• /home/pineapplelover@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    21 hours ago

    Forgive my stupid brain but can you make this distinction clearer for me? I find they’re both kind of the same. You’re extracting the profits which is the cut of the results

    • db_null@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      20 hours ago

      I own some stock in my bank and a farm.

      For the farm, the stocks are intended for the farmer to invest in equipment or whatever they need. I work 4x a year at that farm (either packing cheese or cleaning something) and I pay for my milk, cheese and yogurt. The stocks are a great way for the farmer to get some cash for investments without involving banks. We’re about 100 people who own stock and do the quarterly shifts, but the main value is created by the farmers, their animals and the land. I’m not sure at which point these things become co-ops, but it seems similar.

      Regarding my bank, any stock I buy from them enables them to do stuff with 7x the amount of money I gave them. E.g. if I own 10k in stock, they can use it to finance a 70k loan for someone, I get some dividens (~2% usually) on that. Now does a bank create value this way? Probably not, but it’s better banking than the major names who have little transparency.

      For both, I can vote on important topics and future projects. For me this ensures my bank only invests sustainably and the milk and cheese I consume come from a farm that is nearby, organic and treats its animals well.

      edit: important to call out, these stocks are not publicly traded. Anyone can buy them from the bank/farm and the price per stock is set once or twice per year. So there is little speculating, and nobody can tweet about peace talks and commiting war crimes to drive the price up or down.