The first things the Democrats would do with a sovereign wealth fund would be to mandate IRA and 401k investments go in to it and then make investments in all their pet boondoogles. Definitely a bad idea.
I'm not sure how a Sovereign Wealth Fund works. Is where people who work have part of their income confiscated every payday with the promise of future payments after they can't work any longer? (Sarc)
A nation that has managed to get itself trillions of dollars in debt should not be rewarded with a Sovereign Wealth Fund and the management of such.
Is it relates to tariffs, I know we have disagreed partially on this, but I find that it can occasionally be an effective maneuver for a short-term political gain if accompanied by other things and it is a wise play when done in the short term.
Jeff, you are totally convincing about Sovereign Wealth Funds. I'm not sure, however, about tariffs. Trump seems to use them as a lever against countries who do similar to us, sometimes through deliberately underselling to gain market share and so forth. I read it he would remove tariffs in a minute of there was movement toward equalization. It's the Art of the Deal.
I think that there is A LOT to do on the regulatory and tax front first. Tariffs are a tax on consumers. Been proven over and over again in study after study. Anticompetitive as well and ensure homegrown industries stay fat and unproductive. See auto and steel. There is an argument to be made that we are better off letting commoditized manufacturing happen in other countries and redeploy our manufacturing workforce into higher value manufacturing (not learning to code!)
Yes, I get it, but the problem of China looms large. The more dependent on them we are, the more trouble we're in. I used to be totally in synch with your approach, buying into the idea of a financially interlocked world being safer, but the more I got to know the CCP and their intentions, the less I was convinced. It's certainly complicated. Anyway, congrats on your Substack that is already invaluable for straightening out the economic ins and outs.
100% agree. I do think you can’t have good ideas without having lot’s of ideas. So, let the debate begin. But this is not a good idea. We don’t beat other countries by being like other countries. We beat them by being the United States. The fact that we keep talking about how to make America more competitive suggests that somehow we have become less competitive. And we have. But it is all because we have too much government, not too little. Any idea that gives government more power and money is a bad idea…period. Not saying we couldn’t find something worthy to spend on, but if we do we should only fund it by cutting other spending and I would argue $3 somewhere else to fund $1 of something that actually makes sense. Like…$3 less in windmill subsidies to spend $1 more on security inside schools.
Right. I think often Trump spitballs stuff in a brainstorming way (giving him the benefit of the doubt) or, just is so undisciplined and stream of consciousness says stuff without thinking.
Newt used to do it all the time. He had a staffer with a notebook follow him everywhere and he would just toss stuff out. 90% of it never saw the light of day. The wealth fund shouldn’t ever happen. People complain about Trump and bleach and blue lights and, yet, I just get handed a cleaning clothes on every United flight while the bathrooms in the airport had blue lights in the hand blowers. So, while everyone says Trump is stupidly saying stuff the real world does something close to what he was talking about.
Public-private schemes are the worst of both worlds. It's just another name for cronyism, where favored parties get preferential treatment for a venture that wouldn't be accorded access to market capital, while giving cover to politicians for appropriate accountability, transparency and oversight. It muddies the water by mixing two different avenues of development: public purpose--or private risk.
Instead of sovereign wealth fund we have ARPA, DARPA, Bell Labs, Xerox Parc, Argonne, Lawrence Livermore, Fermi and on and on the list goes, federally funded and corporately funded. We have no need for a sovereign wealth fund. The idea is inelegant, but he is closing in on the right track. Development, innovation, basic research; stand back and let them do their work.
If the government money is given with NO STRINGS, it is possible it can work. However, always strings. Remember, the internet was a discarded piece of junk until entrepreneurs picked it up and started playing with it. We have Argonne-Fermilab, and understand a lot about nuclear power, but we do nothing with it. How many federal $$$ are wasted on research grants at universities? What's the world look like if those $$$ are investor dollars seeking a return, not government largesse?
