Less so if you follow the conclusion that recent sales of NFTs are the latest in a long line of mass adoption/mainstreaming of Blockchain tech and investments. From that perspective, it's more comparable to telling lifelong cash holders people to begin "investing" - there's certainly survivorship bias if you're looking at specific stocks/markets, but the thing to "buy into" is the ecosystem.
More than 5% of US households are entirely "unbanked," so literally cash only. [1]
I hope that fills in the knowledge gaps, so you can now engage with the content presented to you.
[0] https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2020/03/25/more-than-h...
[1] https://www.fdic.gov/analysis/household-survey/index.html
Just because someone doesn’t participate in the stock market doesn’t mean they’re “cash holders for life” - people do participate in real estate and accrue other assets. I would be stunned if those 48% of people were just stuffing cash in couch cushions. Not to mention why would we exclude 401(k)s?
57% of Americans don’t have a spare $500. [1] This sounds a suspicious amount like 48% + 5%. Give or take. The un-banked aren’t unbanked because bank accounts are inaccessible. They’ve got nothing to put in them.
They’re not “lifelong cash holders” they’re broke. Cash non-holders if you will.
So basically anyone with money invests it, and most people are hand-to-mouth broke.
What exactly are they saving or investing? This is a fundamental social policy issue and not something you’re going to solve with blockchain magic.
[1] https://www.cbsnews.com/news/most-americans-cant-afford-a-50...
wrt my comment about 401ks - they are often opt-out these days in part due to regulatory maneuvering on the part of the C-suite to protect their own benefits (e.g. safe harbor plans). Including folks with a 401k as "participants" in the stock market vastly overstates their actual investment activity and participation. More telling of actual participation is that 86% of households in the US don't own any individual stocks - most people with a 401k have it invested in whatever the default managed fund is.
Convincing some portion of that 86% to participate on their own in the stock market is the parallel I was drawing - those with resources to participate in a financial system, which has lower barriers to entry than they might anticipate.
"This is a fundamental social policy issue and not something you’re going to solve with blockchain magic."
This conclusion is so orthogonal to the literal content, and point of my original comment that I can only recommend you reread it and start from there.
For example, I grew up with close friends whose parents were Bulgarian immigrants. Their parents had "good" jobs (dba, generic in-house IT) and were not hurting from money, but: they did not purchase homes, did not invest their money, and literally kept stacks of cash in the home.
Your personal experience and values are not necessarily representative of every other group in your country.