Surely this wealth is this gunna trickle down to the lower classes? Right guys?
Yes, it is trickling down... But not as much as it should
I dont understand why lemmy talks about the stock market like only moustached men wearing top hats and monocles are benefiting....
Regular ass working class people with retirement funds are benefiting as well.
I agree, the stock market disproportionately rewards the rich.... But until we come up with a better system, cheering for the collapse of the stock market hurts pretty much everyone
Regular ass working class people with retirement funds are benefiting as well.
What's a retirement?
Shit must REALLY suck for you that you have no retirement plan... But its not really helpful for us to attack other working class people with retirement accounts tied to stock market investments
Fighting each other and is exactly what the 0.1℅ wants is to do (forget the 1%... Thats just misguided bullshit meant to further divide us)
You got to remember, most of the wealth is still in very few hands. So telling yourself "the stock market also benefits the people who are retiring" makes it sound like there's a good side to this when really it's only a silver lining to an otherwise meaningless and arguably downright hurtful event.
The economy is as bad as it is, we're seeing fascism rise as much as we are, partially because our major economic systems aren't designed to actually benefit the people they're built on sucking value out of.
So no, I don't care that everyone currently cashing out of the system just got a little bit more money or more time out of the recent layoffs and the recent COVID profitteering and the recent inshitification. I think we have to be careful defending bad systems even minorly, despite that being rational and logical, because it feels like we're coming to a tipping point and minor defenses like that make it seem as if we can extend the shelf life of these systems a few more decades, a few more unnecessary deaths, a few more degrees of warming, etc. Idk, only politics is weird. At least you're participating, so thanks for that.
I'm all for dismantling capitalism, but until we come up with a better system, i'm not about to liquidate my accounts just to stick it to the man. Thats cutting your nose off to spite your face
Pensions arent a thing anymore. Retirement savings accounts and lottery tickets are the only two options if you dont want to work until you're dead...
It's not about capitalism vs something-other-than-capitalism, it's about all the small systems that make up our way of life. As a simple example, housing shouldn't be a vehicle for profit seeking. It should be illegal or so greatly discouraged that owning an unhealthy amount of properties is non-viable because if house prices must always go up and everyone needs a place to live - the cost of living must always go up. A subsystem of capitalism that needs fixing, not "a new system that isn't capitalism".
And I'm not suggesting people not have 401k's or not invest or not save money, I've got my retirement fund too. But we have to realize that that system isn't doing it's job and it's harmful to society and the more we participate the more incentivized to keep it harmful, to keep it around. So participate like an intelligent person and then leverage your power and position to better the systems for everyone - eventually at an expense to yourself.
I think the person was speaking to the fact that the median savings account of the average American (big average) is 84,000 https://www.federalreserve.gov/econres/scf/dataviz/scf/table/#series:Retirement_Accounts;demographic:agecl;population:all;units:median
Or that the average person under 35 has less than 18,000
The average American isn't winning big with stock market gains. Crashing the stock market might wipe out my measly 15k, but I don't own a house yet and I can't touch that money for another 30+ years, so it can't help me at all anyway.
But until we come up with a better system, cheering for the collapse of the stock market hurts pretty much everyone
We'd better come up with a better system fast because regardless of who is or is not cheering for what, no asset market goes up in value forever. Market corrections are a natural part of any market cycle and many people believe the stock markets are generally overvalued at present. Some people would even say that the current market "bubble" is being propped up by people who don't want a correction to occur because it would mean a decrease in their retirement savings, but all that does is all but guarantee that when the inevitable correction does occur, it will be more severe than it needed to be.
I'm all for dismantling capitalism, but until we come up with a better system, i'm not about to liquidate my accounts just to stick it to the man. Thats cutting your nose off to spite your face
Pensions arent a thing anymore. Retirement savings accounts and lottery tickets are the only two options if you dont want to work until you're dead...
i'm not about to liquidate my accounts just to stick it to the man.
I didn't say you should. I am saying that under the current model, investors, including individuals whose retirement accounts are tied to the stock market, need to accept and allow for periodic market corrections, otherwise asset bubbles will form, making much more severe crashes inevitable. The problem is, investors don't plan for or are willing to accept periodic corrections, they will only accept their accounts going up, at an increasing rate, forever. Needless to say, that is impossible.
Yes, it is trickling down... But not as much as it should
It may be trickling down, but only to the ever shrinking middle class. Normal working people used to have pensions, then 401ks popularized a nation wide obsession with gambling for retirement.
Employer matched retirement benefits are getting rarer by the day and it's understandable why so many people don't care about the stock market doing well. Why would anyone care if the market is making a killing if they have no access to it?
