Why aren't you a shareholder?
EDIT: sure - downvote me all you want. The question is still around.
EDIT: sure - downvote me all you want. The question is still around.
If you spend 50% of your income every year and stick the rest into the stock market and get 6% or so after inflation, you can sustain your spending without working after about twelve years.
If you spend 90% of your income every year and stick the rest into the stock market and get 6% or so after inflation, you can sustain your spending without working after about forty years.
It's all to say that being a shareholder matters in a hugely different way depending on your income. The disparity is worse when you look at how you can sustain higher volatility once you're already wealthy.
You're asking why can't people just be shareholders, but I think you're asking why it isn't enough that everyone can be shareholders. The reason is that being a shareholder only matters for those already making a ton.
There are more categories than the ultra rich and the incredibly poor. Stop that.
A lot of people can save 10-20% in stocks (such as via index funds.) A lot of people would rather not do this and still complain and point sticks at "the rich."
What can you do?
"The reason is that being a shareholder only matters for those already making a ton."
Is simply wrong and nonsensical. I don't make a ton, I am not ultra rich, it matters a lot to me to be a shareholder. It matters because that way I get to make money when "they" do.
Making $50k and spending $45k versus making $90k and spending $45k.
"Getting rich via investment depends on having income above a threshold which is set by the cost of living."
It's just not necessary to talk about getting rich. Getting rich is not relevant in this context. You made claims that are blatantly false that are part of the ever tiresome either rich or poor-dichotomy.
Most people can save money and invest that money in a way that makes them shareholders.