Skip to main content

View Diary: EPIC WIN! Mittens gets DESTROYED by Occupier in New Hampshire "Corporations are ABUSIVE people!" (182 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  OK, a little fact checking has taken place (34+ / 0-)

    Per this, the upper 1% own 38.3% of all stocks and mutual funds, while the next 9% own 42.9%.

    From hereit appears that foreigners own about $4T of a total of $24T in equities.

    So rich foreigners get about 1/6th of the profits, while the 90% (not 99%) gets about 18%. Roughly equal.

    In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice; but in practice, there always is a difference. - Yogi Berra

    by blue aardvark on Thu Jan 05, 2012 at 03:16:06 PM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  Thanks (10+ / 0-)

      we need to use the exact facts -- they're on our side even if not as dramatically as we wish.

      The GOP: "You can always go to the Emergency Room."

      by Upper West on Thu Jan 05, 2012 at 03:58:16 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  From Yahoo Finance (8+ / 0-)
      The Top 5 Facts About America’s Richest 1%

      #3) The Top 1% Own Half of the Country's Stocks, Bonds and Mutual Funds: The Institute for Policy Studies illustrates this massive disparity in financial investment ownership, noting that the bottom 50% of Americans own only 0.5% of these investments.

      #5) The Top 1% Are Taking In More off the Nation's Income Than at Any Other Time Since the 1920s: Not only are the wealthiest 1% of Americans taking home a tremendous portion of the national income, but their share of this income is greater than at any other time since the Great Depression, as the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities illustrates in this chart, using 2007 data.

      Republicans take care of big money, for big money takes care of them ~ Will Rogers

      by Lefty Coaster on Thu Jan 05, 2012 at 06:14:34 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Well, the president did say (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      blue aardvark, RockyMtnLib

      that the passage of Citizens United would mean the introduction of foreign money into the American political system.

    •  I suggest you be a bit more careful (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      blue aardvark

      To avoid jumping to some very wrong conclusions.

      First, the commentary you linked to plays fast and lose with the numbers and draws some broad conclusions - not that they are necessarily wrong - but so poorly presented and argued it could never pass a serious editorial review let alone a peer review and the site appears to be a pitch for the author's books.

      Second, I think you are drawing some simple conclusions from aggregate data that does not lead where you are going.

      The data you quoted is aggregate securities market transactions without a breakdown of investor demographics. Rolled into that data are many classes of investors including individuals, corporations, institutional investors (such as pension funds, who are some of the largest investors), etc.

      Next, you are only factoring domestic verses foreign investments without factoring American investments in foreign corporations (where in many cases a very substantial amount of holdings and profits are sheltered), meaning, you are not really getting the total picture of what the 99% (or 90% if you like) actually own.

      Is this last point important? You better believe it is. Have you heard about American corporations that pay zero taxes yet are obviously profitable? One reason is these multinational corporations pile-up holdings in foreign subsidiaries and shelter corporations. Bingo.

      Economics is actually quite complicated and even economists with much greater expertise than you or I struggle to unwind the ball of string.

      So just as a friend I'd suggest not jumping to the conclusions you do because it is likely to be quite inaccurate and UNDERSTATED.

      What you might want to compare, however, is the difference  in cross-holdings between the US and other countries, they seldom balance but is often quite interesting, e.g., how much US investment in China verses Chinese investment in the US. Or US verses Cayman Islands.

      What about my Daughter's future?

      by koNko on Fri Jan 06, 2012 at 08:30:44 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Addenda (0+ / 0-)

        This chart provides a better breakdown of investment vehicle but not investor type (demographics).

        Note that a significant amount of the Treasuries held by these foreign investors underwrite US Government debt, and something likely to increase if the Administration does more stimulus spending.

        So this is an example of why I suggest not to play so lose with those numbers.

        What about my Daughter's future?

        by koNko on Fri Jan 06, 2012 at 08:38:20 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  Yet another example (0+ / 0-)

        This show US Purchases and Holdings of Foreign securities.

        Look at the trend of purchases (top table) and holdings (bottom table) and you will see exactly what I was talking about - a very big increase in foreign holdings by US investors over the past few years.

        That, my friend, is part of the 90% owned by the 1% (and others).

        Very complicated and hard to integrate without some work but even the top line numbers tell a story (in the general sense).

        What about my Daughter's future?

        by koNko on Fri Jan 06, 2012 at 08:45:14 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site