Danish pension fund divesting US Treasuries • Hacker News Board

Re: Danish pension fund divesting US Treasuries

#201

Post by jimnotgym » Tue, Jan 20, 2026, 4:23 PM UTC

epolanski wrote: post #113

alphazard wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's symbolism. It's not. This is where the financial rubber meets the road, actions have consequences, and the rest of the world is looking at the US as increasingly unlikely to pay above inflation on its debts. The people managing the pension funds (if they are acting in good faith) really want to generate yield, and really want to preserve capital for the Danish people. They don't want to symbolically do those t…

There's no chance US will default on its debts, all it has to do is to print more money. Inflation may spirale, but it's going to be a US citizens problems (as well as US bond holders) in terms of inflation and budget cuts.

If the US invades Greenland, and is at war with Denmark, will it still pay its debts to a Dane?

Re: Danish pension fund divesting US Treasuries

#202

Post by jacquesm » Tue, Jan 20, 2026, 4:23 PM UTC

rjzzleep wrote: post #184

alphazard wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's symbolism. It's not. This is where the financial rubber meets the road, actions have consequences, and the rest of the world is looking at the US as increasingly unlikely to pay above inflation on its debts. The people managing the pension funds (if they are acting in good faith) really want to generate yield, and really want to preserve capital for the Danish people. They don't want to symbolically do those t…

The EU threw all its baskets into a war it didn't need to fight, destroyed its energy independence, it's weapons, it's airdefense and huge parts of its air force. I don't think they have a lot of cards to play. There an interesting analysis on whether the EUs threats on financial markets actually bear any meaning here: https://x.com/Kathleen_Tyson_/status/2013314168250675456 Edit: March 2022 peace deal that Boris Joh…

What nonsense. We have plenty of cards to play and if 'having cards to play' is what stood between the USA and the relationship we had - or rather that we thought we had - for the last 70 years stood for something then that should not have been a factor in the first place.

This whole thing is due to one country not playing by the rulebook because they think they're big enough to fuck over the world. Guess what? No single country is big enough for that. Trump is way out of his depth when it comes to statesmanship and has replaced it with brinkmanship, that's not a valid substitute unless what you're looking for a a disaster.

Re: Danish pension fund divesting US Treasuries

#203

Post by Supermancho » Tue, Jan 20, 2026, 4:23 PM UTC

petcat wrote: post #116

fooster wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Chinese are Canadian adversaries mostly because of the US. The US more or less forced Canada to hold Meng Wanzhou, which caused a huge rise in diplomatic tensions and cost Canada billions. Some thanks we got for that.

Doesn't China own most of the real estate in Canada. Did USA cause that

For a time there was a large amount of Chinese money fleeing to Canada and the US, buying up coastland and other high value residential. Circa 2018ish, that reversed due to Xi Ping's mandates. Near Seattle, the Bellevue luxury market bottom fell out over a month long period. AFAIK, it never fully returned to the hey day levels of spending.

Re: Danish pension fund divesting US Treasuries

#204

Post by cuu508 » Tue, Jan 20, 2026, 4:23 PM UTC

rjzzleep wrote: post #184

alphazard wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's symbolism. It's not. This is where the financial rubber meets the road, actions have consequences, and the rest of the world is looking at the US as increasingly unlikely to pay above inflation on its debts. The people managing the pension funds (if they are acting in good faith) really want to generate yield, and really want to preserve capital for the Danish people. They don't want to symbolically do those t…

The EU threw all its baskets into a war it didn't need to fight, destroyed its energy independence, it's weapons, it's airdefense and huge parts of its air force. I don't think they have a lot of cards to play. There an interesting analysis on whether the EUs threats on financial markets actually bear any meaning here: https://x.com/Kathleen_Tyson_/status/2013314168250675456 Edit: March 2022 peace deal that Boris Joh…

What war are you referring to?

