decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more...
decoration
For layout only
Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines
ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books
Your contributions keep Groklaw going.
To donate to Groklaw 2.0:

Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.


Contact PJ

Click here to email PJ. You won't find me on Facebook Donate Paypal


User Functions

Username:

Password:

Don't have an account yet? Sign up as a New User

No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.


What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments


Sponsors

Hosting:
hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster
but that's as it should be. | 458 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
but that's as it should be.
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
tax incentive.

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
money.

Cheers,
Wol

[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]

Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )