Earlier quoted context omitted.
>And it really is as simple as that. It really isn't, because your "simple" comparison is bunk. For one, it's measuring stock vs flow. Stock prices measure stock, eg. the size of a piggy bank. Salaries measure flow, eg. your annual salary. Directly comparing the two results is meaningless. It's easy to demonstrate this with the piggy bank example. If your salary was 50k/year, you saved 5k/year, then your piggy bank w…
People who have less flow and no stock can increase their savings less than those with stock and the same flow. Many are not able to save at all. Those without stock receive only flow. Those with stock receive both flow and stock, and those with more stock profit more from rising stock. So the relationship between stock and “flow” is absolutely relevant if we want to understand wealth inequality, because the working…
If they have savings they can buy stock. Nobody is sentenced to have savings only.
> with the ownership class accruing profit that they receive by virtue of ownership.
Anyone can buy stock with less than $100 and thereby join the ownership class.