Live data from Hacker News

Danish pension fund divesting US Treasuries

reuters.com

441–450 of 857 posts

Re: Danish pension fund divesting US Treasuries

#441

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]

NATO was a thing in 1960. France and the UK spend lower proportions of their GDP than in 1960 not because of an increase in the amount of white-knighting America does on their behalf but because they are no longer administering global empires (France was in active conflict at the time), and because per capita spend isn't a great way of measuring ability to project military power either particularly not post Cold-War; the US has also cut it and is still relatively more powerful than it was in 1960.

The US military industrial complex primarily does invest domestically and sells more overseas than it buys. It employs millions of US citizens, sells more US tech than it buys and subsidised the creation of dual use technology the wider US economy does rather well out of, including an early version of the internet we're interacting over. And if it's too big or too wasteful, that's a decision made entirely by the US, which fights the wars which - for better or worse - the US wants to fight (it's actually Europe throwing lives at American wars; last time the UK actually had to defend its own territories US support was restricted to sharing intel and selling us some missiles). Same goes for the bases in Europe. The Trump administration is furiously trying to sanewash Trump's acquisitiveness into an imperative to have more bases close to Russia on European territory - if its that important, kind of hard to argue there hasn't been a benefit to any of the other bases over the past 80 years...

Re: Danish pension fund divesting US Treasuries

#442

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not pure symbolism. The most effective way to reduce the global threat the US is appearing to pose more as of late, is to hit the dollar. The US economy is in a very precarious state, tensions along political ideology lines are high, and it would not take much more than a worsening of economic conditions plus a catalyst event to kick off armed unrest within the country. A new civil war that drives the US to frag…

> 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 opposition to American hegemony shifted from Europe (ie the USSR) to Asia (ie China). To that end, NATO lacks the capacity to meaningfully impact a conflict in the Pacific. The EU simply does not have the means to project power in that way nor do they have the ability to meaningfully implement economic policies that would effectively reduce Chinese growth.

Trump is an asshole, but the strategy hasn’t really changed in the last decade or so. Obama tried to isolate China with European help, Trump 1.0 tried to convince Europe to step up, Biden showed them we were willing to move on, and now Trump 2.0 is following through.

People fail to realize how anti-European this past decade has been, and not just under Trump. Europe had significant issue with the Inflation Reduction Act. Not to mention the war in Ukraine, which while illegal and entirely caused by Russia, was capitalized upon by American diplomats to the absolute benefite of the US at the expense of Europe.

The overarching plan has been evident for a while, Trump is just blatant about it. He lacks the decorum to make someone happy about being gifted a lemon. Past administrations have had much more tact in that regard.

America does not want direct conflict with China. China doesn’t want direct conflict with America either. It would be catastrophic for both honestly. Neither side would emerge cleanly victorious. Both would be limping away scarred by the experience. To that end America is just trying to let the underlying structural issues play out. China and Europe both have some structural issues that need addressed. America is gonna build up it’s own hemisphere and simply wait the rest of the world out.

Is it the best plan? Honestly it might be. The more I see of it, the more comfortable I am growing with it. I was more worried about it in the Biden days simply because I was still under the mindset of Europe being an important ally. America was undermining the European economy on multiple fronts and it seemed like we were alienating some of our closest allies. Ironically what I think a lot of people are feeling now.

The truth is though that Europe is dead weight. Their economy is anemic, their still too fragmented militarily and they have been actively undermining America’s effects to derisk supply chains from China. Trump’s broad tariffs would have been handled better under someone else, but the end result would have been the same out of simple necessity. Since COVID America has grown more dependent on China due to second order effects. Everytime we close a door someone else opens a window to let them back in. And it’s not just Europe, but Canada, South Korea, others too. Honestly Mexico has probably been our best ally in that regard.

If you follow the geopolitical sphere most of what’s happening is not new. Trump hasn’t really changed the plan - he’s just subtle like a brick to the face. He is loud and boastful about it where before it was clever and subtextual. That is really the only change. Geopoliticallt he tries to dominate while Biden and Obama would convince people something stupid was what they really wanted.

