pull down to refresh

Wow You start wondering when peoole are going to open their eyes and stop buying them. Then shit will hit the fan.
They'll just start forcing people to buy them, in that case.
reply
73 sats \ 89 replies \ @Cje95 7 May
There were talks about doing something called “baby bonds” where each child would get a bond from the government and then couldn’t touch it till they turned like 18 and I could see that being a “fantastic” way to offload them on the population… idea seemed to have died once the House flipped in 2022 but before it was talked about quite a bit on the hill
reply
31 sats \ 1 reply \ @TomK OP 7 May
oh my god is that really true? when I was little in Germany, the so-called 'Sparkasse' gave everyone who started school a savings bond with 5 Deutschmarks inside.
reply
The idea was based off of some other country I think in Europe. I will see if I can find who it was that was a huge proponent of it.
Ah found a link turns out it was reintroduced this Congress as well
reply
Wow they would be able to offload a bunch. I bet they would be worth almost the same amount after 18 years. That certificate wouldnt be able to keep up with inflation.
reply
reply
Who has 1k to buy that when they are having a kid?
reply
31 sats \ 1 reply \ @Cje95 7 May
I’m not sure it’s really a cost since it’s the federal government giving it and they would be off ramping bonds I believe
reply
Can you imagine the government starting to print their 1000 dollar bills again? I remember a few years back this special one signed by Chase was worth a lot.
reply
Fed printer go brrr.
reply
21 sats \ 0 replies \ @Cje95 7 May
Exactly!
reply
Thanks
reply
That's diabolical. I assumed they would put financial requirements on things like pension funds and university trusts that would require them to hold some proportion of US treasuries.
reply
31 sats \ 65 replies \ @Cje95 7 May
To be honest I am not sure… I think they could be something that take care of the issue and they wouldn’t need to do that however I could see government pensions being another big off ramp for these bonds as well
reply
Could they do that? Actually, arent they using social security to prop things up? I think the government has borrowed from it time and time again.
reply
The social security trust was a fiction to begin with, but even so, it's been in the negative for several years now.
reply
Isnt it because they borrow from it though? It should be highly positive with all the growth we have had in our economy in the past. Just amazes me how mismanaged the money is.
reply
Not really, but sort of. There was some fake accounting that was called the social security trust fund, but it was never legally binding in any way and the program was never actually set up to be financially sustainable.
On occasion, politicians have publicly justified their reckless spending as borrowing from that fake trust fund, though.
10 sats \ 3 replies \ @Cje95 7 May
I mean all the worlds money is whats funny is that the US is one of the best at it given its economic size compared to China and India.
If they got really desperate, they could do a bail-in for themselves and convert people's savings into treasuries.
The one certainty is that they will do something to prop up demand for US debt.
reply
Is that cheating though? Buying your own bonds, it will just bring the value of the US dollar down even faster.
reply
21 sats \ 0 replies \ @Cje95 7 May
The US has been buying their bonds in one way or another for 100 years. While other countries use a central bank the US does it via the Fed and bond purchases
reply
Everything they do is cheating.
reply
21 sats \ 1 reply \ @Satosora 7 May
They could cheat and manipulate a little less obviously.
How would they even enact it? Give each parent a debt of 1000$? That would hurt a lot, considering how much a baby costs!
reply
31 sats \ 2 replies \ @Cje95 7 May
It isnt a debt! It is $1k set aside for the kid and they get it when they turn 18 it doesn't cost the parents anything!
reply
They dont just give out free money. There is no such thing as a free lunch.
reply
21 sats \ 0 replies \ @Cje95 7 May
I mean read the leg... it is free money. What I commented earlier was that they could in theory instead of put it in savings accounts like the legislation talked about instead give the kid $1k in US bonds to offramp some of the vast bond holdings
reply
There are lots of options, but one that comes to mind is that they could make it a refundable tax credit. That would basically let people buy bonds instead of paying taxes.
reply
Would that actually work? I would buy the bond and sell them right away, because they are worthless. Waiting for them to mature is a losing proposition.
reply
31 sats \ 5 replies \ @Cje95 7 May
If they used bonds you could not touch them. The kid could do whatever he wants once he/she hit 18 but not before.
reply
hhhmm... that would be a lot of money they would have to cash in. Imagine the first set, might bankrupt america lol
Exactly, and then the minimum reserve regulations will be relaxed, sovereign wealth funds and banks will be forced, as you say, to take this junk onto their balance sheets and we will have opened up yet another pond for this slurry.
reply
We don't have minimum reserve requirements in the US anymore.
reply
I know, but there is a minimal quota in the eurosystem left. That will be killed soon
reply
There was shockingly little coverage when they were removed it a few years ago.
reply
They dont want the people to know that they are manipulating the money to zero.
reply
the readership of the general media is so financially illiterate that our leading media could basically report on it in detail and there would be no consequences.
reply
The writership of the general media is too financially illiterate to report on it in detail (which is why they were hired).
reply
i know what you mean. i've been self-employed in the business for over 26 years. it is indeed incredible
i know what you mean. i've been self-employed in the business for over 26 years. it is indeed incredible
How is Sweden doing? They have that oil fund, why cant they take away from that?
reply