top | item 25024337

(no title)

docbrown | 5 years ago

Of course stocks have real tangible value or else we wouldn’t be able to buy and sell them. They’re not something that you barter with.

However, the majority of Americans do not associate stocks with voting rights. Only a slim minority of Americans own stocks to begin with!

Most laymen investors or readers believe that the stock market is an indication of how well our economy is doing — which it’s not.

The value of the stock market, like you said, is based on the buyers expectations. Which is what I said: the market is controlled by institutions and money managers. Those are the majority of your buyers.

discuss

dfilppi|5 years ago

A slim minority of Americans have a 401k?

docbrown|5 years ago

Barely half have some sort of 401k program and the average holding amount is only $40,000. Nothing to really gloat about.

Earners of $100,000/year or more have 5x the amount in holdings as compared to those earning $99,000 or below.

Only 14% of Americans are invested in individual stocks outside of a 401k program.

401k assets only amount to 17% of the total US retirement.

None of these numbers tell a great story because Americans are not saving for retirement. If they are, they’re barely saving a years worth of their salary.

jeofken|5 years ago

I agree it’s sad how far this world is from perfection, and that so many don’t know about the benefits of owning capital.

I wish I could convince people to spend only half of what they spend on weed and alcohol on buying stocks - it would be of great benefit to the masses. How can we show them the benefits?

dTal|5 years ago

You're talking past the point under discussion, to wit:

>the stock market has little correlation to reality... It fluctuates based on personal sentiment from institutions and money managers

>a slim minority of Americans own stocks to begin with...

>most laymen investors or readers believe that the stock market is an indication of how well our economy is doing — which it’s not.

And therefore an improved stock market does not equate to an improved 'economy', and therefore it is incorrect to credit Donald Trump with an improved economy purely because tax cuts to the rich may have bumped the stock market. What on Earth does your comment have to do with that?