If it had gone the other way it would have been overturned probably pretty quickly. It doesn't make sense for owners of something to not be in control of it.

> It doesn't make sense for owners of something to not be in control of it.

When I say this about my phone, I get told that It was my choice to buy it.

I would really like to have the same set of principles applied consistently to ownership of end product and ownership of the stock.

Currently some people enjoy greater rights for no reason other than privilidge.

i don’t find it at all unbelievable. i think the judgement is pretty spot on:

> A business corporation is organized and carried on primarily for the profit of the stockholders. The powers of the directors are to be employed for that end. The discretion of directors is to be exercised in the choice of means to attain that end, and does not extend to a change in the end itself, to the reduction of profits, or to the non-distribution of profits among stockholders in order to devote them to other purposes…

You never know, it’s the law of unintended consequences. Maybe it would’ve caused people to walk away from stocks as an investment. Maybe people would’ve put all their money in real estate instead. Kind of staggering if you think about how much worse the whole housing crisis could be.

Devil's advocate; maybe they would invest more into small businesses instead of housing.

Small businesses are hard. I can’t tell you how many restaurants moved in (and then went out of business within a year) to the plaza next to the university during my degree. The landlords who own that plaza have remained the same for decades. They don’t care if any of the businesses survive. They have tenants lined up around the block, just waiting to pay big rents.

What's the failure rate in small- vs mid- and large-sized companies? Is it really any different?

Restaurants have extremely high failure rates! Large sized companies are rock solid by comparison.

you would invest in a fund, not individual small companies.