this post was submitted on 19 Jan 2026
619 points (99.0% liked)

Microblog Memes

11006 readers
3268 users here now

A place to share screenshots of Microblog posts, whether from Mastodon, tumblr, ~~Twitter~~ X, KBin, Threads or elsewhere.

Created as an evolution of White People Twitter and other tweet-capture subreddits.

RULES:

  1. Your post must be a screen capture of a microblog-type post that includes the UI of the site it came from, preferably also including the avatar and username of the original poster. Including relevant comments made to the original post is encouraged.
  2. Your post, included comments, or your title/comment should include some kind of commentary or remark on the subject of the screen capture. Your title must include at least one word relevant to your post.
  3. You are encouraged to provide a link back to the source of your screen capture in the body of your post.
  4. Current politics and news are allowed, but discouraged. There MUST be some kind of human commentary/reaction included (either by the original poster or you). Just news articles or headlines will be deleted.
  5. Doctored posts/images and AI are allowed, but discouraged. You MUST indicate this in your post (even if you didn't originally know). If an image is found to be fabricated or edited in any way and it is not properly labeled, it will be deleted.
  6. Absolutely no NSFL content.
  7. Be nice. Don't take anything personally. Take political debates to the appropriate communities. Take personal disagreements & arguments to private messages.
  8. No advertising, brand promotion, or guerrilla marketing.

RELATED COMMUNITIES:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] MareOfNights@discuss.tchncs.de 97 points 1 month ago (6 children)

OK, I feel like many people here don't know what this means.

The US sells bonds to people. These binds are promises to pay them back more in a certain number of years.

The EU can't demand payment for all of that debt. What the EU CAN do, is selling the bonds it already owns, flooding the market. And not buying more themselves.

This would mean, that selling more bonds would become expensive for the US. Potentially they won't find enough buyers to fund their government.

Canada already threatened that (or started to do this, I don't remember) once already at the start of Trumps term. This might have been a factor for him backing of his invasion fantasies the first time.

[–] Technus@lemmy.zip 68 points 1 month ago (8 children)

They don't even have to sell what they've got. They just have to stop buying more and invest elsewhere instead.

The US runs on a perpetually increasing deficit. If that line were to stop going up, we'd instantly fall into a recession.

[–] cheesybuddha@lemmy.world 25 points 1 month ago (1 children)

They would be crazy to keep investing in the US at this point. Why throw good money after bad? Time to cut your loses and move on I think.

[–] Tiger@sh.itjust.works 33 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Because the US economy is like a coked up salesman, not a great guy, but he’s hit those growth targets out of the park. Until now. But he’s running out of gas and the party’s over, pissed off too many people.

[–] Grandwolf319@sh.itjust.works 10 points 1 month ago (3 children)

Yeah and they are getting to a point where there isn’t much growth to be had.

Which is why I think he wants Venezuela and Greenland, I honestly think the US is kind of broke.

If that keeps the party going, then unfortunately some will keep investing.

Hence why it’s actually critical not to just give him Greenland, making it hard will have an impact.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (7 replies)
[–] Petter1@discuss.tchncs.de 13 points 1 month ago (1 children)

TIL
US is a Ponzi scheme and US used this fraud money to make weapons in order to steal more money (oil) and prevent creditors from getting their money back 🤔

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] HobbitFoot@thelemmy.club 13 points 1 month ago (1 children)

To add context, part of getting Great Britain and France to back off in the Suez Crisis was Eisenhower threatening to sell off American owned debt in these two countries.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] III@lemmy.world 10 points 1 month ago

This might have been a factor for him backing of his invasion fantasies the first time.

Joke is on them, he is so vapidly stupid he forgot and is again threatening Canada.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] bonenode@piefed.social 91 points 1 month ago (3 children)

I mean, Deutsche Bank is not exactly a good guy either. Same as pretty much all other banks.

[–] GreenBeanMachine@lemmy.world 55 points 1 month ago (7 children)

I will side with the lesser evil. But so far it's just empty words, they need to dump all of those bonds.

[–] tomiant@piefed.social 16 points 1 month ago

Yeah these people will do only what is financially expedient, they are amoral by definition.

[–] arrow74@lemmy.zip 13 points 1 month ago

Very noble of you.