I don’t know if that helps the anxiety at all. I’ve felt it, I’ve been there. I’ve yet to see a better plan though. Honestly, the next decade is gonna be bumpy, but if you look at the long-term trajectory, America is gonna be well ahead of the rest of the world by the 2040s. We are easily in the best strategic position I would say. Once you really wrap your mind around the various aspects of it, it’s not a bad plan. It’s not Trump’s plan, it’s not Biden’s plan, this plan has roots going back over a decade. I’m sure at some point it was just a COA under discussion with multiple decision points and alternatives. Could it have worked itself out differently? Probably. But given where we are it’s probably the best plan for now.

Re: Danish pension fund divesting US Treasuries

#443

Earlier quoted context omitted.

NATO came into being to deal with the USSR, which was the preeminent threat to all NATO members. The US wasn't expected just to come save Europe; European states had real military power and the will to bring it to bear against the US's main adversary. In a conflict with the USSR, the US could rely on Europe to fight with them. Very valuable. Today, US policymakers see China as the main adversary. But European states…

> Today, US policymakers see China as the main adversary. That is not evident at all in how any US policymaker acts these days. China is stronger than ever, precisely due to US actions. Every day, the US gives up power and throws it away, and China picks it up off the ground for free. The supposed "China Hawks" are all chicken hawks without anything to back them up.

There is not one single person here. A number see China as the biggest problem and act that way. A number don't, and act that way. The combined looks like a 'chicken hawk' policy though

Re: Danish pension fund divesting US Treasuries

#444
post #41

So much of the way the United States works is having a nearly limitless source of borrowing at low rates in the form of selling treasury bonds. The further we get away from that being true, the more precarious things become.

We're under active, malicious attack by 1/3 of our own eligible voters. Not clear how this will play out, as I can't think of any historical parallels.

Thats why its really fricking important to have more than two parties, so coalitions can be formed to counter such things.

Re: Danish pension fund divesting US Treasuries

#445
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…

The problem is that the EU and China are both looking for export markets to fund their economic growth, unless EU blows up it's welfare system and prints money like the US, the two are competitors.

But doing that would undermine Euro's credibility, as the EU is a loose union of countries with their distinct interests and politics, also member countries would compete on outspending each other as the Euro would have been essentially free money, a Euro debt crisis on turbocharge.

So, the EU can never print like the US. The EU and China will be rivals.

Re: Danish pension fund divesting US Treasuries

#446

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

Why doesn't China gerrymander their maps?

Re: Danish pension fund divesting US Treasuries

#447
post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> when the alternatives are people like.. Hilary Clinton ? Would she have been worse than this? And the US had a better choice the second time.

No, I do not even think people like DeSantis or Ted Cruz would have been worse. Trump was one of the worst possible candidates the US voters could pick.

I think it's safe to say that none of the other potential GOP candidates would have threatened to invade a NATO ally.

Re: Danish pension fund divesting US Treasuries

#448
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…

[flagged]

> If Taiwan thinks they will get support from these countries that are now heavily invested in China, they need to think again.

Please explain in detail how you think the Canadian military would deter a Chinese invasion of Taiwan.

Taiwan needs a joint force in the Pacific, not individually committed nations. If "America First" policy extends to Taiwanese diplomacy, the island is as good as gone.

Re: Danish pension fund divesting US Treasuries

#449

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[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?

[flagged]

Re: Danish pension fund divesting US Treasuries

#450
post #240

Feels like the right direction, pull all European money from the US, hope that financial and economical consequences convince US citizens to deal with their president as he deserves. It will decrease profits short term but certainly will have less negative impact than letting that guy in power.

Talk about a pipe dream. This is a far less significant penalty than what has been applied to Russia and absolutely nothing has happened to Putin. Europe could apply all the same sanctions to the US that it has applied to Russia and Trump would still serve out his full term.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN