Could you please read the guidelines and then take care to comment civilly and substantively here?
Sure, obv won't apply to everyone and not everyone will agree, but seems like a reasonable sentiment that should at least be allowed to exist on the thread. Deleting it makes it seem like you're going for thought monoculture here.
This article is talking about the labor-shareholder profit split. It's absolutely relevant to point out the opportunities normal people have for becoming shareholders. stockpile.com let's you buy fractional shares (no longer need 2k to buy a share of amazon) for a 99 cent commission. You can get commission free ETF's from Schwab with a couple hundred $ account minimum.
Arguing that most workers are so strapped for cash that they literally cannot set aside a few bucks to invest -- and not only that -- that arguments even hinting at such a thing should not even be said out loud, is mind boggling.
I did.
"It shouldn't be your prerogative to see comments like that deleted because you disagree with them."
It absolutely should be everyone's prerogative here to see comments that disagree with reality deleted.
"It's absolutely relevant to point out the opportunities normal people have for becoming shareholders."
It is. The comment you're talking about did no such thing, and proceeded to blame poor people for not doing so based on a viewpoint that is completely divorced from reality.
"Arguing that most workers are so strapped for cash that they literally cannot set aside a few bucks to invest -- and not only that -- that arguments even hinting at such a thing should not even be said out loud, is mind boggling."
Arguments that have no basis in reality are not being done in good faith. Arguments like the one you're currently trying to defend exist solely to blame the poor for being poor, and to make the person feel smugly superior that they're not poor, even though the difference between them and the people they're complaining about is usually just dumb luck.