The bank will side with whoever makes them the most money. Cutting off the US means a default on loans. They won't do it, they will lobby their governments to not do it, and will only do it if their home country forces them to do so.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] panda_abyss@lemmy.ca 27 points 1 month ago (3 children)

The Beaverton had an article the other day “Canada chooses lawful evil over chaotic evil”

I’ve also seen posts online along the lines of “I’d rather deal with lex Luther than the joker”

[–] JasonDJ@lemmy.zip 15 points 1 month ago (1 children)

He's not like Heath Ledger's Joker. Not even Jack Nicholson's Joker.

He's more like...Jim Carey's Riddler.

[–] WhiskyTangoFoxtrot@lemmy.world 9 points 1 month ago (1 children)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] tomiant@piefed.social 7 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Say what you will about Lex Luther but at least he had an ethos.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] JoMiran@lemmy.ml 75 points 1 month ago (4 children)

Counterpoint:

If you owe the bank $100 that's your problem. If you owe the bank $100 million, that's the bank's problem.

-- J. Paul Getty

I'm not defending the US, I'm just pointing out a teeny ten trillion dollar problem.

[–] MareOfNights@discuss.tchncs.de 22 points 1 month ago (1 children)

They need to sell more bonds though. Europe can flood the market, leading to a collapse of the bonds value.

That would mean, more debt would become increasingly expensive for the US, potentially to the point where they won't find more lenders.

[–] JoMiran@lemmy.ml 13 points 1 month ago (9 children)

Sure. But the trillions that Europe holds will become worthless if the US defaults.

[–] NotSteve_@piefed.ca 17 points 1 month ago

Honestly those trillions seem to be on a fast track to being worthless either way. Might as well leverage them as a loud fuck off to the USA

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] horn_e4_beaver@discuss.tchncs.de 13 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I think you're missing the part where the US goes effectively bankrupt because it can't sell debt. Everybody loses.

[–] NotMyOldRedditName@lemmy.world 7 points 1 month ago (7 children)

I think they'd just print more money first wouldn't they? That would lead to high inflation, and they'd need more money so print more, and next thing you know they're challenging Zimbabwe for the highest denomination bill?

[–] horn_e4_beaver@discuss.tchncs.de 15 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Bye bye confidence in the dollar.

What do think tarrifs are for? They get people used to inflation.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] resipsaloquitur@lemmy.world 9 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

That, and the US is a fiat currency system. Treasuries are a relic of the gold standard. If no one wants to loan the US the money it itself creates out of thin air, it can simply loan itself the money. Really, just will it into existence.

Europeans can exchange their dollar holdings for other currencies or spend their dollars on US goods or dollar-denominated oil. This would weaken the dollar and make imports into the US more expensive. But it’d make US exports more competitive.

I’m always baffled how people, particularly Europeans, don’t understand fiat currency. They have ceded their sovereignty to bond market vigilantes so thoroughly they can’t even conceive of a fiat system.

This particular threat seems like a way to wishfully think their way out of a poor defensive posture. Europe, you’re being squeezed by Russia on one side, the US on the other, and China is hollowing out your manufacturing. Time to hit the gym.

This devalues the currency making it harder to import things and if no one buys your exports you'll have a very very sad economy. Printing money is possible but has very serious repercussions if you just yolo.

[–] AbsolutelyNotAVelociraptor@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 month ago (4 children)

it would be the bank's problem if burgerland stopped borrowing money. Instead they keep going because they can't fund themselves. I wonder what could happen if nobody lent them any more money.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] Thedogdrinkscoffee@lemmy.ca 28 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (4 children)

Yes, but this doesn't go far enough. The entire world no longer benefits from a strong US. As an unreliable business partner and security partner, everyone should be coordinating the disuse of American tech, abandoning dollars and disposing of debt.

Its all unbacked liabilities now. Market makers can make the numbers go up for a time to incentivise the greedy, needy and stupid, but if there has ever been a clear case of a sinking ship, it's the US. No one is free to do business anymore. This means that US tainted assets will tank and anyone left holding the bag will be sorry. Pension funds especially. The risk vs return equation just put a singularity on the risk side. No one can afford to do business under these circumstances. Radical market interventionism breaks investment, productivity and returns.

