|Authored by: Wol on Tuesday, September 25 2012 @ 09:11 AM EDT|
|Why should it be?|
That's the problem with the markets - "power without responsibility".
Most shares are owned by fund managers, who are NOT held in check in any
reasonable way. And by pretty much forcing employees to put money into a managed
fund, we are badly distorting the market.
If we (a) made it easy for small savers to invest in individual shares, and (b)
forced big savers to do so, it would bring order to the market.
And if we're giving people a tax incentive to save, why shouldn't we have some
say in how they save!!! If they don't want to be told what to do, they forgo the
That's one of the reasons why Buffet et al do so well. Because they are a
*major* investor in many of the companies they invest in, those companies are
allowed to forward plan for the benefit of the shareholders.
As has been reported here on Groklaw, in too many cases funds move in,
strip-mine the company for assets leaving it horribly overgeared, then move on
leaving it to collapse. If people had to own shares directly, this would be far
less likely to happen.
And diversification is supposedly a good thing. How many people had ALL their
retirement plan in eg Enron? How many people today *think* they are diversified
across several funds, and will get a nasty shock to discover all the funds are
in the same shares? etc etc.
People should take responsibility for their decisions. With greater power comes
greater responsibility. And if you have a lot of money you should take
responsibility for the power that comes with it.
At the end of the day, if you get given a tax benefit, the state has the right
to have a say in what you do with it. Don't like the terms? Don't take the
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]