Re: Danish pension fund divesting US Treasuries

#205

Post by alephnerd » Tue, Jan 20, 2026, 4:24 PM UTC

moogly wrote: post #187

alephnerd wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The EU can't mend ties with China without giving up on Ukraine as China's FM Wang Yi has stated [0] on multiple occasions [1]. Additionally, in the Chinese foreign policy space, the EU is viewed as weak [2], and largely through the lense of the US-China rivalry (which is how the US views the EU as well now). [0] - https://www.scmp.com/news/china/diplomacy/article/3316875/ch... [1] - https://www.reuters.com/world/chin…

Well then us Europeans are fucked regardless I guess. > Beijing did not want to see a Russian loss in Ukraine because it feared the United States would then shift its whole focus to Beijing How does this statement make sense though? I don't see the A -> B. The US pretty clearly does not want to see a Russian loss either, and seems more fine with Ukraine losing. It should depends on how much the US wants Europe? If th…

> How does this statement make sense though? I don't see the A -> B. The US pretty clearly does not want to see a Russian loss either, and seems more fine with Ukraine losing.

Despite Trump, the US (and rivals of China like South Korea and Japan) have continued to supply the Ukrainian armed forces and their allies like Poland and Romania.

A protracted Russia-Ukraine War with the balance of power in favor of Russia means the US, SK, and JP remain bogged supplying Ukraine and it's allies like Poland and Romania, instead of diverting stock to the Asian front.

Additionally, China and Russia are increasingly collaborating to respond against Japan should a conflict occur [0] and North Korea is already an active participant in the Russia-Ukraine War.

> It should depends on how much the US wants Europe?

The issue is both the US and China view the EU as a regional power that can be pushed around - not as an entity that can retain strategic autonomy.

This is the crux of the EU's current diplomatic malaise - neither the US nor China view the EU as an equal, but rather, as a junior partner.

> Perhaps I'm just really daft

I won't say daft, but the issue is Europeans view themselves as deserving of being on the same table as the Americans and Chinese. Neither the Americans or Chinese see it that way now.

In order for the EU to build strategic autonomy, some very painful steps need to be taken which simply aren't being taken (as Draghi pessimistically pointed out a couple months ago) [1].

Additionally, periphery regions of the EU have increasingly started operating independently of the rest of the EU - as with China's CSPs with Spain [2] and Hungary [3]; Israel+India's defense alliances with Greece [4] and Cyprus [5] against Turkiye; and Poland coming out against committing resources to defend Greenland [6] - so a unified EU response is steadily degrading as members decide to take defense matters into their own hands.

Basically, if a naval standoff between Greece and Turkiye was to arise in the next 6 months in the Aegean Sea, would the rest of the EU sanction Turkiye (and thus lose a major defense partner in Ukraine [7][8][9] and the Baltics [10]) or ignore Turkiye (and thus destroy the EU and NATO defense commitment).

[0] - https://www.reuters.com/world/china/china-russia-discuss-ukr...

[1] - https://www.france24.com/en/tv-shows/business/20250916-mario...

[2] - http://en.cppcc.gov.cn/2025-11/13/c_1140641.htm

[3] - https://english.www.gov.cn/news/202405/10/content_WS663d3b83...

[4] - https://geetha.mil.gr/kyklos-synomilion-staff-talks-kai-ypog...

[5] - https://www.bankingnews.gr/amyna-diplomatia/articles/851003/...

[6] - https://www.reuters.com/world/poland-will-not-send-soldiers-...

[7] - https://ukrainesarmsmonitor.substack.com/p/ukraine-turkiye-s...

[8] - https://www.cats-network.eu/publication/ukraine-turkey-strat...

[9] - https://www.rnbo.gov.ua/en/Diialnist/3345.html

[10] - https://www.turkishminute.com/2026/01/13/nato-asks-turkey-to...

Re: Danish pension fund divesting US Treasuries

#206

Post by adventured » Tue, Jan 20, 2026, 4:24 PM UTC

azinman2 wrote: post #135

epolanski wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's no chance US will default on its debts, all it has to do is to print more money. Inflation may spirale, but it's going to be a US citizens problems (as well as US bond holders) in terms of inflation and budget cuts.

You’re assuming the people in charge are sane, rationale, and value past decisions that have worked out. It’s quite clear with the now likely permanent damage to NATO this isn’t the case.

