superrific
Legend of ZZL
- Messages
- 5,526
I didn't critique anything. I was just poking a bit of fun. My first marriage fell apart because of mental health issues on both sides that emerged later.
Economic News Thread | Consumer Confidence declines
- Thread starter nycfan
- Start date
- Replies: 1K
- Views: 31K
- Politics
- Messages
- 15,096
I was poking fun back.
- Messages
- 2,164
"It sounds too radical to even warrant a second thought. That President Donald Trump could force some of the US’s foreign creditors to swap their Treasuries into ultra long-term bonds to ease the country’s debt burden.
The idea of dramatically restructuring America’s debt load is part of the Trump team’s agenda to revamp global trade via tariffs, weaken the dollar and ultimately reduce borrowing costs, all with the goal of putting US industry on more even footing with the rest of the world, said Bianco, an over three-decade market veteran and founder of Bianco Research.
Other elements of the plan include the creation of a sovereign wealth fund — which Trump has already set in motion — and forcing America’s allies to shoulder a larger share of security spending.
......
Bianco stressed that this type of debt swap may not actually happen, and if the US were to pursue it, it would require significant international cooperation and could potentially impact global financial stability. Bond investors are so far showing little sign of concern, with trading in the Treasury market particularly calm in recent days.
Still, the point of discussing these ideas with clients is to emphasize the magnitude of the potential changes in store, Bianco said.
“Take them seriously, don’t take it literally,” he said referring to the debt swap idea and some of Trump’s more radical proposals in general. “If Trump is willing to blow up NATO, why wouldn’t he be willing to blow up the financial system?”
The idea of dramatically restructuring America’s debt load is part of the Trump team’s agenda to revamp global trade via tariffs, weaken the dollar and ultimately reduce borrowing costs, all with the goal of putting US industry on more even footing with the rest of the world, said Bianco, an over three-decade market veteran and founder of Bianco Research.
Other elements of the plan include the creation of a sovereign wealth fund — which Trump has already set in motion — and forcing America’s allies to shoulder a larger share of security spending.
......
Bianco stressed that this type of debt swap may not actually happen, and if the US were to pursue it, it would require significant international cooperation and could potentially impact global financial stability. Bond investors are so far showing little sign of concern, with trading in the Treasury market particularly calm in recent days.
Still, the point of discussing these ideas with clients is to emphasize the magnitude of the potential changes in store, Bianco said.
“Take them seriously, don’t take it literally,” he said referring to the debt swap idea and some of Trump’s more radical proposals in general. “If Trump is willing to blow up NATO, why wouldn’t he be willing to blow up the financial system?”
superrific
Legend of ZZL
- Messages
- 5,526
Fair.
superrific
Legend of ZZL
- Messages
- 5,526
From that article:
"A way to do so would be by swapping some of their Treasuries into 100-year, non-tradeable zero-coupon bonds."
"100 year non-tradeable zero-coupon bonds" is a euphemism for monopoly money. The actual value of a 100 year zero coupon bond is, to a first and second approximation, nil. You don't get a thing in return unless the USA is around for 100 years, and can still service that debt, and still cares to service that debt. NO. THANK. YOU. I would pay zero cents on the dollar for such a thing -- but apparently that wouldn't be a thing because they are non-tradeable.
So in essence, this is a fancy way of just canceling debt. It would destroy the financial system. It would not "remake it."
The concept of a 100 year non-tradeable zero-coupon bonds is mind-boggling. There's moronic; there's ultra-moronic; and there's this. I'd rather own a shitcoin.
"A way to do so would be by swapping some of their Treasuries into 100-year, non-tradeable zero-coupon bonds."
"100 year non-tradeable zero-coupon bonds" is a euphemism for monopoly money. The actual value of a 100 year zero coupon bond is, to a first and second approximation, nil. You don't get a thing in return unless the USA is around for 100 years, and can still service that debt, and still cares to service that debt. NO. THANK. YOU. I would pay zero cents on the dollar for such a thing -- but apparently that wouldn't be a thing because they are non-tradeable.
So in essence, this is a fancy way of just canceling debt. It would destroy the financial system. It would not "remake it."
The concept of a 100 year non-tradeable zero-coupon bonds is mind-boggling. There's moronic; there's ultra-moronic; and there's this. I'd rather own a shitcoin.
- Messages
- 2,164
That is why I highlighted the last line, where Bianco was honest about destroying the international financial system.
- Messages
- 15,096
Wow.
superrific
Legend of ZZL
- Messages
- 5,526
I didn't take her as "being honest" so much as predicting Trump. I didn't read carefully though.
- Messages
- 3,701
Shitcoin, is that trumps crypto?
superrific
Legend of ZZL
- Messages
- 5,526
There's the traditional economic indicators, but there's also just general degradation of the rule of law. Nobody wants to be invested in a fascist dictatorship run by an unstable idiot and a drug-addled anti-social weirdo. This won't show up immediately but it should still drag asset prices in general.
- Messages
- 561
The first major Trump shot at his adoring cultist MAGAts. This will hit them hard.
