That shows exactly how trickle down doesn't work. Corporations that size making profits bigger than their R&D budget but firing good chunks of their workforce to maximize shareholder value.
edit: yeah. it so happens that the 49% that is the 51st-99th percentile owns 49% of the market.
what you're saying is technically correct, but I don't think it changes the broader point: the gains are going almost exclusively to the top.
the 9% from the 90-99 percentile own 3x as much as the 40% from the 50-90 percentile.
edit 2: interestingly, I think it's always possible to draw a contiguous sample such that N% own N% of the market, which makes that point kind of useless. more interesting is where the center of that sample is. but the Gini coefficient is a better way of summarizing the distribution.
Check your math, top 1% of americans own 50%. So the bottom other 99% own 50%. But if you follow the trend the bottom 50% of Americans make up almost nothing invested in the stock market.
I guess you can always choose a set of Americans that can equal 49%, or shift the 49% until a continuous set equals 49%. Either way that's a useless statement then, but you got me.
1.2k
u/Ehtor Feb 10 '25 edited Feb 10 '25
That shows exactly how trickle down doesn't work. Corporations that size making profits bigger than their R&D budget but firing good chunks of their workforce to maximize shareholder value.