I’m saying if you make political decisions that hurt this or that company (or all of them) you actually hurt normal people rather than “the 1%” who supposedly pull all the strings.
The rising tide may not lift all boats but it lifts a lot of them.
The rising tide may not lift all boats but it lifts a lot of them.
* The 1% lose 50 cents
* The top 10% lose 90 cents.
* The bottom 90% lose 10 cents.
* The bottom 50% lose maybe 1-2 cents (and only some of them).
A net loss in the stock market that leads to a slight redistribution of that wealth would thus be better for the majority of pensioners.
As somebody who is primarily concerned with the welfare of the average joe you would support this, no?
Take Elon Musk. Even if you stole all of his money, he would start a new business, and people would back him with capital (whatever is left after the socialists stole it all) because of his background, and it would be successful, and he would be rich again.
You can’t stop talented people from making money unless you use guns.
The thing is - basically being a grifter is a great skill for making money for oneself and friends, but not actually a skill that helps society as a whole. And sure, advertising is a kind of expertise, but I don't think many people actually hold it in high regard as being worth a lot in terms of "deserving".