[Jensson]

USA has financed itself by taking investments/loans from other countries for decades now, at some point the net inflow of money will have to stop and the country will have to sustain itself rather than live off funding. Imagine what happens to the economy when you can no longer import twice as much goods as you export.

[cronix]

Exactly what happened in NYC in the 1970's. The city gov't was so far in debt with social program spending that the bankers, the ones who purchased the bonds that facilitated the debt that allowed the city to spend more than it took in, literally didn't show up to the next bond sale. NYC plunged into darkness for a long time. Complete misery. The rich left, taking their tax dollars with them. Crime rose to all time high levels. Buildings sat in decay. Debt is ok, unless there is no way to pay it back.

> In the early 1970s, the City’s borrowing increased rapidly and bankers began to question the accuracy of its financial records and its ability to repay its debt. These concerns were exacerbated in 1974, when the State Urban Development Corporation defaulted on some of its debt. In 1975, the banks lost confidence in the City’s numbers and financial managers, and there were no bids for New York City notes and bonds. In short order, New York City lost all access to the long-term and short-term debt markets. During FY 1975, New York City had borrowed more that $8 billion in short term debt and had $4.5 million of notes outstanding at the end of the fiscal year. Moreover, New York City was funding $600 million (about 5% of its operating budget) through issuance of long-term bonds. When the markets closed to the City, it was unable to fund its cash flow needs; it was forced to halt its capital program; it could not finance the portion of its operating budget that had been funded by long-term debt; and it could no longer roll its accumulated deficit from year to year

https://wagner.nyu.edu/files/faculty/publications/Forsythe_D...

Similarly, the world was doing something similar to the US in the 1970's, then Nixon decided to take us off the gold standard and go to a fiat currency, which we still use today. They were questioning America's ability to repay it's bond obligations and whether America had enough physical gold in its vaults to cover it's paper currency inflation. Instead of being repaid in dollars, they started demanding being repaid in gold, which put a run on the gold supply, so Nixon took us off. The whole system is fake, and ripe for collapse. All major nations are financing the US Gov't. One day, they just might decide America is too far in debt to repay them, and stop. I think that's a matter if when, not if. I mean, have you looked at the interest rate on long term bonds?

[fshbbdssbbgdd]

The 30 year treasury rate is 2%, which is extremely low compared to historic rates. A lower rate indicates higher demand for the bonds. In other words, we seem to be at very low risk of being unable to find someone to buy the bonds.

In fact, it’s impossible, since the treasury can always buy them. Unlike New York City, the US government issues the currency as well as bonds denominated in that currency.

[tryptophan]

Interest rates dont mean anything anymore(ie you cant draw any conclusions about the risk the market is pricing in). The entire credit market is manipulated by the FED.

The fed owns like 20% of all federal debt, bought with printed money. Recently they have also been printing so much that they eat up >50% of bond auctions.

[imtringued]

Thank you. Now I am fully convinced that "printed money" and "money printing" is a meaningless term that means absolutely nothing.

Before that I assumed that there was some logic behind the term but it is clear that there isn't.

[Gustomaximus]

There is some logic. It's heading towards MMT

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern_Monetary_Theory

Many people misunderstand what MMT actually is, cherry pick parts and call that MMT. It's interesting concept, I dont think it will work but many do.

[syshum]

>>since the treasury can always buy them.

Inflation will have a say in that... Zimbabwe here we come.

I cant wait until I need a virtual truck load of dollars to buy a loaf of bread because the "treasury can issues the currency"

[quickthrowman]

> In fact, it’s impossible, since the treasury can always buy them.

Minor correction: The US Treasury issues bonds, the Federal Reserve Bank is the buyer.

[imtringued]

Yeah sure but this is old news.

>Keynes was able to make his proposal the official British proposal at the Bretton Woods Conference but it was not accepted.[4] Rather than a supranational currency, the conference adopted a system of pegged exchange rates ultimately tied to physical gold in a system managed by the World Bank and IMF. In practice, the system implicitly established the United States dollar as a reserve currency convertible to gold at a fixed price on demand by other governments. The dollar was implicitly established as the reserve by the large trade surplus and gold reserves held by the US at the time of the conference.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bancor

[snovv_crash]

Even more telling, look at the futures on long term bonds.

[imtringued]

>Imagine what happens to the economy when you can no longer import twice as much goods as you export.

Jobs would come back. Wealth inequality would stop growing. Right wing extremism would die a quick death. All of this wouldn't be a big issue if your government used the cheap money to build long lasting infrastructure that will be of use long after the cheap money is gone. Oh, right. Trump did massive income tax cuts and burned a hole into the budget and now it's Biden with his infrastructure bill who is irresponsible.

[iammisc]

> Right wing extremism would die a quick death.

Suggesting that jobs be brought back and goods produced here is right wing extremism according to many these days. If you do those things, right wing extremism won't die, it will have achieved its policy goals.

[naveen99]

Money flows to the us when it’s felt to have the best use for the capital. Money will flow back to the creditors when they have better use of the capital themselves.

[sonthonax]

No it hasn’t. Most US public debt is held domestically (while I’m not sure on the specifics, I think it’s about 80%).

[Jensson]

> No it hasn’t. Most US public debt is held domestically (while I’m not sure on the specifics, I think it’s about 80%).

You aren't contradicting anything I said here. Most debt is domestic, but what matters is the external debt and it will dry up, and when it does USA will no longer be able to import way more than it exports. And imports/exports affects everything else in the economy, so altering massively as is bound to happen would have huge consequences.

[maxerickson]

Money doesn't drive the economy, it lubricates it.

[Jensson]

I'm not just talking about money, I am talking about net imports of goods and services. You can't print more goods and services with the dollars presses.