Jeff, you are spot on with your comments on the sovereign wealth fund. Another dumb idea from Trump. He should be asking questions why certain countries have these funds and it would then occur why we do not have a sovereign fund here. Dumb ideas are in bloom this election from both GOP and DEMS. Trump continues to show he does not understand economics (tariffs). Harris only understands more government and socialism. I hope the GOP wins the Senate like they predict to ensure whoever gets the Presidency will be somewhat kept in check. This has turned into horrible choices for President. Very disappointed in both candidates.
I don't agree that Trump doesn't understand economics. I'd say that tariffs are easy for an audience to understand, and most countries use them, so it's easy for him to talk about them. My hope is that the legislature doesn't keep him in check, but works with him to pass very aggressive pro-competition pro-free market legislation. Getting rid of the Deep State would be a fantastic start
Oh, please. Trump is not perfect, but who is? You, anonymous Tony? If you are looking for a perfect politician you will die in the search. Compared to Kamala Trump is John the Baptist. And he's a lot better than many RINO senators you seem to put undue faith in.
no doubt.....I am happy to see Dick Cheney on the other side. It shows that he wasn't ever a Republican, but purely a politician in pursuit of power that used the Republican Party because it was convenient---Cheney grows up in New Jersey he's a Dem. He used his government position to grift his way into very nice private occupations. Biden used the government to enrich his family. There isn't a big dark line of difference between the two though one is illegal (Biden) because it's outright corruption and one is a more behind the curtain corrupt
I notice a lot of folks point to Norway or Singapore or Alaska and say "they manage their funds well". Management of the funds isn't the issue. It's the principle. That is taxpayer money and there is no public benefit compared to the public benefit of giving that money to individual citizens and let them invest on their own behalf, or spend it, or save it. It is centralized money management for centralized government while marginalizing citizens.
A sovereign wealth fund might be a good idea once our politician's stop deficit spending and taxpayers, pay off the $35,000,000,000,000.00 of national debt. Until then, not so much.
The first things the Democrats would do with a sovereign wealth fund would be to mandate IRA and 401k investments go in to it and then make investments in all their pet boondoogles. Definitely a bad idea.
I'm not sure how a Sovereign Wealth Fund works. Is where people who work have part of their income confiscated every payday with the promise of future payments after they can't work any longer? (Sarc)
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sovereign_wealth_fund
This is a pretty balanced description. They exist primarily although not exclusively under authoritarian governments.
A nation that has managed to get itself trillions of dollars in debt should not be rewarded with a Sovereign Wealth Fund and the management of such.
Is it relates to tariffs, I know we have disagreed partially on this, but I find that it can occasionally be an effective maneuver for a short-term political gain if accompanied by other things and it is a wise play when done in the short term.
Jeff, you are totally convincing about Sovereign Wealth Funds. I'm not sure, however, about tariffs. Trump seems to use them as a lever against countries who do similar to us, sometimes through deliberately underselling to gain market share and so forth. I read it he would remove tariffs in a minute of there was movement toward equalization. It's the Art of the Deal.
I think that there is A LOT to do on the regulatory and tax front first. Tariffs are a tax on consumers. Been proven over and over again in study after study. Anticompetitive as well and ensure homegrown industries stay fat and unproductive. See auto and steel. There is an argument to be made that we are better off letting commoditized manufacturing happen in other countries and redeploy our manufacturing workforce into higher value manufacturing (not learning to code!)
Yes, I get it, but the problem of China looms large. The more dependent on them we are, the more trouble we're in. I used to be totally in synch with your approach, buying into the idea of a financially interlocked world being safer, but the more I got to know the CCP and their intentions, the less I was convinced. It's certainly complicated. Anyway, congrats on your Substack that is already invaluable for straightening out the economic ins and outs.
100% agree. I do think you can’t have good ideas without having lot’s of ideas. So, let the debate begin. But this is not a good idea. We don’t beat other countries by being like other countries. We beat them by being the United States. The fact that we keep talking about how to make America more competitive suggests that somehow we have become less competitive. And we have. But it is all because we have too much government, not too little. Any idea that gives government more power and money is a bad idea…period. Not saying we couldn’t find something worthy to spend on, but if we do we should only fund it by cutting other spending and I would argue $3 somewhere else to fund $1 of something that actually makes sense. Like…$3 less in windmill subsidies to spend $1 more on security inside schools.
