Oh my god. I already knew that stock was a tool used by the wealthy to get wealthier, "investing" while not actually putting money into businesses.
I didn't know that the wealthy have a monopoly on newly issued stock. Did you know that you could only buy some of Facebooks initial stock if you have over $500,000 in your account? What does that mean? It means that some person who's already a millionaire is going to buy that stock and turn around and sell ten minutes later to it some Average Joe's mutual fund at a tidy profit (probably--everyone could say that Facebook isn't worth the price and refuse to buy so they might take a loss). In other words, if I was a millionaire, I could own Facebook for ten minutes and make a profit. But if all I have is a small 401K, the only way I can make money on Facebook is to pay the millionaire for the privilege of his "sloppy seconds" (that's the term used by a business advisor on ABC news last night). Even if all I could buy is 10 shares, shouldn't I be allowed the option to buy it as soon as it is for sale? Shouldn't I have the option to sell it at a small profit ten minutes later?
Or what if I'm some devout Facebook user who actually cares that the company does well (like the owners of McDonald's stock who only eat at McDonald's, thus increasing the profitability of the company and thus helping to increase the demand, and therefore the price, of McDonald's stock)? Why should I be denied access to the stock unless I bow to the monetary demands of the already wealthy? I want to keep the stock for fifty years and retire on it, after spending a lifetime helping the company to be profitable in my own small way--but I must pay the millionaire who is only buying the stock because he knows some sad sap like me will pay anything to own a part of the company I hold dear? He doesn't care whether the company fails or succeeds--he's just in it for a few hours to make a profit that the average american would like to see as a year's wage and pay half the amount of taxes on it as said Average Joe.
Of course, we live in a country where such unfairness is standard doctrine from the Republicans who say that fixing this type of activity is a "job killer". That raising taxes on this type of "investment" keeps "job creators" from hiring one more person. It doesn't matter that the millionaire who sold me my Facebook stock doesn't employ anyone. That he sits in his $10 million Costa Rican mansion and buys and sells from his ocean view balcony. Sure, he "technically" just poured a million dollars into Facebook's coffers, but he just made that back plus 20% when he sold it ten minutes later. 40% if he waits an hour.
I wonder how much Romney's mutual fund is making on this deal...
I didn't know that the wealthy have a monopoly on newly issued stock. Did you know that you could only buy some of Facebooks initial stock if you have over $500,000 in your account? What does that mean? It means that some person who's already a millionaire is going to buy that stock and turn around and sell ten minutes later to it some Average Joe's mutual fund at a tidy profit (probably--everyone could say that Facebook isn't worth the price and refuse to buy so they might take a loss). In other words, if I was a millionaire, I could own Facebook for ten minutes and make a profit. But if all I have is a small 401K, the only way I can make money on Facebook is to pay the millionaire for the privilege of his "sloppy seconds" (that's the term used by a business advisor on ABC news last night). Even if all I could buy is 10 shares, shouldn't I be allowed the option to buy it as soon as it is for sale? Shouldn't I have the option to sell it at a small profit ten minutes later?
Or what if I'm some devout Facebook user who actually cares that the company does well (like the owners of McDonald's stock who only eat at McDonald's, thus increasing the profitability of the company and thus helping to increase the demand, and therefore the price, of McDonald's stock)? Why should I be denied access to the stock unless I bow to the monetary demands of the already wealthy? I want to keep the stock for fifty years and retire on it, after spending a lifetime helping the company to be profitable in my own small way--but I must pay the millionaire who is only buying the stock because he knows some sad sap like me will pay anything to own a part of the company I hold dear? He doesn't care whether the company fails or succeeds--he's just in it for a few hours to make a profit that the average american would like to see as a year's wage and pay half the amount of taxes on it as said Average Joe.
Of course, we live in a country where such unfairness is standard doctrine from the Republicans who say that fixing this type of activity is a "job killer". That raising taxes on this type of "investment" keeps "job creators" from hiring one more person. It doesn't matter that the millionaire who sold me my Facebook stock doesn't employ anyone. That he sits in his $10 million Costa Rican mansion and buys and sells from his ocean view balcony. Sure, he "technically" just poured a million dollars into Facebook's coffers, but he just made that back plus 20% when he sold it ten minutes later. 40% if he waits an hour.
I wonder how much Romney's mutual fund is making on this deal...
No comments:
Post a Comment