The wealth was generated by firing employees.
Its already trickling down in a golden shower
Given the millions of people whose retirement fund is invested in the stock market, yes it will.
That's awesome I guess... if only the stock market was at all related to the actual economy.
It helps retirement funds, like if you have a 401k or IRA.
I’m kinda suprised the numbers aren’t like 1% owns 99% of the shares.
They'll get there eventually.
Only if you're at the magical age to cashout and shift a major portion into safer assets.
You can control the class of investments in a retirement account. Shift to a more aggressive mix in a thriving economy, more stable in a weaker one. Most work on bear/bull percentages, which makes it easier to manage for those with little to no experience.
You can, but who actually does? The people managing the accounts make most of their money off of asset trades, so its in their best interests to convince you to keep it in stocks.
I use a portal to control my retirement accounts. I’m pretty sure most of them work like that now.
War profit, layoff profit, benefit reduction profit, ballooning healthcare cost profit.
I don't know how we will survive at this pace. Seriously, what's next after this all implodes?
Bartering and peace.
Lol. Not. Just famine and a lil' death.
Same thing as 100 years ago. Stock market crash, poverty, unions rise, the powerful try to squash it and fail, unions and collective organizing take back a descent middle class life, the next generation(s) who grew up with all those advantages lets it all slip away because they are entitled, rinse repeat. The rich never learn but neither does the lower classes. There is no winning, it’s a constant vigilant battle to keep a standard of living that the working class must learn to maintain. The rich get rich by taking more than they need, that never stops.
One difference between now and 100 years ago is that propaganda is way more effective. It can be pushed in real time on social media, and can be targeted towards specific demographics. That’s one of the reasons the US government is trying to ban TikTok, as it doesn’t follow the US’ propaganda diet, exposing people to unapproved opinions.
I assume it will make as much difference in my life as usual.
31,188.38 the day Uncle Joe was sworn in, so +8,811.62 - 28.25% of what he started with.
By point of comparison:
Trump:
1/20/2017 - 19,827.25
5/15/2020 - 23,685.42
+3,858.17 - 19.46% of starting value.
Obama 1st Term:
1/20/2009 - 7,949.09
5/16/2012 - 12,598.55
+4,649.46 - 58.49% of starting value.
Obama 2nd Term:
1/22/2013 - 13,712.21
5/16/2016 - 17,710.71
+3,998.5 - 29.16% of starting value.
Source:
https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/%5EDJI/history/?period1=694362600&period2=1715877818
That’s interesting. On average the stock market rises ~8%/yr so only Obama’s 1st term outpaced. Biden just kept up. Trump … well, lol.
And Obama's first term was a normalization of the market after it went in the absolute shitter under W:
W. Bush 1st term:
1/22/2001 - 10,578.24
5/17/2004 - 9,906.91
-671.33 - (-6.35%) of start.
W. Bush 2nd term:
1/20/2005 - 10,471.47
5/16/2008 - 12,986.80
+2,515.33 - 24.02% of start.
But that gain of 2.5K was as of MAY, by the time Bush was out it was 7,949.09. A drop of 2,522.38 from where he started the term, and 5,037.71 from that May number.
Before Obama could do anything, it bottomed out at 6,547.05 on March 9th, the stimulus package had just become effective less than a month before on 2/17/2009.
So this is kinda neat. Because, well, rule one is the economic policies of the current president lag in actual economic change, up or down. That is assuming that the president has any1 real sway on the economy in the first place. Consensus on how much, if at all, is up to discussion. We could write literal books on it.
So just to be fair, if we take these numbers and give them a 12 month lag, how does it compare? At 8, 16, or 24 months?
Im really not trying to be a troll or upset anyone's preconceptions. These are genuine questions based on my honest understanding of economics and the effects of government policies. Im curious.
The 12 month lag is GENERALLY true, barring an emergency such as Obama's first term and Biden's term.
In general, the economic policy in any president's first year is attributable to whoever their predecessor was because budgeting is done a year in advance.
I don't understand why there is a bull market.
Wouldn't the latest CPI report mean that the FED is less likely to lower interest rates which in turn would mean the high APY cash accounts are going to stay in effect for longer? Meaning a 5% APY on liquid cash without risk.
The only reason I can think of is that Boomers are trying to maximize their retirement funds and not reading anything, not even headlines.
But this wouldn't take into account the large banks and firms that are really leading the bull run.
Is this really just because of the idea that there is a potential for "AI" to increase productivity?
None of it makes sense to me, but I'm not an economist.
I'm no economist, either, but I imagine widespread layoffs and the AI boom both contribute.
Wasn't there a book about this in the 1990's? Or maybe a Wired headline?
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.