I've been watching the democratic debates as time allows lately, and though I find many positions I agree with and many others I do not, one seems confusing to me on a few levels. This could indicate I just misunderstand the context of these issues or meaning of the comments.
All of the major candidates have made various comments about those who are making money on 'wall street', which I interpret to mean those who own stocks or similar securities. In these comments they downplay any success of the market, and draw a contrast between those making money from market success and the 'average working American'.
I am aware that a large number of Americans do not own any stocks, mutual funds, or ETFs in personal accounts, but when you factor in 401ks and pensions it seems that the majority of Americans benefit from market success. But even if we assume that the majority of 'average working Americans' do not own stock, it seems obvious to me that the optimal solution is to encourage investing and not reduce profits from market success.
When stock ownership had barriers to entry (when I was a teenager I had to save up $2k to meet the TDA minimum) that created a serious class issue in my opinion. One I spoke out against strongly in my youth. But with the creation of services like Sharebuilder (that allowed you to invest $x weekly into fractional shares of any stock) or Robin Hood (that pushed every brokerage towards commission free trades) or Fidelity (who's credit card puts your cashback rewards into your investment account) it seems like even someone looking to invest the $10 they would have spent on fast food this week, or invest their spare change, or invest their free money, can do so easily. If there is a dearth of average working Americans enjoying returns from investing, it seems like this should be addressed as a public education issue to increase market participation.
However, when the politicians call out 'wall street' for making too much money, the crowds cheer and the commentators rarely disagree. Am I misunderstanding the target of the ire directed at 'Wall Street'? If not, why is there so much anger directed towards the market instead of effort being made to make the market work for more voters?