I don't think your numbers for corporate profit margin are fair.

At highest in my post, they were 13%. The circles in the image claim 65% - and that's with sources that I've provided. Where are the ones that say I'm incorrect?

Million dollar salaries to executives are still expenses.

Sure, but those almost certainly pale in comparison to the actual profit margins of the companies.

Dividends to shareholders are still expenses.

How is this a fair critique? As someone in another thread mentioned, the shareholders provided capital. They invested, seeing some promise in a company, and providing them with a capital catalyst earlier on for which the entire incentive for doing so was the prospect of securing a return that (hopefully) exceeds the initial input in real monetary value. Anyone can become a shareholder, and indeed, many are.

Ordinary workers buy cars in today's society - they can certainly afford the one-time expense needed to open a brokerage account and begin investing themselves, and for the most part, the stock market is a good investment. In many cases, companies will match a worker's purchase of the company stock up to a certain amount, thereby tying some of the worker's good fortunes, to those of the institution they add value for.

Why are multiple avenues of wealth management unethical?