would that involve getting rid of publicly traded/owned companies? would that in turn mean only one person could own a company and not allow investments?
Some eutopia idea they will never come close to implementing. Here’s a reasonable fix for the stock market.
Have capital gains add to income instead of having a separate tax rate. (Really unlikely) Keep the exception on the first half million.
Remove the duty to investors that publicly traded companies have. (Also crazy unlikely)
Require all shares in a company pay out annual dividends tired to gross profit. Let’s say 1% of gross profit must be handed out as dividends. (Unlikely, but not absurdly so)
Institute a 1% per-trade tax paid by the buyer. (Never gonna happen)
I don’t understand the reason for #3 - could you explain?
The rest are great - number one is my personal favourite, too, since it would either result in much more money for the government to invest or (if the tax income stays the same) much lower taxes for most people
many stocks are fantasy values, which are disconnected from the actual performance of the underlying company. #3 would reconnect the stockvalue to the company value (my guess)
Yeah pretty much. It would increase the amount of value the stock holds that’s directly tied to the performance of the company. Comparatively, then, buying and selling for a profit would be less attractive. Buying and holding would be more attractive.
You’d have to play with the numbers to get it to an “ideal” ratio, and fantasy and speculative stocks would still exist, but it would still help reduce their prevalence.
would that in turn mean only one person could own a company and not allow investments?
you can already own a company with multiple people without the stock market.
would that involve getting rid of publicly traded/owned companies?
you can already have a public company, that is not listed on a stockmarket
Then what’s the alternative?
any of those that already exist.
I guess it would also be possible to image some new implementation of public trading, one that does not enable corruption and white-color-crime so much as the current one. Maybe something with more transparency and public oversight. Keep in mind, that the stock market in the US was implemented by already rich people, who had no incentives to make it fair. All fairness was implemented later as an after thought.
even then, with one person owning a stock or a company, what would stop a person from selling what they considered to be shares why wouldn’t I tell you that you get 100th of only thing if you buy 1/100 of a piece of what I consider to be the value of the company?
would that involve getting rid of publicly traded/owned companies? would that in turn mean only one person could own a company and not allow investments?
no
also no
Then what’s the alternative?
Some eutopia idea they will never come close to implementing. Here’s a reasonable fix for the stock market.
Have capital gains add to income instead of having a separate tax rate. (Really unlikely) Keep the exception on the first half million.
Remove the duty to investors that publicly traded companies have. (Also crazy unlikely)
Require all shares in a company pay out annual dividends tired to gross profit. Let’s say 1% of gross profit must be handed out as dividends. (Unlikely, but not absurdly so)
Institute a 1% per-trade tax paid by the buyer. (Never gonna happen)
Anyway, we’re fucked.
I don’t understand the reason for #3 - could you explain?
The rest are great - number one is my personal favourite, too, since it would either result in much more money for the government to invest or (if the tax income stays the same) much lower taxes for most people
many stocks are fantasy values, which are disconnected from the actual performance of the underlying company. #3 would reconnect the stockvalue to the company value (my guess)
Yeah pretty much. It would increase the amount of value the stock holds that’s directly tied to the performance of the company. Comparatively, then, buying and selling for a profit would be less attractive. Buying and holding would be more attractive.
You’d have to play with the numbers to get it to an “ideal” ratio, and fantasy and speculative stocks would still exist, but it would still help reduce their prevalence.
you can already own a company with multiple people without the stock market.
you can already have a public company, that is not listed on a stockmarket
any of those that already exist.
I guess it would also be possible to image some new implementation of public trading, one that does not enable corruption and white-color-crime so much as the current one. Maybe something with more transparency and public oversight. Keep in mind, that the stock market in the US was implemented by already rich people, who had no incentives to make it fair. All fairness was implemented later as an after thought.
even then, with one person owning a stock or a company, what would stop a person from selling what they considered to be shares why wouldn’t I tell you that you get 100th of only thing if you buy 1/100 of a piece of what I consider to be the value of the company?
No
How would that work?
There’s other legal forms aside stock company.