And if you invested in those index funds in the past 15 years, the return would be superb.
replyBanning these super-voting companies from 401(k) and index funds would have deprived many low- and middle-income people of those superb returns.
But hey less competition for the houses and stuff, right? We don't want more average people to enter the upper middle class.
The parent comment isn't about dual-class companies, it's about the fact that many shareholders effectively don't get a choice in how the votes for their shares are cost.
replyExactly.
replyI'm not against forbidding index/401K funds from investing in those companies since many people deem those companies as "bad".
Many average people don't actively manage their funds. Based on the past data, they would've missed out on the benefits, but that's okay.
Having shareholder voting power is more important for them, I suppose. While I disagree, I might have voted for the ban. Because this would've translated to less competition for house and stuff.