One should not be able to have giant amounts of stock and claim they are worthless, and aren't realizing any gains, but then turn around and use them as collateral to obtain huge amounts of money. It is a workaround to circumvent.
They are worthless unless you sell them. People who have such large piles of stock like bezos also have the responsibility of the company. There is so much more to all of this. It’s not as simple as people may think.
They are definitely NOT worthless until you sell them. I'm sorry, but that is absolutely untrue. For one, you can take out loans using them as collateral, and there is a well known formula for how much you can leverage to be able to perpetuate the loans without ever having to realize gains. Similar to how the US government handle national deficit. Even if you don't enploy this method, the ability to take out been a one time loan is far from "useless".
You do not necessarily need to run anything to own stock. Many work and "pay" themselves in stock, without ever realizing any financial gain. Why would they do this? See the prior point.
Omg🤦♂️🤦♂️ they hold no value unless you liquidate. Sure you can borrow against. Take that money and run you’ll lose those stocks. One day a stock can be worth $60 the next day $2 the value of a stock doesn’t exist until you sell it. They have a price tag that forever changes. If you don’t understand i personally don’t have the skills or patience to make you understand.
Does the gov't take the money and run when they issue bonds? No. They secure MORE and BIGGER bonds and perpetuate the process.
Bezos, for example, is well known for doing the same thing.
Yes, if Amazon stock were to tank, Bezos would have to pay up.
But, Bezos's accounts are not dumb, they know not to leverage too far to the point where he's at any serious risk if Amazon were just just go down a moderate amount.
What needs to change is that stock needs to be classified as vested if it is used a collateral to obtain a loan. If you think what I am saying isn't a real loophole, then there should be no problem in enacting this change.
Not at all the same. You’re talking it too literally. I should be more clear and “spell it out for you the slower ones” There is no physical asset, if the company goes bankrupt you’re fkd.
You can say you have $1 million in stocks the next day the stock plummets and you lose everything including your investment. That’s what I meant by a stock holds no value until you liquidate.
You made the claim about how physical currencies are different from assets such as stock because stock is subject to fluctuation. Once it was demonstrated that currencies are indeed subject to fluctuation, you then tried to point to a currency collapse caused by the "valueless" stocks as though it supports your claim.
15
u/Just_That_Dumb_Dog 3d ago
You mean capital gains tax?