Here's a statement of the obvious: The opinions expressed here are those of the participants, not those of the Mutual Fund Observer. We cannot vouch for the accuracy or appropriateness of any of it, though we do encourage civility and good humor.
@MFO Members: Just another example of a long line of left wing liberals that frequently appear on a MFO. Daly favors narrowing income inequality with a negative income tax and limits on the largest incomes, which he argues will help reduce drawdown of finite resources, make society more equitable, help the poor more effectively than does today's welfare state, and help shift our politics from a plutocracy to a democracy. One of his criticisms of the obsession with growth is that it enables society to evade tough questions about wealth redistribution and population control. Regards, Ted
@Maurice Daly's suggestion of zero taxes on labor and capital while heavily taxing land and natural resources to restrict climate change is pretty far from Venezuela and Cuba. I guess the question comes down to whether the planet's climate really cares two cents about your retirement accounts. Hint: It doesn't.
@Maurice Post from real sources, not real fake news, and we'll talk. Also, Daly is actually a nationalist and an anti-globalist--something I don't particularly agree with, but his thoughts are interesting. Evidently, you haven't watched the video.
@Maurice Profits on stocks sold on the secondary market are a form of redistribution to shareholders for work they did not do. The investors who buy their shares of a company on the secondary market in no way helped build the company or produce the profits but receive the profits from the employees of the company who produced them. In other words, the gains in your IRA/retirement account you're so concerned about are a form of redistribution. It's called rentier capitalism. Note: I do not think rentier capitalism is evil, but that it needs to be regulated to prevent dangerous extremes in which all the wealth is extracted from labor for investors like you and me while there is no social safety net for labor when they get sick or displaced because of the demand for profits from investors like you and me.
What I find absurd is this notion you have that Obamacare is evil redistribution while you sitting on your duff collecting dividend and return checks for gains you didn't work for is somehow a wholly benign activity. And while you might be tempted to say " I worked for that retirement money," the truth is you only worked for the money you invested. You didn't work for the gains or returns you received. The profits produced by labor are being redistributed to you. You could say that's how risk capital works. OK, except that buying on the secondary market in no way contributes new capital to the company to grow its business. That occurs during the IPO phase of the company or during secondary offerings. But once the new capital is issued investors are merely trading paper and not adding to the resources of the company. 99% of fund shareholders are liquidity providers. That is all. For that they've received in excess of 10% a year--rentier capitalism at work. Fine, but a social safety net needs to be in place for those hurt by this system. Good health care insurance--the lack of which has been the largest cause of bankruptcy in the U.S.--is a necessary part of that safety net.
Comments
Regards,
Ted
What I find absurd is this notion you have that Obamacare is evil redistribution while you sitting on your duff collecting dividend and return checks for gains you didn't work for is somehow a wholly benign activity. And while you might be tempted to say " I worked for that retirement money," the truth is you only worked for the money you invested. You didn't work for the gains or returns you received. The profits produced by labor are being redistributed to you. You could say that's how risk capital works. OK, except that buying on the secondary market in no way contributes new capital to the company to grow its business. That occurs during the IPO phase of the company or during secondary offerings. But once the new capital is issued investors are merely trading paper and not adding to the resources of the company. 99% of fund shareholders are liquidity providers. That is all. For that they've received in excess of 10% a year--rentier capitalism at work. Fine, but a social safety net needs to be in place for those hurt by this system. Good health care insurance--the lack of which has been the largest cause of bankruptcy in the U.S.--is a necessary part of that safety net.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/17/upshot/income-inequality-united-states.html