Basically, Wall Street created a "You're locked in here with me" scenario for the entire American public. Everyone has to throw their money at some speculative asset category, typically stocks, to have a meaningful chance of beating inflation. (Yeah, real estate, fine art, and Yu-gi-oh cards exist, but they're far less fungible and liquid at the scales required)
This creates a political feedback loop: the S&P 500 must keep going up in perpetuity because we're all afraid of being 82 years old and in failing health but having to still flip burgers to afford our medication. Ergo, policies like super-low interest rates that make alternatives like bonds ever less compelling and focus ever more interest in an asset bubble.
TBH, I feel like there's a real opportunity to ask "why are we investing."
For people forced into the market for things like retirement and educational savings, maybe we need some sort of contribution-based scheme, rather than a market-price-based one. Sign up now, contribute an agreed-upon sum for N years, and you get your retirement condo/kid's tuition at Harvard prepaid in 2044. Make the institutions-- the ones with teams of actuaries on staff and the financial backstop to handle it-- eat the inflation risk instead of the individual with a net worth of $650 on a good day.
That sort of program could remove a lot of the "mere mortals who stand to lose everything" from the market. The political benefit is then it returns Wall Street to being a casino for the rich and distasteful, and makes it much easier to propose regulation or managed-growth policies. When not everyone is chained to the market through a 401(k), the threats of a market tank don't bite quite as hard.
Basically, Wall Street created a "You're locked in here with me" scenario for the entire American public. Everyone has to throw their money at some speculative asset category, typically stocks, to have a meaningful chance of beating inflation. (Yeah, real estate, fine art, and Yu-gi-oh cards exist, but they're far less fungible and liquid at the scales required)
This creates a political feedback loop: the S&P 500 must keep going up in perpetuity because we're all afraid of being 82 years old and in failing health but having to still flip burgers to afford our medication. Ergo, policies like super-low interest rates that make alternatives like bonds ever less compelling and focus ever more interest in an asset bubble.
TBH, I feel like there's a real opportunity to ask "why are we investing."
For people forced into the market for things like retirement and educational savings, maybe we need some sort of contribution-based scheme, rather than a market-price-based one. Sign up now, contribute an agreed-upon sum for N years, and you get your retirement condo/kid's tuition at Harvard prepaid in 2044. Make the institutions-- the ones with teams of actuaries on staff and the financial backstop to handle it-- eat the inflation risk instead of the individual with a net worth of $650 on a good day.
That sort of program could remove a lot of the "mere mortals who stand to lose everything" from the market. The political benefit is then it returns Wall Street to being a casino for the rich and distasteful, and makes it much easier to propose regulation or managed-growth policies. When not everyone is chained to the market through a 401(k), the threats of a market tank don't bite quite as hard.