You're assuming NATO is somehow critical for the US. It is not.

NATO is critical for the European powers (those not named Russia). The US doesn't require it. The US doesn't need to defend Europe any longer. And it's clear the Europeans don't want the US there, so it works out great. Europe can boost its defense spending by ~$300 billion to make up the difference, or not, whatever they choose to do is up to them.

The US had the world's largest economy six decades before NATO existed. China is growing into a superpower entirely without a NATO-like participation. NATO is primarily beneficial to European stability. The US doesn't need NATO to defend itself at all.

Re: Danish pension fund divesting US Treasuries

#207

Post by petesergeant » Tue, Jan 20, 2026, 4:24 PM UTC

alephnerd wrote: post #157

sekai wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The EU can't mend ties with China without giving up on Ukraine as China's FM Wang Yi has stated [0] At the end of the day China cares more about Europe than Russia. Because that's where the real money is.

At the end of the day, their Foreign Minister and their entire foreign policy apparatus has consistently stated they will prioritize Russia over the EU for national security reasons (Central Asia, North Korea, Japan). The EU signing an FTA with India on Jan 27th is also a negative sign for China-EU relations.

Foreign Ministries of all countries are known to speak the unvarnished truth at all time

Re: Danish pension fund divesting US Treasuries

#208

Post by jacquesm » Tue, Jan 20, 2026, 4:24 PM UTC

epolanski wrote: post #113

alphazard wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's symbolism. It's not. This is where the financial rubber meets the road, actions have consequences, and the rest of the world is looking at the US as increasingly unlikely to pay above inflation on its debts. The people managing the pension funds (if they are acting in good faith) really want to generate yield, and really want to preserve capital for the Danish people. They don't want to symbolically do those t…

There's no chance US will default on its debts, all it has to do is to print more money. Inflation may spirale, but it's going to be a US citizens problems (as well as US bond holders) in terms of inflation and budget cuts.

We're at a crossroads: If you don't behave like you will pay your debts then people are going to assume that you will not. Before you know it you won't be able to pay your debts even if you wanted to.

Re: Danish pension fund divesting US Treasuries

#209

Post by atwrk » Tue, Jan 20, 2026, 4:24 PM UTC

alephnerd wrote: post #120

moogly wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In a "might makes right" world, Europe clearly needs more might, and then it makes sense to improve relations with China; not a lot of options.

The EU can't mend ties with China without giving up on Ukraine as China's FM Wang Yi has stated [0] on multiple occasions [1]. Additionally, in the Chinese foreign policy space, the EU is viewed as weak [2], and largely through the lense of the US-China rivalry (which is how the US views the EU as well now). [0] - https://www.scmp.com/news/china/diplomacy/article/3316875/ch... [1] - https://www.reuters.com/world/chin…

Wang explicitly said that support for Russia in the war is about diverting the US focus from China. If the US shows it doesn't care about Ukraine's future (and Wang told the truth), then I doubt Chinas support will stay as is for long. At most it will be a bargain in the coming EU-China negotiations.

Re: Danish pension fund divesting US Treasuries

#210

Post by jonkoops » Tue, Jan 20, 2026, 4:25 PM UTC

rjzzleep wrote: post #184

alphazard wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's symbolism. It's not. This is where the financial rubber meets the road, actions have consequences, and the rest of the world is looking at the US as increasingly unlikely to pay above inflation on its debts. The people managing the pension funds (if they are acting in good faith) really want to generate yield, and really want to preserve capital for the Danish people. They don't want to symbolically do those t…

The EU threw all its baskets into a war it didn't need to fight, destroyed its energy independence, it's weapons, it's airdefense and huge parts of its air force. I don't think they have a lot of cards to play. There an interesting analysis on whether the EUs threats on financial markets actually bear any meaning here: https://x.com/Kathleen_Tyson_/status/2013314168250675456 Edit: March 2022 peace deal that Boris Joh…

It is a war we must fight now, and must continue to fight. It is a war against oppression, against autocrats squishing their population for servitude. If nobody steps up to protect Democratic values, and the freedom of the people for self-governance, it is a slippery slope to hell.