is too big to fail. Then that would mean the stock market is a closer reflection of the well being over the overall economy. And when the economy actually is doing well, everyone would benefit. When it doesn't, that's 328 million Americans who would then have a financial interest in actually holding our elected officials accountable instead of being drawn into stupid culture wars as a justification for government gridlock. All of our elected officials would actually have to put in work then instead of empty platitudes to feed to the general public.

 

Don't have AppleTV but Youtube recommended this and have been listening. I still like my idea even after a year. I actually forgot about it until this was in my recommended feed.

 

I kinda pictured it more as hiring an ethical successful hedge fund manager that takes the pool of money that's keen on noticing bubbles precisely like Gamestop and having the financial ability to keep Wall Street honest lest they feel the wrath of approximately 328 million investor's money pooled together. And yes people can invest independently without a being a part of the pool but you'd think you'd need to be extremely successful to outpace whatever gains you'd get by remaining in the collective pool. Isn't that basically what rich people with millions of disposal income do? They just dump that extra few million into a hedge fund pool and let an expert make them passive income with a greater total sum of money in the hundreds of millions to invest with instead of their smaller amount. Plus this would afford even homeless and people in the penal system and young adults an expert in finance to manage their affairs while they're still getting on their feet and with proper consumer protection laws in place and enforced, that could help deter predatory bad faith actors. That's my optimistic take.

If they got one of their own with the expertise to notice some malfeasance that our government appears incapable of managing and staying ahead of and is able to hit them hardest in their wallets, you'd think bad faith actors in Wall Street would be more honest.

As far as guarantee of government money, what do you think all those bailouts were to the airline industry, auto industry, Wall Street's mismanagement of the housing market and the list goes on and it's all done under the pretense that these existing industries are too big to fail and thus need a guarantee of government money through tax dollars to continue existing. The same will be true of crypto should it ever go bust. It's already too big to fail. And this is done intentionally by bad faith actors in the market knowing that the government will assuredly cave and guarantee money while not even getting a slap on the wrist. Who pays for it? At least some portion of those bailouts are taken from the 52% of Americans' tax dollars who don't even have a dime invested into the stock market right? How is that not robbing from them when they're already likely low income?

Why is taking 52% of Americans tax dollars with no investment in the stock market every time a big industry needs a bailout okay but when it's the other way around, people consider it unfeasible? I don't understand that personally.

 

I mean pages fall off the D&D. I was mostly keeping consecutive posts going for awhile and it fell off to other topics of discussion that are a bit more important than my little thought experiment. I think it's a good idea but I'm in no position to see it passed in any form even as like a test experiment in a single state where if it ends up being a bad idea at least it's limited to that state instead of the entire nation. My little foot note in history. Random Rocket fan BBS poster ultimately suggests atrocious investment plan that ruins state finances for decades!

I agree with Juan that people should be able to decide how they invest but I also think it'd be a good idea to have an ethical hedge fund manager handle it for people not as ambitious and just want to work their 9 to 5 or whatever work schedule and still be more comfortable through all stages of their life at least financially more than they currently are.

One negative I could see is it might further exacerbate climate change which I post a lot of concern over. If say this really provides an enormous boon to the stock market and economy as it should and that really upticks manufacturing of fossil fuels (which we need right now anyways) and further increases consumer spending for people to more frequently replace their iPhone for instance, then that's just added waste to existing waste dumps that'll only fill up even faster in the U.S. that would only increase climate change. Not really lessen it. In that sense it could be a negative for the rest of the developed world. Still, it'd probably benefit more Americans than the current system is presently and you could probably curb consumer spending by encouraging better investment behavior over short term joy from purchasing a bunch of goods with an expiration date and rapid depreciation in value over time.