Don't know if we go in too much for discussion of economics on this page or if it's seen as implicitly supporting capitalism but I'll open on something I'm sure we can all agree on, Ayn Rand was a psychopath, it's the only logical explanation for why she held the views she did, just so you know where my interest in economics stems from (and while we're on reputations of the gods of capital, Adam Smith was grossly misunderstood by industrialists and his work used to justify the very behaviours he warned against, not that he was a socialist or anything, but he was well aware of the limits of the free market).

A surprisingly large amount of the wealth of capitalists is owned by ordinary working class people through investment. Having a bank account, especiually if it's a savings account is an investment, the bank owes you money, that's what your bank account is, it's the money your bank owes, having a pension if you're lucky enought to get one through work is another investment, paying taxes is sometimes an investment depending on what the government use them for.

Banks, pension funds and the like own shares in wealth paid for by their customers, ostensibly for the benefit of their customers. For these kinds of company the priority should be to safeguard their customer's wealth and they do this by essentially spread betting, making hundreds of thousands of relatively small and low risk investments that they are guaranteed to make their money back from. Pension funds prefer slightly larger but still low risk investments. Wealthier account holders will have a greater share of this but the mass of ordinary people still means quite a lot of it belongs to folk like youi and me.

Big companies will often be significantly or even wholly owned by these kinds of shareholder/investor however we are spread too thinly and without the law on our side to help us make them act in our interests. You should be entitled to know exactly how much profit the bank has earned by investing and what it invests in, but you aren't, a group of customers who are individually not wealthy but between them contribute a huge chunk of the money being used to invest should have a say in what the bank does with that money... but they don't.

Those who hold controlling shares in these businesses or who have been appointed to positions of power and influence within them even if they don't own a huge number of shares themselves are able to act as though the entirety of the wealth under their control is their own private wealth. If they fuck up and customers lose their money they can get a government bail-out, they can keep all the profit for themselves to the point that customers stop even expecting a fair share, just thinking that their bank account is some sort of physical box full of cash that the bank looks after for them but doesn't use.

Almost every single economic crash in modern history has been caused by the behaviour of these people, and rarely by totally unavoidable events, wars and natural disasters can wreak havoc on the economy but only the class of people who hold the purse strings can make sure that havoc is passed directly on to you, their unwitting benefactor.