Can the stock market be used to steal from the rich?

[A New Era]

About 60 percent of the market moves are made from institutional investors. Much of the rest of that is from rich individuals.

Now the majority of them has panicked, and stocks are uneralistically low. If you buy stocks in a good company now and you wait a year or two when the rich pricks have returned, the stocks will have returned to its normal level. The result is that you have a nice percentage gain of perhaps 50 percent and the rich has lost a lot of cash.

I remember Lenin talking about capitalists selling the rope of which we hang them with. In this case we steal from them. Legally.

A lot of revolutionary leftists have a disdain, and rightly so, for the capitalist economy and the stock market. But what if the stock market is used against the capitalists, in advantage of the working people in situations like this?


I am not saying it is "morally" correct or incorrect. What do you think?

Discuss.

[JimmyJazz]

Good luck with that.

[al8]

I think more likely that the superrich will steal from the rich and give to themselves. They have the capital and propably also the know-how to pull such things of. I've even heard that some economists think that such people simply engineer such crisis in the right moment to opertunely accrue more capital to themselves. That is, compress capital onto the hands of fewer people.

http://www.citywire.co.uk/selector/-/news/other/content.aspx?ID=317193
http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=10495

[sunfarstar]

股票是什么?就是一张"白条":laugh:.股票市场是什么?就是一场大的赌博.:laugh:
别指望能从富人手里拿到钱,社会主义社会应该实行有计划的民主经济体系.:):lol:

[Enragé]

In a year or two the economy will be worse off than it is now

not to mention
you'll be stealing from the workers as any shareholder does.

[cyu]

The extremely wealthy can afford to ride out temporary drops in the stock market.

The less wealthy cannot - for example, the elderly may be forced to pull their money out in order to pay the bills.

So you look at the current situation. Is the market down mainly because the less wealthy have already pulled their money out? If that's the case, saving the stock market (which is what you'll be doing if you're trying to convince everyone to get back into the pyramid scheme) will only benefit the extremely wealthy who still have their money in there. The only thing the extremely wealthy fear is a total crash.

If you really wanted to end plutocracy, you'd encourage employees to assume democratic control over their companies, thus rendering stocks worthless.

[Mather]

About 60 percent of the market moves are made from institutional investors. Much of the rest of that is from rich individuals.

Now the majority of them has panicked, and stocks are uneralistically low. If you buy stocks in a good company now and you wait a year or two when the rich pricks have returned, the stocks will have returned to its normal level. The result is that you have a nice percentage gain of perhaps 50 percent and the rich has lost a lot of cash.

I remember Lenin talking about capitalists selling the rope of which we hang them with. In this case we steal from them. Legally.

A lot of revolutionary leftists have a disdain, and rightly so, for the capitalist economy and the stock market. But what if the stock market is used against the capitalists, in advantage of the working people in situations like this?

I am not saying it is "morally" correct or incorrect. What do you think?

Discuss.

LOL, the stockmarket does not work that way and neither do investors.

If you want social change then the stockmarket is the last place to go to, not because it does not have enough 'ethical' investors, but because the rationale behind holding shares and investing in equities is something that falls outside the remit of ethics altogether.

[LunaSlave]

why not just organize so workers withhold their labour?

seems to me this would hit the root of the problem much more quickly and effectively, and the organizational experience gained by workers would be far more valuable than what would be gained playing around with the stock market.

[Charles Xavier]

Speculation is anti-communist

[A New Era]

They have the capital and propably also the know-how to pull such things of.

Generally speaking, the more money you have to allocate in the stock market, the worse off you are, ie the harder it is to earn good returns in terms of percentages. Superinvestors like Warren Buffett miss the days when he was sort of poor and had much less money to allocate in the stock market.



In a year or two the economy will be worse off than it is now

What do you base this opinion on?


you'll be stealing from the workers as any shareholder does.

Often yes, though not always.


LOL, the stockmarket does not work that way and neither do investors.

Please enlighten us how the stock market works? :rolleyes:


Speculation is anti-communist


There is a difference between speculating and investing, and besides, say a person has a difficult time making money as a worker and he is thrifty in the stock market. Would his survival would be anti communist when he is merely trying to survive?

