this post was submitted on 03 Feb 2025
41 points (93.6% liked)

politics

25668 readers
2377 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Summary

Trump signed an executive order to begin developing a U.S. sovereign wealth fund, which he said could take a 50% stake in TikTok if it is sold to an American buyer.

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick were tasked with laying the groundwork, though congressional approval may be required.

Trump noted that other nations have similar funds and aims to rival Saudi Arabia’s.

all 15 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] ExtremeDullard@lemmy.sdf.org 23 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (4 children)

For once I agree with what Trump did there, which goes to show that even a broken clock can be correct twice a day.

Having said that, I have zero doubt that the fund will be mismanaged and used by wealthy fuckers to enrich themselves, rather than managed sensibly like the Norwegians manage theirs with the interests of the population in mind.

[–] Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world 24 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

Norwegians have a sovereign fund because they aren't in debt. Where is they money coming from when Trump added $7.8 Trillion in addition debt the last time he was president?

[–] ExtremeDullard@lemmy.sdf.org 11 points 7 months ago (2 children)

If the sovereign fund makes money then it's a good investment regardless of whether the country is in debt.

Of course, it needs to make more money than it costs to service the extra debt, if they're going to borrow to constitute it.

That's assuming the broligarchs don't embezzle the money of course...

[–] Nougat@fedia.io 8 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Borrowing money to fill an investment fund will never work. Because if the investment fund is going to make more money than the interest on the loan costs, the lender would just do their own fund themselves and not lend money to someone else to do it.

[–] Quik 2 points 7 months ago

That's not quite true. If you're better than the market, you can borrow until the market price for money (interest rate) adjusts (you become the market) and make money off of it. The thing just happens to be, governments aren't usually in the being-more-efficient-than-the-market game, so, yes, countries should never do that.

[–] partial_accumen@lemmy.world 3 points 7 months ago

Investment will equal "having a vested interest in its success". If the government has a vested interest in the success of one company over another how is that a level playing field? If a law is in the way of a government investment, the government can simply change the law and the company benefits. That wouldn't happen for the competitor to the government invested company.

Think how this can be used by the trump government. trump directs the US taxpayers money to be invested in Twitter or another musk controlled company. You, as a taxpayer, have no say. Twitter issues additional rounds of stock raking in money, but devaluing the existing stock.

If the sovereign fund makes money then it’s a good investment regardless of whether the country is in debt.

Musk gives himself a raise from your tax money. trump could force all government agencies to use Twitter as the only official communication method. Now you have to look at ads to find out how to file your tax forms or renew your passport. The government would have a vested interest in Twitter financial success as a partial owner of it.

Is this what you want?

[–] xmunk@sh.itjust.works 19 points 7 months ago (2 children)

I'd honestly give a 50/50 chance that it'll solely be used to pump Trump investments and then dump the loss on the American people.

Is there anyone here who thinks the fund wouldn't own Trump coin or whatever his next shitcoin venture is?

[–] partial_accumen@lemmy.world 2 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

New mutual fund established tracking all of these investments. Invest today! Ticker symbol: RGPL /s

[–] Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works 2 points 7 months ago

If anyone isn't paying attention they are basically putting a gun to everyone's wallet to make them buy crypto.

I wouldn't be surprised if half of this is solely to pump crypto.

[–] socsa@piefed.social 1 points 7 months ago

This makes no sense when you issue sovereign bonds, and they are the most desirable investment vehicle in the history of the world.

Nobody is going to buy bonds backed by SPY when they could just buy SPY.

[–] MCasq_qsaCJ_234@lemmy.zip 12 points 7 months ago

Elon will steal that sovereign fund through DOGE

[–] WoodScientist@sh.itjust.works 10 points 7 months ago

Jesus fucking Christ. He is trying to literally create state-run media. He's trying to turn Tiktok into Pravda.

[–] AshMan85@lemmy.world 9 points 7 months ago

They are preparing for the dollar to be worth nothing