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

431–440 of 857 posts

Re: Danish pension fund divesting US Treasuries

#431

Post by jacquesm »

epolanski wrote: post #424
SR2Z wrote: post #377

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

That, and as the main theater for two world wars Europe is - and likely will remain - sick of war. We'd rather avoid it, unless it comes knocking on our door, and then, reluctantly, we'll do what needs to be done.

Re: Danish pension fund divesting US Treasuries

#432

Post by epolanski »

baby_souffle wrote: post #372
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's no chance US will default on its debts, Why not? It has happened* before therefore it can/will happen again. * (more or less). I would count significant debt restructure (1790) or replacing promised gold with paper (1860-1930, 1970) or even a significant delay (1979) as a default... even if it was temporary in 1979.

None of those were defaults. The US has never defaulted on its debt, as never did Germany or Italy (speaking of state issued bonds, not war reparations).

Re: Danish pension fund divesting US Treasuries

#433

Post by boricj »

orwin wrote: post #398
boricj wrote: post #360

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The US and France are both nuclear armed, including nuclear armed submarines, which are the ultimate defence deterrent. Except for France's ASMP-A nuclear warning shot (which is not a tactical option by the way), all other independent European nuclear options (French or British SSBNs) are not only strategic, but they imply wiping entire countries off the map. All options also depend on whether the French President…

I'm pretty sure ASMPA-R is precise enough to be considered tactical, and the fallout small enough to easily consider its firing over blue water. Yes, the number of French tactical (sorry, "pre-strategic") nuke is limited (around 50), but i think that's enough of a detterent.

It's not about the precision, it's the yield. We've divested our tactical options back in the 1990s because our nuclear policy is one of strict sufficiency and all our nukes are above a hundred kilotons of TNT. That doesn't leave a lot of room to thread any needle.

Also, our nuclear doctrine says that it's a nuclear warning shot, meaning that the next step on the ladder is French-delivered Armageddon by SSBNs. We're not supposed to keep lobbing them in case of a persistent problem.

Re: Danish pension fund divesting US Treasuries

#434

Post by carlosjobim »

jonkoops wrote: post #210
rjzzleep wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

What are you doing here then? Shouldn't you be in the trenches or in a factory making artillery rounds?

Or who is "we"?

Re: Danish pension fund divesting US Treasuries

#435

Post by BurningFrog »

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.

Dollar inflation is a way for the US to default on its debts.

"Here are the dollars we owe you. They're worth half as much as the ones you paid us."

Re: Danish pension fund divesting US Treasuries

#436

Post by tokai »

alephnerd wrote: post #205
moogly wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 me…

>Despite Trump, the US

Not true. US is not giving any material support. Only intel.

Re: Danish pension fund divesting US Treasuries

#437

Post by jgeada »

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.

We own the consequences of our actions, our votes. Yes, we as a country, for whatever reasons, voted for someone who very clearly telegraphed he would be doing exactly what he's been doing. FAFO, and we're not even close to the full spectrum of what the FO part implies.

We the people are responsible for the government we get.

Don't like the consequences? Make better voting choices next time.

Re: Danish pension fund divesting US Treasuries

#438

Post by g_delgado14 »

r_p4rk wrote: post #176
g_delgado14 wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> A new civil war that drives the US to fragment into several independent regions over the course of the next ~five years would kind of be the best scenario from a global perspective. The US isn't going to passively give up its hold on the world order. You don't think this would trigger a world war? And if / when the US does topple (whether in 10 years or in 1000 years), at the moment it looks like the only viable ne…

> The US isn't going to passively give up its hold on the world order. You don't think this would trigger a world war? They are literally right in the middle of imploding their soft power; so maybe you are right about passively giving it up when they're actively doing so instead?

would you call annexing greenland or invading venezuela passive?

Re: Danish pension fund divesting US Treasuries

#439

Post by wasabi991011 »

whimsicalism wrote: post #310
btbuildem wrote: post #290

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We don't live in the meth lab downstairs, we're in the apartment above it. It's been wild in the past couple of decades, but lately you guys have started taking pot shots at the ceiling, so yeah, we're watching.

I don't think an American civil war in the next 5 years is at all likely. The rest of your comment I understand - not much we can say beyond we're sorry and his support is a small (but influential) minority.

> I don't think an American civil war in the next 5 years is at all likely.

The government of Minnesota has readied the national guard, the Pentagon put 1500 soldiers on standby to be deployed to Minnesota, Trump is threatening to invoke the insurrection act, and there's no sign of this conflict cooling off.

5 years is a long time too, I don't see how you believe it's not at all likely.

Edit: to be clear, I'm not sure it will lead to the fragmentation that the other commenters was claiming. But an conflict between federal and state law enforcement/ military seems likely.

Re: Danish pension fund divesting US Treasuries

#440

Post by LunaSea »

whimsicalism wrote: post #401
colechristensen wrote: post #391

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You have to ask yourself, compared to current US leadership, is China actually all that bad? US is being driven by the personal whims of a deteriorating tyrant, Congress is allowing it and the courts are only doing a tiny amount of checking his power. You can't just say "despite everything happening we're still the good guys and China and Russia are the bad guys!" Osama bin Ladin won. The goals he had when he attacke…

Call me a traditionalist but I do think having free/fair elections is a massive distinguishing factor.

Is that why Texas is gerrymandering their maps again? Is it to have "fair" elections?
Post reply on HN