Discuss.

[Enragé]

What do you base this opinion on?

common sense, and on people i've talked to who are pretty knowledgeable about the economy. I could be wrong ofcourse, but i wouldn't risk it.


Often yes, though not always

err, when wouldn't you be?


say a person has a difficult time making money as a worker and he is thrifty in the stock market

given that he has a difficult time making money, what would (s)he invest in the stock market?

[ROM]

?maybe? I once bought some technology stock which was founded by former Secretary of Defense Casper Wienberger.He had an inside adavantage because he knew that the military were going to change thier operational frequency's in
advance because they wre already compromised. They opened these frequency's to market and he sold them to Russia for wireless internet service etc-because of the vastness of the countries unpopulated areas. Russia took advantage of the opportunity and the stock tripled before I sold, The Rubel fell and the stock was later worthless but Russia kept the system and control it for the State and are using it today. In the end I made a few bucks and Russia now owns the entire system for free, operated by the State. Maybe this isn't srealing from the rich but it;s damn close, In the end it was technology for free for Russia. Wise choice by the USSR.
Just one Example of stock manipulation ,stealing as you may say from the Rich to Aid
the people in general. Just an Example'

[Enragé]

?maybe? I once bought some technology stock which was founded by former Secretary of Defense Casper Wienberger.He had an inside adavantage because he knew that the military were going to change thier operational frequency's in
advance because they wre already compromised. They opened these frequency's to market and he sold them to Russia for wireless internet service etc-because of the vastness of the countries unpopulated areas. Russia took advantage of the opportunity and the stock tripled before I sold, The Rubel fell and the stock was later worthless but Russia kept the system and control it for the State and are using it today. In the end I made a few bucks and Russia now owns the entire system for free, operated by the State. Maybe this isn't srealing from the rich but it;s damn close, In the end it was technology for free for Russia. Wise choice by the USSR.
Just one Example of stock manipulation ,stealing as you may say from the Rich to Aid
the people in general. Just an Example'

How did you steal from the rich in this example?

Also, what about those who developed and operate(d) the technology (i.e the workers)? Did they see any of that money?

[A New Era]

common sense, and on people i've talked to who are pretty knowledgeable about the economy. I could be wrong ofcourse, but i wouldn't risk it.Few people, if any, can know with certainity where the economy will be in five or twelve months, or five or twelve years, and no one can ever know where the stock market will be in the same period. Forecasts are often more wrong than they are correct.


err, when wouldn't you be?You will not be stealing from workers but from speculators of the stock market if you do not receive dividends and just capitalize on the fear of the stock market.

And some companies, even very large ones, do not hire workers at all and consist of just a few managers who for instance own brands that other companies hire.


given that he has a difficult time making money, what would (s)he invest in the stock market?

Small savings.

In some countries the state offer interest rate free student loans to... Well, students. That money could be used, or as mentioned above, small savings.

[Enragé]

Few people, if any, can know with certainity where the economy will be in five or twelve months, or five or twelve years, and no one can ever know where the stock market will be in the same period. Forecasts are often more wrong than they are correct.

True, as i said i could be wrong. Though, in their defense, the people i've been talking to have been right pretty much 100% of the time over the last few months in the predictions they made.


You will not be stealing from workers but from speculators of the stock market if you do not receive dividends and just capitalize on the fear of the stock market.


Err, well, how do you do that? I thought with holding shares comes recieving dividends. Even if it doesn't holding shares isnt something i'd be up for doing.


And some companies, even very large ones, do not hire workers at all and consist of just a few managers who for instance own brands that other companies hire.

And so exploit the workers of those other companies. Where do you think wealth comes from? Does it fall from the sky you think?

also you haven't responded to my response to your argument regarding the worker who'd survive by investing in stocks.

[A New Era]

Err, well, how do you do that? I thought with holding shares comes recieving dividends.It depends on the company. Some companies issue dividends, others do not.


And so exploit the workers of those other companies. Where do you think wealth comes from? Does it fall from the sky you think?

