> Non sense.

Really great contribution there, appreciate you sharing your thoughts and furthering the conversation.

What LogicSlave said is dead on accurate. Lowering the barrier to market entry has empowered millions of people to make their money work for them. Is some of it unhealthy? Absolutely. But not all gamblers are addicts, and its not all counter-productive either. The downside is that many are jumping in without fully understanding the risks, but in my opinion, the best way to learn the game is to play. Investopedia fantasy portfolios are a risk free way to try it out, but those have been around for decades and few people use it as an opportunity to learn the market.

There's nothing nonsense about it. These big firms have billions on the line and are interested in protecting it. WSB is a comedy outlet where active posters are at least in the high end of hobbyist traders, and they realized that some very greedy short selling left an opening for a decent buck. The vast majority of Robinhood's userbase couldn't even come close to explaining to you the mechanism through which this happened, let alone know when it's happening elsewhere and how to enter and exit. Nobody there has any delusions that they would be able to take on a large firm if the large firm was able to hit back.

Markets and the choices you make them in can be incredibly complex. Most people don't have the time and drive to deal with that, no matter how much you "democratize" the technology.

> Markets and the choices you make them in can be incredibly complex. Most people don't have the time and drive to deal with that, no matter how much you "democratize" the technology.

Fully agreed here. My point wasn't to say that people are taking on Wall St. and getting rich quick by developing a deep understanding the mechanizations of the market. But you don't have to understand a gamma squeeze to make money. In the past, brokers were a luxury only the wealthy could afford, and I think it's a great thing that that is no longer the case.

Also, I think it's overlooked how much of the banter on wallstreetbets does not necessarily dictate how participants invest. There are probably many people who read, joke, and occasionally make a risky investment, but who otherwise maintain a relatively conservative portfolio. Wallstreetbets is just the most entertaining way to casually pick up knowledge on the subject.

How so?