Right. I think often Trump spitballs stuff in a brainstorming way (giving him the benefit of the doubt) or, just is so undisciplined and stream of consciousness says stuff without thinking.
Newt used to do it all the time. He had a staffer with a notebook follow him everywhere and he would just toss stuff out. 90% of it never saw the light of day. The wealth fund shouldn’t ever happen. People complain about Trump and bleach and blue lights and, yet, I just get handed a cleaning clothes on every United flight while the bathrooms in the airport had blue lights in the hand blowers. So, while everyone says Trump is stupidly saying stuff the real world does something close to what he was talking about.
hahahahaha, that's funny and true which is sad.
State ownership of the means of production. Now WHERE have I heard of THAT before?
Public-private schemes are the worst of both worlds. It's just another name for cronyism, where favored parties get preferential treatment for a venture that wouldn't be accorded access to market capital, while giving cover to politicians for appropriate accountability, transparency and oversight. It muddies the water by mixing two different avenues of development: public purpose--or private risk.
Dumb ideas are equal opportunity employers and cross party lines. Also, everything looks good on paper. In real life? Not so much.
Instead of sovereign wealth fund we have ARPA, DARPA, Bell Labs, Xerox Parc, Argonne, Lawrence Livermore, Fermi and on and on the list goes, federally funded and corporately funded. We have no need for a sovereign wealth fund. The idea is inelegant, but he is closing in on the right track. Development, innovation, basic research; stand back and let them do their work.
If the government money is given with NO STRINGS, it is possible it can work. However, always strings. Remember, the internet was a discarded piece of junk until entrepreneurs picked it up and started playing with it. We have Argonne-Fermilab, and understand a lot about nuclear power, but we do nothing with it. How many federal $$$ are wasted on research grants at universities? What's the world look like if those $$$ are investor dollars seeking a return, not government largesse?
Jeff, you are spot on with your comments on the sovereign wealth fund. Another dumb idea from Trump. He should be asking questions why certain countries have these funds and it would then occur why we do not have a sovereign fund here. Dumb ideas are in bloom this election from both GOP and DEMS. Trump continues to show he does not understand economics (tariffs). Harris only understands more government and socialism. I hope the GOP wins the Senate like they predict to ensure whoever gets the Presidency will be somewhat kept in check. This has turned into horrible choices for President. Very disappointed in both candidates.
I don't agree that Trump doesn't understand economics. I'd say that tariffs are easy for an audience to understand, and most countries use them, so it's easy for him to talk about them. My hope is that the legislature doesn't keep him in check, but works with him to pass very aggressive pro-competition pro-free market legislation. Getting rid of the Deep State would be a fantastic start
Oh, please. Trump is not perfect, but who is? You, anonymous Tony? If you are looking for a perfect politician you will die in the search. Compared to Kamala Trump is John the Baptist. And he's a lot better than many RINO senators you seem to put undue faith in.
no doubt.....I am happy to see Dick Cheney on the other side. It shows that he wasn't ever a Republican, but purely a politician in pursuit of power that used the Republican Party because it was convenient---Cheney grows up in New Jersey he's a Dem. He used his government position to grift his way into very nice private occupations. Biden used the government to enrich his family. There isn't a big dark line of difference between the two though one is illegal (Biden) because it's outright corruption and one is a more behind the curtain corrupt
All I can say about Dick Cheney endorsing Kamala Harris is:"Hey Dick, give it a shot." 🧐😱😂
I immediately heard a rimshot after reading that comment, and someone telling me to tip the waitstaff. 😁
I notice a lot of folks point to Norway or Singapore or Alaska and say "they manage their funds well". Management of the funds isn't the issue. It's the principle. That is taxpayer money and there is no public benefit compared to the public benefit of giving that money to individual citizens and let them invest on their own behalf, or spend it, or save it. It is centralized money management for centralized government while marginalizing citizens.
A sovereign wealth fund might be a good idea once our politician's stop deficit spending and taxpayers, pay off the $35,000,000,000,000.00 of national debt. Until then, not so much.