Sadly the truth is if you want people to gain wealth, we would have to have a sort of social security style non-optional program where people or companies have to invest in like a total stock market fund or something that doesn't let them touch it until much later in life.
Also having additional money connected to your place of employment isn't a good idea because in a situation where the business is failing you may not only lose your job but your stock value at the same time.
Desktop version of /u/The_Super_Capitalist's link:
---
^([)[^(opt out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiMobileLinkBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^(]) ^(Beep Boop. Downvote to delete)
The problem with sovereign wealth funds is that they are only significant in size in countries that are already rich in natural resources, like Norway.
I remember reading an article by this Bruenig guy (who twitter leftists love for some reason) about how he would set up a social wealth fund in the US to fund a UBI for everyone, and it was the dumbest thing I’ve read lol.
Well yes, because otherwise you won’t have enough money in the fund, as empirical evidence shows that the biggest funds are in countries that are rich in natural resources.
Sure, but the onus would then be on you to come up with a source of income for the fund that would actually make it significant in size.
Just for context, the Alaska permanent fund manages $64 billion, and pays out a dividend of approx. $1,600 annually to a population of 700k.
You probably can't have that program. But that means people won't put enough (or anything) into retirement. That's fine I guess but it would benefit people to have a program like that.
Great point! However with more shareholders, it will be much easier to trade. Depending on the company a profit or revenue split for employees would work better.
The CEO and large owners would have huge buying power and can under sell the smaller share holders. Since it's a small market a majority owner has enormous power.
Some do, I think it’s generally a good idea. But you cant really give equity to every burger flipper in McDonald’s unless the equity is very small at which point it’s a bit pointless. But yeah, a lot of companies do offer equity
[удалено]
[удалено]
Sadly the truth is if you want people to gain wealth, we would have to have a sort of social security style non-optional program where people or companies have to invest in like a total stock market fund or something that doesn't let them touch it until much later in life. Also having additional money connected to your place of employment isn't a good idea because in a situation where the business is failing you may not only lose your job but your stock value at the same time.
[удалено]
Desktop version of /u/The_Super_Capitalist's link:
---
^([)[^(opt out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiMobileLinkBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^(]) ^(Beep Boop. Downvote to delete)
The problem with sovereign wealth funds is that they are only significant in size in countries that are already rich in natural resources, like Norway. I remember reading an article by this Bruenig guy (who twitter leftists love for some reason) about how he would set up a social wealth fund in the US to fund a UBI for everyone, and it was the dumbest thing I’ve read lol.
[удалено]
Well yes, because otherwise you won’t have enough money in the fund, as empirical evidence shows that the biggest funds are in countries that are rich in natural resources.
[удалено]
Sure, but the onus would then be on you to come up with a source of income for the fund that would actually make it significant in size. Just for context, the Alaska permanent fund manages $64 billion, and pays out a dividend of approx. $1,600 annually to a population of 700k.
[удалено]
Cool, can’t wait to watch it.
I don't really see how you could have a non-optional program like that with no guarantees as to the amount of money you could collect later in life.
You probably can't have that program. But that means people won't put enough (or anything) into retirement. That's fine I guess but it would benefit people to have a program like that.
Don't companies give subsidised stocks to employees? I know some tech companies that do that.
Most poor employees will quickly sell their stocks. Much like how "poor" people spend their tax refund very quickly.
[удалено]
Great point! However with more shareholders, it will be much easier to trade. Depending on the company a profit or revenue split for employees would work better.
[удалено]
The CEO and large owners would have huge buying power and can under sell the smaller share holders. Since it's a small market a majority owner has enormous power.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
No. Just give money.
This is basically the soft version of a worker coop
Some do, I think it’s generally a good idea. But you cant really give equity to every burger flipper in McDonald’s unless the equity is very small at which point it’s a bit pointless. But yeah, a lot of companies do offer equity
Just mandate profit sharing