Get out while you still can. Don't be the last one left holding the bag.

load more comments (4 replies)

Yeah, same with Canada. We have about 430 billion in US debt. Admittedly not as much as Europe, but still a big chunk. And it was Carney that suggested other countries consider dumping this debt if tarifs went out of control. 

[–] Deceptichum@quokk.au 15 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (3 children)

Haven’t Deutsche Bank been busted multiple times for being Putins money launderers?

I cant see capitalists sacrificing trillions for 60,000 people.

[–] tempest@lemmy.ca 13 points 1 month ago (1 children)

They have been busted for all sorts of stuff the controversies heading (which feels like a misnomer) in their Wikipedia is quite long.

That said they could still be correct here.

[–] Deceptichum@quokk.au 7 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

They're correct in that Europe holds trillions in US assets, my issue is with the premise that they'll trade a towns worth of people for that.

Capitalists have made it known where there allegiances lie, and it's not with the people.

[–] phoenixz@lemmy.ca 5 points 1 month ago
  1. yes, but that doesn't mean that they're right or wrong about this. Also, thanks to lax regulations, at this point what bank hasn't?

  2. this goes way WAY beyond 60.000 people because this won't stop at Greenland. Also, this is something that a government could require banks to do. This also goes without mentioning that they're not sacrificing much beyond getting money for the IOY papers.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] JasonDJ@lemmy.zip 15 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Because that is MAD. Literally. Economic mutually-assured destruction.

Who had "WW3 being started over a bounced check"?

[–] PostingInPublic@lemmy.world 10 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Nah, these balls can be lightly squeezed, not just cut off. They can be squeezed lightly for a longer time, making Americans uncomfortable for months, or once in a not so gentle way.

The central banks can do that by selling bonds at a slughtly cheaper price than the US offers for their new bonds, forcing them to offer higher rates, making their debt more expensive.

It's the perfect instrument, if you're willing to pay the price.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] dandelion@lemmy.blahaj.zone 15 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

https://www.congress.gov/crs-product/RS22331

As of 2024, 70% of debt is owed domestically, i.e. bonds are owned primarily by people within the US. Only 30% of US debt is owned by foreign interests.

Foreign debt is mostly owned by Japan:

  1. Japan, $1,061 billion, 12.4% of foreign debt
  2. China, $759 billion, 8.87%
  3. United Kingdom, $722 billion, 8.44%

It's only when you group together all "European countries" that they collectively hold the most debt.

Here's a more updated figure from 2025:

https://www.pgpf.org/article/the-federal-government-has-borrowed-trillions-but-who-owns-all-that-debt/

It seems like a trend right now is that China is divesting from the US:

https://www.scmp.com/economy/global-economy/article/3340164/china-dumps-more-us-debt-buys-other-assets-trump-targets-powell

Beijing’s stockpile fell to US$682.6 billion in November, down from US$688.7 billion in October, according to US Treasury Department data released on Thursday.

That marks the lowest level since September 2008 and a nearly 10 per cent drop since last January, according to financial data provider Wind.

[–] unexposedhazard@discuss.tchncs.de 15 points 1 month ago (1 children)

The idea behind grouping them is that all those "european countries" can act as one through EU coordination. So it makes no sense to separate them when talking about negotiating power.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] bjoern_tantau@swg-empire.de 12 points 1 month ago (3 children)

As if the current administration would ever do such an outdated thing as "paying back a loan". Of course getting a new loan is a problem for future-US.

[–] gressen@lemmy.zip 8 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Defaulting on a loan would have disastrous consequences.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)

They also rely upon the rest of the world paying patent royalties and other IP associated revenue... funny how patents are basically a database of free valuable knowledge when you quit giving af about the owners 🤔

[–] ClownStatue@piefed.social 6 points 1 month ago (3 children)

Only problem I can see if they play that card, there’s a pretty good chance the US population responds by burrowing further up its own ass. Eventually, you have a very well armed rogue state (assuming we don’t already have one just yet).

[–] Augustiner@lemmy.world 25 points 1 month ago (1 children)

So let’s continue with the appeasement policy. Worked great last time…

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] AbsolutelyNotAVelociraptor@sh.itjust.works 9 points 1 month ago (8 children)

how long can an army obbey orders if they are not paid?

load more comments (8 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›