WWGWD
Active member
- Joined
- Sep 26, 2012
- Messages
- 425
- Reaction score
- 127
- Location
- Austin, TX
- Gender
- Female
- Political Leaning
- Progressive
Not to me. You invest at your own risk. Besides, what you described is more akin to putting the cart before the horse.
I still would not. There still needs to be a "premium" of sorts. That's how money market tools work. It's the same reasoning behind why some people will invest in high-yield (junk) bonds.
Capital gains get a bad reputation because all people see are these fat cat hedge fund managers. For every one of those, there are a thousand middle to upper-middle class people gambling with their money. I'm not about to penalize the vast majority for the actions of a tiny minority.
I would agree with you, if we were talking about a new and untested system. However we aren't. I think there have been plenty of patterns that have emerged from market trends over the years, and those patterns can be used to support certain presidence. If you are going to calculate for certain risk, what's wrong with calculating that risk and determining what is a reasonable way to ensure the entire coutries economy does fail with that tiny minority?
If it weren't for the fact that trading on the stock market, effects people who have never even thought about investing, I would say, do what you want. It's one of those things now though, that effects everyone from top to bottom. The failure of such, has required the safety net of the taxpayers already. So why not use that recent history to better prepare for the next inevitable bubble?