this post was submitted on 31 Jan 2026
63 points (100.0% liked)
chat
8556 readers
238 users here now
Chat is a text only community for casual conversation, please keep shitposting to the absolute minimum. This is intended to be a separate space from c/chapotraphouse or the daily megathread. Chat does this by being a long-form community where topics will remain from day to day unlike the megathread, and it is distinct from c/chapotraphouse in that we ask you to engage in this community in a genuine way. Please keep shitposting, bits, and irony to a minimum.
As with all communities posts need to abide by the code of conduct, additionally moderators will remove any posts or comments deemed to be inappropriate.
Thank you and happy chatting!
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
If you have option to put it in treasuries or money market funds, do that. so many countries have these forced savings schemes to funnel workers' savings into capital gains for capitalists.
You just gonna loan your money to the US federal government?! J/k. Idk though because then people are just giving up so much potential return (compared to stock ownership) on the money that's supposed to hold them over after they're too old to work. I know "no ethical consumption" doesn't mean I can go out and do unethical things, but I think people are forced to participate and like others in this thread point out it's on purpose.
I don't consider Treasuries to be a loan to the Government, nor does it fund the Government in any meaningful sense, interest on it is free money offered by the Government to the holders. It's interest bearing cash, no one has any qualms holding currency or working for currency (even though that too is Government debt, one which loses more purchasing power over time). Think of sovereign bonds as interest bearing money instead.
Thank you for this explanation. I hope I have not wasted your time by "getting an answer by being wrong on the internet."
You seem pretty on-the-ball on this, may I ask what you think of the argument that municipal bond measures act as kick backs to rich investors? That cities should just raise taxes to pay for whatever the thing is, instead of selling bonds investors will make profits from that will be paid by future taxpayers? This is an argument I heard all the time from a Trot friend way back when I was lil' lib.
Cities are financially constrained (unlike the Feds) so if the city wants to fund something useful for the public (like free bus), they have to issue bonds if in deficit, they are actually borrowing money.
Of course, taxing the rich is always preferable as it reduces interest payments for the financially constrained city which may be forced to cut spending if interest payments become too much. But even borrowing by issuing bonds can be a solution (it's better mobilization of rich peoples' hoards) if higher taxes on hoarders isn't possible (due to political situation) since tax revenues tend to go up over time depending on economic activity (because of Federal Govt deficits and bank credit creation) and inflation so the debt service becomes lower. All of this depends on the interest rate. Though taxing the rich is always better looking at it from city's perspective, the rich peoples' hoards are better used by the city/state Government (except for the police and all).
I was reading this book yesterday and found something new, Chapter 23 by Michael Hudson where Canadian provinces went so far as to borrow in foreign currencies with lower interest rates but with exchange rate risk and ended up paying 25% rates effectively.
Thank you for taking the time to explain this, seeing it as cities borrowing at a favorable rate puts it into perspective for me. I had not thought of it from the angle of coaxing the burghers to put their hoarded lucre to productive use. Your sharing your knowledge will genuinely make me less of a curmudgeon next time a bond measure comes up.
That's a good anecdote, jeez I love being a state government and big brain financial engineering myself into paying credit card APR.
Isn't that leaving a lot of money on the table over time?
I have about half my money in vanguard index funds. I don't like being so invested in Tesla and Microsoft, but any time I look at alternatives, the returns or fees change my mind because over time the difference ends up being a ton of money.
I get that treasuries are safer, but I feel like the stock market is propping up America so much that any long term failure of the stock market would mean the end of America and thus treasuries as well.
index funds are the only thing worth investing in, unless you feel like micromanaging this shit, and i certainly don't
True, my view is that if they are forcing me to save I would rather save in something reliable and gamble with whatever remains from my actual salary.
But I understand some people won't have much remaining savings. Nothing against anyone either way.