james22 Posted February 4 Author Posted February 4 1 hour ago, Xerxes said: Caisse de dépôt et placement du Québec Woke up from a nap to first read this and thought I'd had a stroke.
dwy000 Posted February 4 Posted February 4 1 hour ago, Vish_ram said: SWF assets: All confiscated assets that are proven to be part of criminal operation that Govt isn’t selling, If Govt bails out anyone, SWF will get some warrants. any NIH funding to private results in issuance of equity to SWF. only prob is that Dems will squander it away when they regain power. Aren't seized assets already divided between the local/state/federal agencies responsible for their seizure? I think it's supposed to be both a funding source and incentive to seized crime related assets. To be meaningful, any SWF would need tens, if not hundreds of billions, of fairly liquid assets. The problem isn't figuring out assets, it's getting those who control or benefit from them today to give them up for use by generations down the road.
Xerxes Posted February 4 Posted February 4 28 minutes ago, james22 said: Woke up from a nap to first read this and thought I'd had a stroke. haha. you got to work on your French. https://www.cdpq.com/fr/a-propos/histoire Established the 1960s. Currently $C450 billion in assets. I should clarify that pension fund and sovereign fund serve different purpose. So my initial statement that stated that QC has a large fund despite not being a net energy exporter is erroneous.
Spooky Posted February 4 Posted February 4 It would be good to give all Americans a stake in the economy / output of the nation, it might help with inequality and the feeling that only the top 1% benefit from capitalism. I wish Canada had done something similar to Norway with its energy assets, we would all be wealthy . The downside is that there are additional fees and costs and less agency for individuals to make investing decisions. Governance also needs to be thought through carefuly, MBS took over control of the Saudi PIF and has been making some pretty bad investments. Ontario tried to set up a separate provincial pension plan and that was a disaster which ultimately fell apart. Another idea that I thought was cool is giving every citizen a trust fund when they are born with like $5k in the S&P 500 which they can't sell until they are an adult. Give people some ownership and skin in the game.
TwoCitiesCapital Posted February 5 Posted February 5 (edited) 3 hours ago, Spooky said: It would be good to give all Americans a stake in the economy / output of the nation There is already the opportunity for this. Anytime can open a brokerage account with minimal upfront and buy the S&P ETF commission free. 3 hours ago, Spooky said: , it might help with inequality and the feeling that only the top 1% benefit from capitalism. I am skeptical it will help anyone except the well connected and political elite. 3 hours ago, Spooky said: I wish Canada had done something similar to Norway with its energy assets, we would all be wealthy . Norway find itself in an enviable position, but it's not real 'wealth' if you don't control it. 3 hours ago, Spooky said: Another idea that I thought was cool is giving every citizen a trust fund when they are born with like $5k in the S&P 500 which they can't sell until they are an adult. Give people some ownership and skin in the game. IMO, this is a much better idea and a program easily affordable by US govt compared to other social safety net services. Just have to make the money untouchable until 18 - ideally even longer. Maybe 25 or 35. Edited February 5 by TwoCitiesCapital
alpha Posted February 5 Posted February 5 4 hours ago, Spooky said: I wish Canada had done something similar to Norway with its energy assets, we would all be wealthy . Ugh if I remember correctly Norway based their system on Alberta's but Albertans voted in a new govt that gutted it for special interests while Norway maintained theirs.
james22 Posted February 5 Author Posted February 5 One of the first sovereign wealth funds: the Alaska Permanent Fund Asset classes are managed by a dedicated team of investment professionals focused on achieving best-in-class overall performance. Investments are spread across most markets, countries, and currencies to achieve broad exposure to global growth and value creation, taking advantage of the Fund’s long-term horizon and size to generate high returns and maintain wealth for future generations. The Fund is invested across public and private assets, and the asset allocation consists of eight asset classes: Public Equities Fixed-Income Private Equity Real Estate Private Income: Infrastructure, Private Credit, & Income Opportunities Absolute Return Strategies Tactical Opportunities Cash. https://www.ifswf.org/members/usa https://apfc.org/performance/
formthirteen Posted February 5 Posted February 5 On 2/4/2025 at 4:26 AM, Xerxes said: I meant to post this few months ago and create a dedicated thread on sovereign funds. Forgot. I guess this thread is a good home for it. Yes, Farouk Al-Kasim, the guy who saved Norway from being destroyed by oil by telling the Norwegians they had oil. Here's an FT article about him: https://archive.is/lEYl7#selection-2133.659-2146.1 Quote This is better understood today than it was 40 years ago. When al-Kasim arrived in Oslo, no one was worrying about how oil might challenge Norway – in part because they didn’t think any would be found. The Geological Survey of Norway had dismissed the possibility just 10 years earlier. The politicians and senior bureaucrats had not caught oil fever. A serious mining accident had recently brought down a government, and most did not want to touch oil matters with a bargepole. “Everything I said was met with, ‘Oh, you think so? Mmm. Maybe. Let’s wait and see’,” al-Kasim recalls. “This characteristic saved Norway from the curse of oil: the fact that they are completely incapable of getting carried away by the oil dream. They were very sceptical – plain horse sense basically. They didn’t want to move until it was absolutely proven that it was the right time to act.” Norway's government is run by humans and they are not able to keep their hands out of the cookie jar: https://www.norskpetroleum.no/en/economy/petroleum-tax/ Quote Temporary changes in the petroleum tax system In the first half of 2020 the global oil demand fell dramatically because of the Covid-19 pandemic. The pandemic, combined with low oil and gas prices, resulted in temporary financial difficulties and increased uncertainty. Without temporary tax changes, the investment activity on the Norwegian continental shelf could have been lower than expected as a consequence of postponed of planned and profitable projects. This could have led to problems for the service and supply industry. ”Temporary changes” are still ongoing. The net government cash flow from petroleum activities has not yet recovered from the COVID-19 dip. Oh wait, I could be wrong:
