31–40 of 159 posts
882 B / 5.2 Million ~= $170k for every citizen of Norway. At 4% a year that's $6,800 each in annual income. Not bad!
Norway also has foreign debt of greater than $600B or 75% of the Global Fund.
882 B / 5.2 Million ~= $170k for every citizen of Norway. At 4% a year that's $6,800 each in annual income. Not bad!
Norway also has foreign debt of greater than $600B or 75% of the Global Fund.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Norway also has foreign debt of greater than $600B or 75% of the Global Fund.
Interesting. Why do they choose to keep this money in a sovereign wealth fund instead of choosing to pay off their debt?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Norway also has foreign debt of greater than $600B or 75% of the Global Fund.
Interesting. Why do they choose to keep this money in a sovereign wealth fund instead of choosing to pay off their debt?
882 B / 5.2 Million ~= $170k for every citizen of Norway. At 4% a year that's $6,800 each in annual income. Not bad!
Not bad, but not enough to cover the current levels of household debt in Norway, while a large portion of the debt is tied to mortgages the mortgage debt in the Norway have been increasing faster than income for quite a few years now. http://www.tradingeconomics.com/norway/households-debt-to-gd... This isn't a problem unique to Norway, Norway is just one of the biggest offenders, even in the Nordic countries there is…
Is there an index or ETF which follows this pension fund's investments?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The US would need 56 trillion to achieve the same level of per capita income
That's not a correct calculation, however the US has sovereign wealth funds which are usually administered on a state level and are usually orietned towards a specific funding goal (e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Permanent_School_Fund ) , as well as social security. The Social Security Trust Fund is a sovereign wealth fund it's not called like that due to historic convention, but it does operate like one. Overall…
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the SS Trust Fund has to exclusively buy Treasury bonds, while other sovereign funds make investments in the public stock markets, etc. Seems an important difference.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Norway also has foreign debt of greater than $600B or 75% of the Global Fund.
Many countries have very large foreign debts and nothing similar to the Global Fund, so Norway is still doing far better off, relatively speaking.
This is untrue, while a country might not have a single large SWF most of them have similar investments they are just distributed and managed differently. What you would be correct to say is that not many countries have a single large SWF which is primarily funded through the "nationalization" of the revenue from mineral rights.
Also please note that the "882B" are for both funds or if you like the Government Pension Fund of Norway Fund manages 2 discrete SWF's the petroleum revenue fund and the national insurance/tax revenue fund.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>> "...impossible..." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renaissance_Technologies "...famed for one of the best records in investing history, returning more than 35 percent annualized over a 20-year span..."
People have done it before. It has always turned out to be luck. Fantastic track record until they cease being lucky. So, cynicism and economic orthodoxy aside, that sounds like a really cool company. Has anyone tried just tossing a big dumb neural network on stock data and investigated whether it can make money? It sounds very obvious, but a quick googling returns little. But I guess the investment industry is prett…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's not a correct calculation, however the US has sovereign wealth funds which are usually administered on a state level and are usually orietned towards a specific funding goal (e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Permanent_School_Fund ) , as well as social security. The Social Security Trust Fund is a sovereign wealth fund it's not called like that due to historic convention, but it does operate like one. Overall…
>The Social Security Trust Fund is a sovereign wealth fund it's not called like that due to historic convention, but it does operate like one. Correct me if I'm wrong, but the SS Trust Fund has to exclusively buy Treasury bonds, while other sovereign funds make investments in the public stock markets, etc. Seems an important difference.
Overall the Social Security Act does disallow prefunding of the fund with marketable investments but one of the reasons it hasn't been changed it's because it's actually a pretty solid policy, and the world for the most part also doesn't want the US to drop a 3 trillion dollars investment pinata on the global markets.
Overall while there is a lot of clickbait that inflates the Norwegian one it is not a special case if you look at public fund rankings http://www.swfinstitute.org/fund-rankings/ you'll see that the US Federal Pensions Fund and the California Reteirment Fund combined are about equal to the Norwegian National Fund, and those are just 2 funds.
Overall pretty much every state in the US has multiple SWFs, public funds or similar investment ventures those are usually directed at a specific funding target e.g. retirement, public schools, universities, infrastructure etc. Each fund funds usually only a single thing and each fund has a different source of revenue and investment goals and regulations, for the most part based on how the US federal system works in general it's a better model. California isn't expected to fund education in Texas or pay for a new road in Wyoming and vise versa so each state runs their own funds to fund their own needs (there is some federal money involved) overall it's likely a slightly safer bet than putting all your eggs in a single basket.
This is also why you simply can't blow up the Norway's fund to US levels and say you'll need 56 trillion dollars because the US doesn't pay for everything from a single fund.
The Gross National Wealth of Norway including the fund is about 85% of the US one when adjusted per capita, Norway is rich, the fund is wonderful and very well performing but it's not some unheard of economic miracle that no one else is using ;)