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

771–780 of 857 posts

Re: Danish pension fund divesting US Treasuries

#771

Post by fyredge »

csense wrote: post #573
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…

> really want to generate yield Treasuries are not the best way to do this. Almost any investment is better than yeeting a substantial portion of your net worth into Treasuries or a savings account. > really want to preserve capital Fiat currency, or bonds that promise payouts in fiat currency, are excellent for short-term capital preservation and terrible for long-term capital preservation, as every government that…

Potential returns may be better elsewhere but that comes with increased risk and reasonable funds balance their portfolio between returns and risk.

Bonds are considered low risk, but with the fiscal policy of the current US administration, the risk may have gone beyond the Danish's appetite.

Bitcoin on the other hand, which sane person would invest in such a volatile product as preservation of capital?

Re: Danish pension fund divesting US Treasuries

#772

Post by viraptor »

bluGill wrote: post #626
epistasis wrote: post #468

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's definitely going on. There's also something that I've heard called "reactionary centrism:" a feedback loop of people who think that truth lies in the middle between the two extremes, and also that assumes that no mainstream position in a political faction can itself be the "extreme." And that if they find that one political faction is doing something that seems extreme to them, that in the interests of fairnes…

Right vs left makes the assumption there are two sides / options. I have long thought that the 'left' was too extreem socialist - that doesn't mean I think current 'right' is any better.

It's quite silly how people talk about the "left" in the US. There's barely any left present in politics. Much less "far/extreme left" or anything close to that. Nobody is really fighting for UBI, nationalisation of large utility-like corps, redoing healthcare completely, wealth taxes, dismantling the two-party system. And these ate still fairly chill ideas that recently happened in other countries, far from "extreme".

Re: Danish pension fund divesting US Treasuries

#773

Post by bluGill »

viraptor wrote: post #772
bluGill wrote: post #626

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right vs left makes the assumption there are two sides / options. I have long thought that the 'left' was too extreem socialist - that doesn't mean I think current 'right' is any better.

It's quite silly how people talk about the "left" in the US. There's barely any left present in politics. Much less "far/extreme left" or anything close to that. Nobody is really fighting for UBI, nationalisation of large utility-like corps, redoing healthcare completely, wealth taxes, dismantling the two-party system. And these ate still fairly chill ideas that recently happened in other countries, far from "extreme…

Your position is they are not extreem. Mine is that what we call left is already too extreem. However what the 'right' wants is different but mostly not in the direction I want to go.

Re: Danish pension fund divesting US Treasuries

#774

Post by bluGill »

pjc50 wrote: post #746
bluGill wrote: post #626

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right vs left makes the assumption there are two sides / options. I have long thought that the 'left' was too extreem socialist - that doesn't mean I think current 'right' is any better.

Would Kamala have invaded Greenland? No, of course not, and you know it. Plenty of people wouldn't even count her as "left".

you miss the point. The two sides are different they are not all viewpoints though.

Re: Danish pension fund divesting US Treasuries

#775

Post by tim333 »

gizzlon wrote: post #695
tim333 wrote: post #529

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US has a lot of other things going for it. Rule of law, enterprise, most of the biggest companies in tech, entertainment and the like.

> Rule of law Are you being sarcastic?

No but I was thinking more of commercial law. I was quite impressed when I had money in ftx.com that the US got the money back and put SBF in jail promptly even though ftx.com wasn't a US company. I'm not sure any other countries would have done that. That sort of stuff matters to large investors.

Re: Danish pension fund divesting US Treasuries

#777

Post by toomuchtodo »

moogly wrote: post #776

Also Swedish fund Alecta at 8 billion dollars (some reports say USD 7.7 - 8.8) https://scanx.trade/stock-market-news/global/swedish-pension...

Swedish Alecta has sold off an estimated $8B of US Treasury Bonds - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46705256 - January 2026

Re: Danish pension fund divesting US Treasuries

#778

Post by hrimfaxi »

tinfoilhatter wrote: post #52
adrr wrote: post #2

What happens when USD stops becoming the the reserve currency for the world? And who takes its place?

The petrodollar (a product of Kissinger) has been in collapse since Saudi Arabia began divesting from it. We've been printing pretend money for quite some time, and supressing the value of precious metals (which is why you're now seeing silver bullion sell for $100+ an ounce). Copper is also selling out now. These precious metals are extremely valuable because they're used to manufacture all of the technology consume…

How has the US been suppressing global metal prices?

Re: Danish pension fund divesting US Treasuries

#779

Post by N19PEDL2 »

inglor_cz wrote: post #580
vharuck wrote: post #572

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the above poster was trying to say, "there is no reason " for the US to claim Greenland. We have a treaty that allows us to build our military bases on the territory. If we want to do security stuff there, we already can.

The reason is that Trump wants to recolor the map and make the US bigger that it is, and be known as the one who did it. Nothing deeper than that. Ironically, that will make some projects harder, especially if US laws such as NEPA start being applied on the Greenland territory. Hello environmental lawsuits from all sides.

Indeed, Trump seems to be suffering from Putin syndrome: he thinks that the best way to make the United States (and himself) glorious is through territorial expansion.

Re: Danish pension fund divesting US Treasuries

#780

Post by DangitBobby »

bluGill wrote: post #773
viraptor wrote: post #772

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's quite silly how people talk about the "left" in the US. There's barely any left present in politics. Much less "far/extreme left" or anything close to that. Nobody is really fighting for UBI, nationalisation of large utility-like corps, redoing healthcare completely, wealth taxes, dismantling the two-party system. And these ate still fairly chill ideas that recently happened in other countries, far from "extreme…

Your position is they are not extreem. Mine is that what we call left is already too extreem. However what the 'right' wants is different but mostly not in the direction I want to go.

A minority of people in the developed world would agree with your assessment that the American left is "extreme". It's mostly American "centrists" and conservatives that think so.
Post reply on HN