Hooters is preparing to file for bankruptcy. No idea if 11 or 7 at this point.
THANKS TRUMP!
Hooters is preparing to file for bankruptcy. No idea if 11 or 7 at this point.
THANKS TRUMP!
- Messages
- 15,096
Bosses are exerting their power. What Trump’s crackdown could mean for your job.
President Donald Trump’s crackdown on federal employees bolsters a trend revoking some workplace flexibility.“… More companies are expected to join the movement this year as they raise performance expectations and mandate workers return to the office full time, work experts say.
“All companies I talk to are really focused on driving productivity [and] lowering cost,” said Bradford Bell, a professor at Cornell University’s School of Industrial and Labor Relations. “It pushes things in favor of employers.”
The harder stance started in corporate America before Trump’s executive order, but the trend is expected to accelerate. Goldman Sachs, Amazon, AT&T and JPMorgan Chase have implemented strict five-day in-office mandates, noting that being in the office will help with collaboration and innovation.
In January, AT&T employees returned to the office full time to find a shortage of desks and parking spaces — a problem the company said it’s working to address.
Meta, which owns Instagram and Facebook, is“raising the bar” on performance and cutting 5 percent of its workforce as it gears up for an “intense year,” CEO Mark Zuckerberg said in a recent company memo.
Last month, Microsoft said it will cut staff based on job performance, even as it vowed to pour more money into artificial intelligence.
Dell is mandating that workers who live within an hour of the office return full time beginning March 3. And remote employees won’t be eligible for promotions. …”
- Messages
- 15,096
Continued
“… Work culture is “probably going to shift a little bit toward the harder end” for employees, said Lori Yue, associate professor of business at Columbia Business School.
Some companies may see the government’s actions as an opportunity to make drastic changes, work experts say.
“For companies that have been wanting to return to the office and push that agenda, this could be another piece of ammunition,” Bell said.
Tech start-ups, known traditionally to be more flexible than large corporations in their work policies, also are pushing more in-person work and longer hours, some within the community said. For founders, the new culture is something they think will give them a competitive edge.
… While unions continue to fight for worker rights, union participation hit a new low of about 10 percent of U.S. workers in 2024, down from 20 percent in 1983.
Trump also fired leaders of the National Labor Relations Board and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, both federal agencies that help protect workers. …”
——
Out - work-life balance, work to live
In - live to work
“… Work culture is “probably going to shift a little bit toward the harder end” for employees, said Lori Yue, associate professor of business at Columbia Business School.
Some companies may see the government’s actions as an opportunity to make drastic changes, work experts say.
“For companies that have been wanting to return to the office and push that agenda, this could be another piece of ammunition,” Bell said.
Tech start-ups, known traditionally to be more flexible than large corporations in their work policies, also are pushing more in-person work and longer hours, some within the community said. For founders, the new culture is something they think will give them a competitive edge.
… While unions continue to fight for worker rights, union participation hit a new low of about 10 percent of U.S. workers in 2024, down from 20 percent in 1983.
Trump also fired leaders of the National Labor Relations Board and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, both federal agencies that help protect workers. …”
——
Out - work-life balance, work to live
In - live to work
JCTarheel82
Iconic Member
- Messages
- 1,157
My organization announced last week that they're working on a plan for most employees to return to the office three days/week. Improving teamwork and collaboration and that whole bullshit narrative. Decent chance that I'll have to quit considering my family situation.
Just curious, but how often are you required to go into work now?
JCTarheel82
Iconic Member
- Messages
- 1,157
Never. Been that way since the pandemic started.
ChapelHillSooner
Esteemed Member
- Messages
- 666
Looking at the last three recessions.
1. Dot-com - I don’t think you can blame that on either side. Just a natural reaction to a brand new industry.
2. Great Recession - IMO this is absolutely the fault of conservative ideology, specifically financial deregulation. How much Bush is to blame is debatable. Clinton shares a good bit of blame for signing Graham Leach Bliley. While that act had great support from both parties, all three sponsors were republicans, almost all no votes were democrats, and deregulation is a conservative principle.
3. COVID - Certainly can’t blame either party for the appearance of the pandemic and while Trump mismanaged it, I am not sure that mismanagement had a lot of impact financially. You can argue the lockdowns created financial distress but also prevented far more financial distress. In either case, those were led by state and local governments.
superrific
Legend of ZZL
- Messages
- 5,526
I promise you this is not true. I've taught the financial crisis extensively. Glass Steagall/Gramm Leach had nothing to do with it. Also, Glass Steagall was on life support and had become a deadweight regulation -- its benefits were almost nil because anyone who wanted to get around it easily could, but it was costly for those who didn't have such designs.
The person most responsible was Greenspan. The fed is supposed to supervise banks. Greenspan had no idea what they were doing. He thought they were unleveraged because he just looked at their debt: equity, ignoring the possibility of hidden liabilities. The second most responsible party was the Bush administration in general: not Bush himself, per se, but his SEC, his Office of the Comptroller, his Treasury Secretaries.