gfp Posted February 5 Posted February 5 What is the point of the US government having a large sovereign wealth fund? Is it to "make money" in order to have money to spend later? It seems like people are missing the difference between a State that can't issue its own currency, a country that runs a large trade surplus and is forced to stockpile someone else's currency, and the United States - which is nothing like either. Remember how "government owning stuff" is, like, the worst?
yesman182 Posted February 5 Posted February 5 5 minutes ago, gfp said: What is the point of the US government having a large sovereign wealth fund? Is it to "make money" in order to have money to spend later? It seems like people are missing the difference between a State that can't issue its own currency, a country that runs a large trade surplus and is forced to stockpile someone else's currency, and the United States - which is nothing like either. Remember how "government owning stuff" is, like, the worst? and on top of that, the US government already owns the profits of all American companies via the corporate tax. The US government doesn't need equity in these companies to share in the profits.....
73 Reds Posted February 5 Posted February 5 5 minutes ago, gfp said: What is the point of the US government having a large sovereign wealth fund? Is it to "make money" in order to have money to spend later? It seems like people are missing the difference between a State that can't issue its own currency, a country that runs a large trade surplus and is forced to stockpile someone else's currency, and the United States - which is nothing like either. Remember how "government owning stuff" is, like, the worst? True, it would be unusual for a country with a large deficit to establish a SWF but isn't it similar in concept to those who believe a low interest mortgage is a wise decision? A lot of variables would need to be addressed/agreed on before a SWF comes into being, which in this environment seems like a long shot.
gfp Posted February 5 Posted February 5 Just now, 73 Reds said: True, it would be unusual for a country with a large deficit to establish a SWF but isn't it similar in concept to those who believe a low interest mortgage is a wise decision? A lot of variables would need to be addressed/agreed on before a SWF comes into being, which in this environment seems like a long shot. No that misses my point entirely. Where does US dollar "money" come from? Does Delta need a fund of SkyMiles held in a reserve somewhere so they have some to give out to you when they need them?
73 Reds Posted February 5 Posted February 5 Just now, gfp said: No that misses my point entirely. Where does US dollar "money" come from? Does Delta need a fund of SkyMiles held in a reserve somewhere so they have some to give out to you when they need them? Sure, but a SWF doesn't depreciate the currency.
John Hjorth Posted February 5 Posted February 5 38 minutes ago, gfp said: What is the point of the US government having a large sovereign wealth fund? Is it to "make money" in order to have money to spend later? It seems like people are missing the difference between a State that can't issue its own currency, a country that runs a large trade surplus and is forced to stockpile someone else's currency, and the United States - which is nothing like either. Remember how "government owning stuff" is, like, the worst? Yes, @gfp, Today I have reread the White House Fact Sheet, that I linked to upsteam yesterday. In all honesty, I simply can't find out from it, what is up, and what is down, what this really is about. It leaves the reader absolutely puzzled, with the question : 'State capitalism in the United States of America at federal level?' And this based on initiative by Donald Trump? The last of it : Quote ... Sovereign wealth funds are maintained by a diverse array of countries leveraging equally varied classes of national assets. President Trump has called for a sovereign wealth fund to ensure the United States can lead the way in long-term wealth generation. The United Kingdom recently announced their own plans to pursue development of such a fund. In addition to countries around the world maintaining their own funds, 23 states within our own country maintain their own funds that control in total $332 billion in assets. It reads to me like 'Many others have such a thing, so we need one, too.', basically.
gfp Posted February 5 Posted February 5 I certainly understand why Wall Street would be into the idea. I mean, Blackrock has to manage the governments assets already right? Remember when the Federal Reserve wanted to buy up corporate bonds? Gotta have helpers for that!
dwy000 Posted February 5 Posted February 5 IF (that's a massive IF) you have a balanced budget, a SWF can be beneficial in smoothing volatility of spend or being used to fund activity that benefits the country but takes it out of government reach (eg university education, research, etc). But the temptation for govt to dip their hand for political benefit is massive and if you run a continued deficit, the idea of using your assets for one thing while borrowing for your day to day spend seems silly.
