United States | News & Politics

3349 readers

568 users here now

Welcome to !usa@midwest.social, where you can share and converse about the different things happening all over/about the United States.

If you’re interested in participating, please subscribe.

Rules

Be respectful and civil. No racism/bigotry/hateful speech.

No memes.

Post news related to the United States.

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

simsymbiote@midwest.social

Type1@midwest.social

exposingfash@midwest.social

171

Disney Hit With Legal Salvo From Shareholders Over Jimmy Kimmel Suspension (www.hollywoodreporter.com)

submitted 5 days ago by cm0002@piefed.social to c/usa@midwest.social

23 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] lurch@sh.itjust.works 11 points 4 days ago (2 children)

Everyone can hold shares. Some shares are like <2€ per piece. It's a group far too big to have a distinct characteristic.

[–] DancingBear@midwest.social 11 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (1 children)

I disagree. One characteristic of shareholders is that they are not a part of the 60% poorest Americans.

Also. The wealthiest 10% of Americans own 87% of all the stock.

All the the middle and upper class and upper upper class own the other 13% lol

There is an 87% chance that the stockholder is in the top 10% of wealth in the country.

[–] lurch@sh.itjust.works 1 points 4 days ago (1 children)

that may well be, but you can be poor and still own shares. like if you have lots of debt, but are slowly paying it back and you have them from before that.

also, like i mentioned earlier, there are really cheap ones, for example KYG8701T1388 is cheaper than a lottery ticket at the moment (but brokers have varying fees and there may be taxes).

[–] DancingBear@midwest.social 1 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

Absolutely, but your anecdote doesn’t change the facts.

Owning stock absolutely gives you a defining characteristic, that’s all I was responding to, don’t have anything against folks who own stock or anything but to suggest that it’s far too big a group to have any defining characteristics is a little absurd…

If you took all of the stocks in existence and picked one randomly, there is literally an 87% chance that the owner of that stock is in the top 10% of wealth ownership in the country, USA I mean….

Our family owns some stocks I guess but we are not in the top 10 percent but my anecdote doesn’t change the facts either…

[–] Gold_E_Lox@lemmy.dbzer0.com 5 points 4 days ago (2 children)

riiight, no distinct characteristic...

thats why the top five share holders (23% altogether) are investment banks and capital management funds.

totally nothing distinct going on

[–] rikudou@lemmings.world 5 points 4 days ago (1 children)

I think the person you're replying to meant there's no distinct characteristic for all shareholders.

[–] lurch@sh.itjust.works 1 points 4 days ago (1 children)

yeah, i think the only thing one can say with certainty is that they own shares.

did they buy them to get a vote in company decisions? did they buy them to get dividends? did they buy to later sell them for more? who knows.

[–] DancingBear@midwest.social 2 points 4 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

There is an 87% chance that any random stockholder is in the top 10% of wealth in the country.

Edit: If you divided all the stocks by issue number and put them in a basket, chose one randomly, there is an 87% chance that that specific stock belongs to someone in the top 10% of wealth in the country.

I get it, you might have some stock, your family members might have retirement accounts based on stocks.

This still does not change my FACT above.

[–] boonhet@sopuli.xyz 1 points 3 days ago

Lol you and I are probably part of those top 5.

There's a reason those companies are measured by "Assets Under Management". It's not their own assets.