• WhatAmLemmy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    1 month ago

    Maybe our quality of life, livelihood, and retirements should not be bound to for-profit corporations?

    • dan@upvote.au
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      I agree, but unfortunately it’s a reality of a capitalist society that large private companies have a lot of the wealth, and so people set themselves up for retirement by owning a very tiny part of those companies.

      • NocturnalMorning@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 month ago

        Our retirement plans didn’t used to be tied to the stock market. So clearly there’s a way to have retirement plans that don’t tie the entire middle class to the success of every large corporation.

        • Disaster@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 month ago

          Well, there’s the Defined Benefit pension, however typically these pension funds then become institutional investors who seek to own shares in… you guessed it - stocks.

          At least those institutional investors are at least somewhat responsive to public pressure campaigns, as the state/local comptrollers are a politically appointed position.

          When you give your money to a 401k, the fund manager gets all the voting rights on the corporate board and is generally only accountable to “A reasonable rate of return”