pull down to refresh

With his latest initiative to set up a state investment fund, Donald Trump has taken the financial markets in a different direction. Many, especially in my opinion unfortunately bitcoiners, are jumping on this bandwagon and rushing into this juggernaut full of anticipation (I know: hyperbitcoinization and all that...). Nevertheless, the question must be: is it right for the state to intervene in the capital markets with public funds? My personal assessment: no, absolutely not. The state should keep its hands off it! It is the territory of the private sector, which is already suffering from too much regulation and interventionism. Efficient capital allocation does not need this! And we don't want a strong state, but a minimal state, if at all.
Some thought on the SWF:
The very foundation of a SWF contradicts the libertarian principle of economic freedom . By centralizing wealth, states exert control over investment decisions that should naturally be left to the market's invisible hand. This control leads to inefficiencies, as government officials, often detached from the real dynamics of the market, make decisions based on political rather than economic merit. The market, in its purest form, would distribute wealth and risk more efficiently through countless individual decisions rather than one monolithic entity.
Moral and Ethical Considerations There's a moral dimension to consider as well. The libertarian ethos champions the idea that wealth generated from resources within a nation's borders should benefit those who directly contribute to its extraction or production, not be funneled into a fund where the government decides its fate. This approach borders on what could be described as modern feudalism, where the lords of the state dictate the destiny of the common wealth.
Political Power and Corruption The concentration of economic power in SWFs also amplifies political power, breeding grounds for corruption and cronyism. Just as we've seen with central banks and planners, the management of these funds can become a playground for political favoritism, where investments are not made for the best return but to maintain political allies or to pursue geopolitical strategies over economic ones.
So please, dear politicians: keep your hands off the free market.
There is a word for the societal structure where a central government owns all or a lot of the businesses. What is it called again?
reply
Exactly, mine Fuhrer
reply
Eyyy I am the german here, having the nazi privilege is something You need to be born with. (Erbschuld)
reply
the what privilege
reply
You do not know much about the political culture in 'modern' Germany, don't You? We have a culture of eternal guilt and personal sin
reply
Actually I think it's good and important to remember the atrocities of the two dictatorships in Germany.
The former DDR internment camp in Hohenschönhausen has a striking museum of the torture that took place there. Similarly I think every German should have visited Auschwitz museum and seen horrors of the industrial scale genocide there.
53 sats \ 2 replies \ @freetx 4 Feb
Agree completely with your points.
While I agree, its not like this is new. We already deeply interfere with markets....not just indirectly by setting interest rates, but directly by buying / selling equities via "plunge protection team" (ie. market stabilization) and the QE bailouts.
This raises a thorny issue: Where do you draw the line? Is it ok for a country to buy gold? oil? Where is the line between that and equities?
I suppose you could make the case that its ok if its just commodities and not equities....since equities have owners and shareholders and thus can be influenced, whereas commodities are indifferent to such things.
reply
I am sure, the private sector is better in building market priced crucial reserves. Problem is geopolitical interventionism
reply
That's a good point. Even commodities have associated special interest groups, though. Maybe it's better than the state buying equities, but oil companies would certainly be interested in getting the state to increase its reserves.
reply
Agree 💯. I didn't think Trump was a fascist. This gives me pause.
reply
What l worry about is how they will secure it? Can you imagine them keeping it on an exchange and not in cold storage?
reply
What if I have a competing product that I want to bring to market against a corporation that the United States Government owns equity in? Lets say my product is better faster cheaper and will undoubtably win in the free market. How is that going to work? Will the Feds sick the IRS on my company and family to protect their interests?
reply