Argumemts about rationality and arbitrage are good for quantitative finance books and the make-believe worlds they construct. They dont define the limits of what can actually happen in human economies.
Negative electric rates could be used to increase load on a grid that would otherwise be generating too much electricity.
Is there any kind of liability that comes with owning stock in a company? I don’t see any motivation to ever pay for somebody to take ownership of your stock.
I’m not aware of a recent example of public company shareholders being held liable, but it’s only one Supreme Court decision away.
I can imagine a circumstance where people want to get rid of their stocks because of reputational reasons.
People downvoting can't differentiate what is likely to happen from what is possible to happen.
No there are not. As a shareholder you cannot be held accountable for losses of the company you're holding the shares of. In the worst case, your share becomes worthless.
This is true. This could also change on the whim of a government. I don't think that's likely, but in a revolution? Who can say.
you frantically try to sell but there are no buyers at any positive price
finally a dodgy person shows up and is willing to "relieve" you of your stock, but at a price
While stocks have limited liability, there can still be costs associated with holding them which could theoretically drive their prices negative.
clearly the company behind that stock is not viable if that sentiment persist but the negative market price is theoretically possible
the question is whether one can rationalize what can happen before it does.
that requires understanding in depth what the system is and how it might behave in extremes
open any quantitative finance book older than a few years and it will tell you that interest rates cannot go negative because... blah blah... some cash arbitrage
it turns out that arbitrage is not implementable...