151–160 of 282 posts
For modern computing/finance type of people (I was but now have reformed) the lack of financial data is a problem. Even if you can get access to every trade, which is hard, the amount of data is not what modern machine learning types require. Thr EMH is a hard mistress too. There is no amount of data that can help you solve unsolvable equations. So alot fall into this trap, synthetic data. Some of the best statistici…
I have a theory. The last 100 years has seen govt spending as percent of gdp increase to ever greater levels. People are expecting more and more handouts and no one wants to pay for it. Without the ability to pay for it via taxes, the govt will eventually have to default on it's currency and thus real returns on fixed income/bonds will have to become increasingly negative. Their article already shows a slight widenin…
The other option is they raise taxes, cut spending and they actually pay those debts off. All debt comes due eventually, you can choose to go bankrupt or you can choose to pay it. But if neither option happens in your lifetime, you don't need to care, if you are just trying to optimize for yourself.
Between MMT, finanicialization of the economy, stock buy backs, Bretton Woods, tax codes, robo investing and indexing...
Interesting stuff but really not super helpful in assessing risk.
I have a theory. The last 100 years has seen govt spending as percent of gdp increase to ever greater levels. People are expecting more and more handouts and no one wants to pay for it. Without the ability to pay for it via taxes, the govt will eventually have to default on it's currency and thus real returns on fixed income/bonds will have to become increasingly negative. Their article already shows a slight widenin…
Do you mean the super rich that want more of the tax revenue for themselves, or boomers, or who are "people"?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
however, given that your 1923 dollars were likely silver dollars which currently trade for $32 (for junk grade) and up ... I made that 8m * 32 = 256m :) - and better if you were sensible and stored un-circulated dollars
>> If I was alive in 1923 and stashed away $8 million > your 1923 dollars were likely silver dollars It's unlikely that you had 200 metric tons of silver coins stashed away.
I think the grandparent was imagining they were silver certificate dollars[1], not actual silver dollar coins. That said, silver certificate dollars needed to be converted at some point in the past, in 2023 they can't be converted and only have collector value, and $8 million worth would dilute their collector value substantially.
[1]:https://www.investopedia.com/articles/markets-economy/090116...
I have a theory. The last 100 years has seen govt spending as percent of gdp increase to ever greater levels. People are expecting more and more handouts and no one wants to pay for it. Without the ability to pay for it via taxes, the govt will eventually have to default on it's currency and thus real returns on fixed income/bonds will have to become increasingly negative. Their article already shows a slight widenin…
> People are expecting more and more handouts and no one wants to pay for it. Do you mean the super rich that want more of the tax revenue for themselves, or boomers, or who are "people"?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> think this is more that we're entering a post material scarcity economy No we’re not. Materials for housing, etc are just as expensive as ever. Food still has to be heavily subsidized by the government directly and indirectly (“water rights”). Post-scarcity is a fantasy world used to justify heavily socialist policies that allow people to not work without having to wonder who does have to work.
Your etc is doing a lot of work here, but post COVID craziness aside I don't think building materials are more expensive than they were in 1990. As an example, lumber has been flat or slightly down since 1995: https://www.lesprom.com/en/news/U_S_lumber_prices_in_2020_an...
Just look at the cost of shelter. Housing costs sooo much more than it did 50 years ago or even 200 years ago. During the time of Henry david thoreau, an average house cost 800 days of unskilled labor wages (meaning 800$, the average unskilled worker made 1$ per day). Today, it's over 5000 days of unskilled labor wages when you take into account property taxes. the difference in shelter cost is so enormous, that back then 1830s, mortgages were often just 10 years. And thoreau thought even that was too much.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
AAA corporate bond yield has always been about ~1% above the treasury yield [1]. Almost nobody has bought government bonds for a long time besides pension funds (due to obligations), banks (due to regulations), foreign governments (due to ForEx necessity), the Fed, and a pretty small amount (~8%) held in 401ks (overwhelmingly by older folks) [2]. Rich people certainly aren't buying Treasuries to protect their wealth…
This is just misinformation, I have worked with investment firms and family offices that regularly buy government securities.
The reality is - a small percentage of treasuries are owned by individuals (including - and mostly - 401ks) - I linked to the data above.
Anecdotal evidence that you helped some people buy treasuries does not dispute that.
Something like ~5% of treasuries are not owned by The Fed, Foreign Governments, Pensions, 401ks, and Banks.
The vast majority of that is owned by bond traders. You're talking about maybe $600B owned by a group of people that has >$30T in wealth. That is basically nothing.
For modern computing/finance type of people (I was but now have reformed) the lack of financial data is a problem. Even if you can get access to every trade, which is hard, the amount of data is not what modern machine learning types require. Thr EMH is a hard mistress too. There is no amount of data that can help you solve unsolvable equations. So alot fall into this trap, synthetic data. Some of the best statistici…
I have a theory. The last 100 years has seen govt spending as percent of gdp increase to ever greater levels. People are expecting more and more handouts and no one wants to pay for it. Without the ability to pay for it via taxes, the govt will eventually have to default on it's currency and thus real returns on fixed income/bonds will have to become increasingly negative. Their article already shows a slight widenin…
The other option is they raise taxes, cut spending and they actually pay those debts off. All debt comes due eventually, you can choose to go bankrupt or you can choose to pay it. But if neither option happens in your lifetime, you don't need to care, if you are just trying to optimize for yourself.
There's another option. One that's far more politically favorable: You simply take out more and more debt, until finally the whole world sells US treasuries. at that point the fed prints unlimited amount of money to buy up all that debt. And when the US pays interest on that debt, it just pays it to the federal reserve which then sends it back to the US. This is the end game, we're looking at. And the result implies inflation and LOTS of it. that's what I mean when I say, they will default on the currency.