Are you trolling? You do realize why those shares are out there, right? Because your company needed money, and those people gave your company their money to get started, grow, hire more people, etc. Is that not bringing something of value?
The people that made the decision to sell the share still pay them selfs plenty of money, the shareholder’s reward is always coming from my paycheck, and I prefer it wouldn’t.
> the shareholder’s reward is always coming from my paycheck, and I prefer it wouldn’t.
This is just untrue for nearly all public companies. Most companies do not pay dividends... and a stock price going up and being sold by some investor literally has nothing to do with your company.
In fact, the stock price is largely irrelevant to your company. It's only relevant to those who own the stock.
> I would have preferred it if my company would have used less predatory means of getting that money, something like taking a loan or simply saving up part of the profits for any future investments.
Issuing stock is basically a loan that they never have to pay back if they do not want to. They can always buy back their stock if they no longer feel it's worth while being a public company.
FWIW, publicly traded companies have earned far more everyday working people comfortable retirements and more, than any single privately-held company.
I don’t despise hedge funds any more then I despise the stock market as a whole. We don’t need it. In fact I would argue that the existence of the stock market is actively harmful. I would go so far as stating the stock market is partially to blame for the current climate crisis. That is, if it wasn’t for the stock market, perhaps people would have acted sooner and prevented the climate emergency.
But fundamentally the stuck market is an idiotic idea. If we didn’t have stock markets, and someone pitch the idea of the first stock market here on HN, I don’t see how any businesses would subject them self to being bought and sold like that.