Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

eridani

(51,907 posts)
9. Ordinary investors won't be paying much. Ordinary people own very little of the stock market
Fri May 17, 2013, 07:05 PM
May 2013
http://www.csmonitor.com/2004/0108/p09s01-coop.html

Wall Street analysts are predicting another great year for the stock market in 2004, and Americans are again pouring their savings into stocks. Tens of billions of dollars have flowed back into equities since last summer. As the Dow and Nasdaq soar, more money is likely to follow. There are also signs of a revival of the '90s myth of the populist stock market -a myth in which Wall Street gives everyone on Main Street a shot at a better life.

Can Americans possibly fall once more for this nonsense? Maybe. The scandals of recent years, most lately in the mutual-fund industry, have done little to debunk the notion that Wall Street is geared toward ordinary investors and that stocks offer a universal path to wealth creation. At the height of the boom, however, the bottom three-quarters of American households owned less than 15 percent of all stock. Barely a third of households hold more than $5,000 in stock. Most Americans have more debt on their credit cards than money in their mutual funds.

Stock-market gains have reflected the top-heavy ownership patterns. Between 1989 and 1997, the most recent year for which there is good data, 86 percent of stock market gains went to just the top 10 percent of households. Yet when the market tanked, it was often ordinary investors who felt the sharpest pain - pain that many will cope with well into retirement. According to a March survey by Greenwich Associates, major retirement pension plans lost $1 trillion from the beginning of 2000 through beginning of 2003.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

kr HiPointDem May 2013 #1
Maybe instead of taxing Wall Street Turbineguy May 2013 #2
Once Wall Street has devoured the middle class and poor, they will be in their own economy liberal N proud May 2013 #3
Du rec. Nt xchrom May 2013 #4
not good enough MrYikes May 2013 #5
Why do you assume it would only impact Wall Street? badtoworse May 2013 #6
Unless you are a computer, why would you care? eridani May 2013 #7
I'm a mutual fund investor and the tax would be added onto the fees I pay the fund manager badtoworse May 2013 #8
Ordinary investors won't be paying much. Ordinary people own very little of the stock market eridani May 2013 #9
You haven't broken it out badtoworse May 2013 #10
If the increase were significant, you would need to find a better manager. Egalitarian Thug May 2013 #12
Non-productive? Without investors, we wouldn't have an economy... badtoworse May 2013 #13
Yes, non-productive. Like the barter economy that is used as justification for a number Egalitarian Thug May 2013 #17
Here is the problem mick063 May 2013 #11
My wife and I have had IRA's and 401k's for 30 years badtoworse May 2013 #14
When corporatists own the government mick063 May 2013 #18
You'd be smarter to worry about the banksters grabbing your money eridani May 2013 #19
I'm really confused here. What you wrote is the essence of "I've got mine, fuck you". Egalitarian Thug May 2013 #20
I believe in equal opportunity, not equal outcome badtoworse May 2013 #21
Sales tax Fumesucker May 2013 #15
Agree. Some states even tax the sale of food and/or medicine. byeya May 2013 #16
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Dean Baker: Cutting Soci...»Reply #9