John Hjorth Posted February 5 Posted February 5 6 minutes ago, dwy000 said: IF (that's a massive IF) you have a balanced budget, a SWF can be beneficial in smoothing volatility of spend or being used to fund activity that benefits the country but takes it out of government reach (eg university education, research, etc). But the temptation for govt to dip their hand for political benefit is massive and if you run a continued deficit, the idea of using your assets for one thing while borrowing for your day to day spend seems silly. Yes, @dwy000, Here is a link to the Norwegian Wikipedia website about a SWF, here translated to english : Norwegian Wikipedia : State investment fund. Quote ... The most common reasons for formation of such funds are : - Reduce the volatility of Government profits - Reduce the adverse effect of economic market fluctuations on government consumption and the national economy - Build up savings for future generations
Xerxes Posted February 5 Posted February 5 (edited) The video is not about SWF but about the original tariff man. And how at some point they “had” to get rid of surplus. That is history. If there is a more to the tariff than it being simply a negotiating tool, if there is real conviction in the White House that it is a permanent tool to increase revenues, (not just to arm wrestle other trading partner), than those future cash pile have to go somewhere, if not earmarked for debt reduction. why would they not go for debt reduction ? No clue. Not everything has to make sense right away. Couple that with bitcoin reserve aspirations (as unlikely as it seems). Wouldn’t those be place in this so called SWF as well. I don’t know the history of SPR well but I imagine when it was first envisioned during the Arab oil embargo, the idea that US had to “save” up expensive barrels during the time when demand was really high seem absurd. like I said not everything has to make sense right away. Edited February 5 by Xerxes
John Hjorth Posted February 5 Posted February 5 YouTube - Reuters [ February 4 2025] : Trump says US sovereign wealth fund could buy TikTok | REUTERS So, now we have a POTUS yesterday asking for a plan for a soveriegn fund for the United States of America, and at the same day talking about placing a part of Tik-Tok there? - - - o 0 o - - - Are you still confused, @Xerxes ?
Xerxes Posted February 5 Posted February 5 6 minutes ago, John Hjorth said: YouTube - Reuters [ February 4 2025] : Trump says US sovereign wealth fund could buy TikTok | REUTERS So, now we have a POTUS yesterday asking for a plan for a soveriegn fund for the United States of America, and at the same day talking about placing a part of Tik-Tok there? - - - o 0 o - - - Are you still confused, @Xerxes ? Right … Tik Tok and a certain Riviera in the near east could be great foundational long term investment bedrock for the SWF PIF has the Neom, so….
John Hjorth Posted February 5 Posted February 5 6 minutes ago, Xerxes said: Right … Tik Tok and a certain Riviera in the near east could be great foundational long term investment bedrock for the SWF PIF has the Neom, so…. Now you're killing me, @Xerxes!
sleepydragon Posted February 5 Posted February 5 1 hour ago, Xerxes said: Right … Tik Tok and a certain Riviera in the near east could be great foundational long term investment bedrock for the SWF PIF has the Neom, so…. add some bitcoin, ethenum, and doge coins for diversification
Xerxes Posted February 5 Posted February 5 2 hours ago, John Hjorth said: Now you're killing me, @Xerxes! Well, that would explain why a nation armed with what the French called privilège exorbitant of having a reserve currency + a structural trade deficit needs a SWF: Illiquid assets like TikTok, certain Riviera in the near east filled with condominiums and beachfront properties plus Bitcoin need to long term runway to get the compounding machine going. It would not makes sense to liquidate in the short term to offset part of the national debt.
Xerxes Posted February 5 Posted February 5 I am actually really curious as to the men and women advising Trump on SWF and seeding it with TikTok. Right or wrong, there must be some high level thinking (not being sarcastic here) behind all the chaos and high-VIX press releases. Like to know the architects.
cubsfan Posted February 5 Posted February 5 4 hours ago, Xerxes said: The video is not about SWF but about the original tariff man. And how at some point they “had” to get rid of surplus. That is history. If there is a more to the tariff than it being simply a negotiating tool, if there is real conviction in the White House that it is a permanent tool to increase revenues, (not just to arm wrestle other trading partner), than those future cash pile have to go somewhere, if not earmarked for debt reduction. why would they not go for debt reduction ? No clue. Not everything has to make sense right away. like I said not everything has to make sense right away. No doubt this is on the table - debt reduction via tariffs. It was mentioned by Richardgibbons previously, and the President has said as much. Like you say, we will have to see what he has up his sleeve.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now