If you own a share of such a company with no workers... That company would sell its brands or services to another company. That company would probably hire workers, but not the company you invest in. If that leasing company would exploit workers, it would be incredibly indirect.

And anyways, if you do not receive dividends, the money you will make will be from buying and selling securities, and not from workers itself. If dividends was involved, then you could perfectly fine argue otherwise, but not if dividends are not issued.


also you haven't responded to my response to your argument regarding the worker who'd survive by investing in stocks. I think I did in the previous post? Or do you feel I didnt answer the question properly?

[cyu]

Even if I weren't a leftist and just your average financial advisor, there's no way I'd advocate you getting into the market at this point in time (assuming I really had your best interest in mind).

The stock market is basically a pyramid scheme. While it does have some basis in real value, the big bucks are mainly made when there's a bubble - the people who got in early get the money from those who got in late (just like a pyramid scheme). If you see a bubble in tech stocks, get into tech stocks. If you see a bubble in oil, get into oil. If you see a bubble in real estate, get into real estate.

It's not "buy low, sell high" - it's "buy high, sell higher".

So what about the current situation? Sure you can make more money when you jump in at the very bottom, but why risk it when you have no idea where the bottom is? If I were your advisor, I'd tell you to wait until you were sure a bubble was forming again before getting in. That would mean prices rising steadily for at least 6 months, if not more.

Of course, if everybody followed this advice, then nobody would be jumping into the market right now. If nobody starts the bubble, then the market stays down. Just more of an indication of the pyramid scheme aspects of it all.

[A New Era]

I didnt think I would end up discussing the more technical aspects of investing, but okay. But I think parts of it might give some insight to Wall Street.


Even if I weren't a leftist and just your average financial advisor, there's no way I'd advocate you getting into the market at this point in time (assuming I really had your best interest in mind).Dont get me wrong, but a lot of financial advisors, along with stockbrokers, are crap anyways. Like a lot of people in the capitalist financial system. A lot of stockbrokers who also are financial "advisors" give you expensive tips and create a false argument for buying (which they make money on) a company they know is crap. Then the stock sinks a lot and then they advise you to sell (which they make money on) and then buy another one (which they make money on). This process until you are broke or can get more money shipped into your brokerage account.

The point? Financial advisors can sometimes be a good thing, but not always are they in your best interest.

The best investors out there with great track record, like Warren Buffett, Charlie Munger and Walter Schloss love recessions, because almost all companies are dirt cheap, even companies that grow a lot. And they dont trust Wall Street. Wall Street loves bubbles, because bubbles means a lot of buying and selling. And Wall Street makes money on buying and selling.

Wall Street wants you to change your stocks as often as possible. That means they will get money and you will lose money, because every buy and sell costs money. They do not want you to pick a company and hold it for 20 years. By getting people to trade (ie buying and selling a lot) Wall Street gets fat on your expensive.

They also create a lot of financial instruments for people to bet on so that Wall Street can get rich. In general, in the modern world, speculation and trading is a product of Wall Street and in other nations, other financial centres where there are stockbrokers and brokerage firms.


If you see a bubble in tech stocks, get into tech stocks. If you see a bubble in oil, get into oil. If you see a bubble in real estate, get into real estate.That is normally recipe for disaster.


It's not "buy low, sell high" - it's "buy high, sell higher".
Every bubble has a pin, and when you buy overpriced companies you can get a big jab in your face if you are in the process where the bubble meets the pin.

You should be happy that you do not touch stocks, because thoughts like that is what gets people burned. Sure, it could work well, even very well, in the short run. But its like driving ten times the speed limit and expect it to go right. You get to your destination ten times faster, but eventually you will crash and get hurt.

Wall Street and their brokers (which literally are capitalist parasites) can make you quick and massive gains but also make you lose money quickly and massively.


Sure you can make more money when you jump in at the very bottom, but why risk it when you have no idea where the bottom is? There is no risk. If you buy a solid company at a good price, you are in good hands.


If I were your advisor, I'd tell you to wait until you were sure a bubble was forming again before getting in.Almost all of those great investors, Warren Buffett, Charlie Munger, Mohnish Pabrai, Walter Schloss, Seth Klarman etc. would be disagreing with that train of thought. Because they never speculate but with patience use the stock market to get rich, slowly, and over time and a lot of patience, over decades, make a lot of money.

