--- Doug Henwood <dhenwood at panix.com> wrote:
> It makes no difference whether one buys a share of
> stock 1) in an IPO
> that goes to a venture capitalist to cash out of
> his/her original
> investment, 2) in an IPO that goes to the company to
> buy equipment
> and hire noew staff, 3) from a retiree who uses the
> proceeds to pay
> for basic living expenses, 4) from a retiree who
> uses it to buy an
> SUV, 5) from a worker who uses the money to pay the
> kid's college
> tuition, 6) from a mutual fund manager who uses it
> to buy stock in
> another company (after shaving off 1% as a
> management fee)?
>
I would say this Doug: what is consistent and
necessary across the board in all of those
transactions is the same "market" for stocks. To the
extent that the value of the stock on the "market" is
driven by concerns antithetical to the worker (e.g.,
layoffs = profits), then any particpant providing
liquidity to the market is complicit. That does not
mean they are all capitalists, but that they all
benefit from the subjugation of workers to capital.
Just a thought.
eric
__________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? HotJobs - Search Thousands of New Jobs http://www.hotjobs.com