Message from @Green Syndicalism
Discord ID: 638381867808325632
so which one do you think a socially owned bank would perform the function of
think hard
You can exit from mutual funds anytime on payment of exit load except closed ended mutual fund and tax saving (ELSS) mutual funds
Sped
That depends on the goal of the socially owned bank
why the fuck would a normie be able to invest their money better than a specialist investor
and what 'socially owned' really means
hint: they wouldnt
<:thisgay:588652395136024586>
not always about BETTER there are sometimes other reasons for being in a mutual fund than just doing it yourself, including friction, etc
Gotem
youve missed the point again
and mutual funds aren't the only kind of 'funds'
whats it like to constantly have points whooshing past your head
but regardless, this is only half the reason for socially owned banks which you cannot withdraw from
theres plenty of other reasons which your dumb fucking mind hasnt thought about yet
You haven't described any reason to have a 'social bank' yet
and when you are talking about a bank you are makign some assumptions about the monetary system, etc, which is a whole other can of worms
a) specialist investors perform better than clueless normies in markets
b) socially owned banks can have wider mandates than typical corporate mandates, such as regional development goals, a focus on restoring environment, etc
c) this isnt private, its social. its meant to include the whole of society mostly equally in the process of wealth accumulation as the economy grows
if there are some social welfare goals, the honest way to fund it is direct monetization
stop whitewashing
socially owned banks are clearly a way for these things to be achieved
and its broader than just a question of "welfare"
if the goal is to gamble on this replica stock market in order to make returns in order ot finance these projects?
ESPECIALLY under a scenario like that, i would not want any sort of 'specialist investor' who thinks he knows this is a good idea
wut
a specialist investor with multiple mandates is absolutely better than a dumb idiot buying shares of amazon
(because he doesnt know any better)
a specialist investors, if he is a real professional, will understand markets are about edge and not 'picking winners', and should be very hestitate to get public money involved in any of this. see calsters, calpers, etc and all their issues
its not about edge when you have multiple mandates
governments playing catchup because they refused to do things the honest way and sock it away
you are so fucking dense
also he literally has a public mandate to get money involved
'edge' is how we make our money on the markets, unless we are playing the venture capital style game, which is how some of those california funds got in trouble
and hes going to earn a % of the gains
so he has plenty of incentive to invest public money
what the fuck are you not understanding about multiple mandates
do you know what a fucking mandate is
a better way(much better way) to invest public money is just to spend the money on the projects the public wants
yes, that can be a mandate!