Its not that important to know the stock market very well if you do not want to invest in stocks (which most leftists would be pulled off by anyways), but a lot of working people have been burned by speculation like mentioned above.

[cop an Attitude]

i'm sorry but that sounds redicoulsy hypocrital. Investing is a capitalist move and in order to invest you must already have some disposable income. The poor will still be left out and the only ones that could have any gain would be the people who have enough money to invest, the upper middle class. If your a middle class citzen and make money off of wall street in this fashion then all you did was just take cash from the rich and put it into your pocket. With this method it is even possible to make a killing and become one of them. If you really follow this then you would just end up with a large upper middle class and a lower class. If you want change, working within the stock market will not work. The best bet would just be to try to make the market crash and not fuel it.

[A New Era]

and in order to invest you must already have some disposable income.

Not neccesarily that much. With a good discount broker you can invest with as little as a 1000 dollars or less. Even under 100 dollars, provided the discount broker is really cheap.


The poor will still be left out and the only ones that could have any gain would be the people who have enough money to invest, the upper middle class.Not true at all. And if you are poor, even better if you invest. Because if you hold investments over long periods of time and you let it compound, you will be better off. Most likely not rich, but you will have a more stable financial future.

We could even mention Warren Buffett. He came from a poor family. So poor that his mother had to skip meals so that their children would get enough food. When he was in his early 20s he was pretty poor but he still had investments going. Not much, but much wasnt needed either.

I am not an American, but large parts of the American working class have IRAs (individual retirement accounts) which either consist of bonds or stocks, right?

So no, your argument is normally not true.


If your a middle class citzen and make money off of wall street in this fashion then all you did was just take cash from the rich and put it into your pocket.Yes, taking money from the rich... That sounds wonderful doesnt it?


With this method it is even possible to make a killing and become one of them.Possibly. But you will be better off.

See, here is the thing. Most communists in this world are communist (or anarchist or socialist) because they have to, not because they want to. They are not "lifestyleists". Their ideological beliefs are a symptom of a curse. And that curse is class society.

Now most of those communists would love to see the capitalist system being replaced by the dictatorship of the proletariat, or a truly classless society, but they wouldnt mind a few extra bucks either.

If you have a choice, if you want to abstain from getting extra cash, your motives might be humble and altruistic in a way, but arent you just a lifestyleist?



The best bet would just be to try to make the market crash and not fuel it.True, I agree, but you are not really fueling it. For a working class person who might only buy 30 or 50 or 100 shares, it wont move the market one bit. Those who move the market are the large institutional investors or the extremely rich who buy 50,000 shares at a time.


If you want change, working within the stock market will not work.That is entirely correct.

And yet shoplifting will not change the system either, but it can be fun and financially rewarding. We still shoplift. Both because we like the thrill, we like the prospect of getting things for free, and we like jabbing the rich in the face.

[cyu]

If you see a bubble in tech stocks, get into tech stocks. If you see a bubble in oil, get into oil. If you see a bubble in real estate, get into real estate.
That is normally recipe for disaster.

Of course it is. I'm not saying it's not. Just look at the current mess. Just as I'm not arguing in favor of pyramid schemes, I would say if you wanted to use a pyramid scheme in your favor, then just make sure you get in on the pyramid scheme early, and not late.

I don't think a casino economy is a good thing, but if you are settling for a casino economy, then there are things you can do to make money off it. Not that any of the stuff you do will be valuable to society, but by settling for a casino economy, you've pretty much already conceded that.



If you buy a solid company at a good price, you are in good hands.



How about a company with excellent union busting skills or excellent skills at avoiding environment / consumer protection lawsuits? Very good for the investor - not so good for humanity.



For a working class person who might only buy 30 or 50 or 100 shares, it wont move the market one bit.


Yes, but you're posting here and hoping to influence others. Would you advocate every "working class person" do this? If so, then it will definitely move the market and save capitalism and the capitalists, rather than bury it.