Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Danish pension fund divesting US Treasuries

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

421–430 of 857 posts

Re: Danish pension fund divesting US Treasuries

#421

Post by jacquesm »

HaZeust wrote: post #414
jacquesm wrote: post #244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Precisely. If the USA wants to be trusted at all it needs to act now or it will be too late. This is the precipice and without action from Congress & the Senate the rest of the world will make up their own mind about the country as a whole. This is probably one of the most expensive moments in history.

One of the most expensive moments in history so far

Fair, but since we can't look into the future that's an obvious thing. Every maximum is always a maximum 'so far'.

Re: Danish pension fund divesting US Treasuries

#422

Post by lynx97 »

soerxpso wrote: post #293
jacquesm wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is not a one sided thing. The US has been allowed to do a lot of things under the NATO umbrella that it benefited from (such as: selling a vast quantity of arms). Soft power is a thing and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization came into being to deal with exactly the kind of situation that we are viewing today. To see the US bow out, and in fact threatening allies is duplicitous at best.

I find it interesting how people say "The US" to refer to groups under the US government that are often completely at odds with the interests of the actual US public. There are virtually no Americans who want our government to be acting in the interests of arms manufacturers except the arms manufacturers themselves and the politicians they pay.

C'mon, what a lame excuse. Well then, show us that democracy works and vote for a goverment which doesn't? If I follow your reasoning, you've just demonstrated that democracy is a failure, because the US government acts in the interests of arms manufacturers since a very long time, no matter if Dems or Reps are in power.

Re: Danish pension fund divesting US Treasuries

#423

Post by epistasis »

monero-xmr wrote: post #407
epistasis wrote: post #402

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> no armies, can’t defend itself, can’t make energy. Look I love dumping on the Europoors as much as anyone, but even I can see that this is a bit extreme. "Decadence?" What does that even mean here? That people are happy and secure and have good qualities of life, without worrying about everything falling apart? The US is not fine, and is falling apart. The US is living decadently on its reserve currency status, whi…

[flagged]

> The goal of Europeans is not to work.

What, would you say, all these entrepreneurs in Silicon Valley are doing here?

They are all trying to invent something so that they don't have to work anymore.

> They will continue to sell their crown jewels to the highest bidder, because no one wants to work.

Is this about Europe or the US?

Re: Danish pension fund divesting US Treasuries

#424

Post by epolanski »

SR2Z wrote: post #377
epolanski wrote: post #331

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Europeans now expect America to fight Russia for them, not with them. As an European: nobody has this expectation, unless you're using some strange subreddit comment as a source of information.

Compare the strength of the militaries of Europe with the United States and you'll see how that claim is believable. That's changing, but for many years European nations did not spend very much on their militaries. A large part of why is the protection of NATO and US bases in various countries.

No, that's the logic of a 15 years old playing call of duty.

Europe has spent less on military because after the cold war and still today, it never had any realistic threat. Russia can't even take few miles off Ukraine.

The only realistic threat is the US, which is an ally, in theory. Now a threat.

Re: Danish pension fund divesting US Treasuries

#426

Post by [deleted] »

Retric wrote: post #343
ptero wrote: post #333

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It did not go into a hyperinflation after the WW2, when the US debt load as a share of GDP was even higher than today; and deflated in the same way US is likely to do it now (bond rates forced way below inflation with yield control). I am not saying that the process will be pleasant for the US or its citizens. But it is not without precedent and is extremely unlikely to cause hyperinflation. My 2c.

The post WWII economic boom outgrew the debt thus dramatically decreased the debt to GDP ratio. The US is unlikely to find itself the only industrialized nation without massively damaged infrastructure again anytime soon.

[deleted]

Re: Danish pension fund divesting US Treasuries

#427

Post by jacquesm »

rayiner wrote: post #368
jacquesm wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is not a one sided thing. The US has been allowed to do a lot of things under the NATO umbrella that it benefited from (such as: selling a vast quantity of arms). Soft power is a thing and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization came into being to deal with exactly the kind of situation that we are viewing today. To see the US bow out, and in fact threatening allies is duplicitous at best.

[flagged]

Haven't you done enough to wreck your reputation by now?

For reference:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46685072

Re: Danish pension fund divesting US Treasuries

#428

Post by tokai »

sorokod wrote: post #285
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.

There is no chance US will need to take Greenland by force ( financial or military) , all it has to do is to increase the number of troops already stationed there by agreement. Yet here we are.

>all it has to do is to increase the number of troops

Demonstrably wrong as Trump announced tariffs on the countries sending troops to Greenland.

Re: Danish pension fund divesting US Treasuries

#429

Post by epolanski »

mikkupikku wrote: post #392
jacquesm wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is not a one sided thing. The US has been allowed to do a lot of things under the NATO umbrella that it benefited from (such as: selling a vast quantity of arms). Soft power is a thing and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization came into being to deal with exactly the kind of situation that we are viewing today. To see the US bow out, and in fact threatening allies is duplicitous at best.

NATO members aren't particularly large customers for American weapons. Poland is the largest, but is dwarfed by Japan, Saudi Arabia and Qatar. Ukraine is receiving a bunch of weapons, but that math isn't so straight forward (they're getting a ton of old stock) and they don't have much choice anyway.

Europeans have spent 80B $ in 2024 and 68 in 2025 on US weapons.

That's not peanuts.

Re: Danish pension fund divesting US Treasuries

#430

Post by aaroninsf »

alphazard wrote: post #94
afavour wrote: post #42

It's symbolism. But it's important symbolism. Far more notable, I think, is Macron saying this morning that Europe needs more investment from China. Canada signing a deal with China to allow their cars to be sold in the country. It's all a sliding slope until it reaches a breaking point and falls off like a cliff. EDIT: to quote the Canadian PN earlier today: “American hegemony in particular helped provide public goo…

> 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 markets certainly don't think it's symbolism.
Post reply on HN