• kent_eh@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    1 month ago

    First question is, massive sell off to whom?

    Any bonds that are at their due date are required to be paid out by the US treasury.

    Most holders of US bonds have a revolving collection of them, so some are coming due on a regular and continual basis.

    Admittedly, that’s not a mass sell-off, but it still puts pressure on the US if everyone starts doing it .

    • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.mlOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 month ago

      Sure, if everybody started dumping US assets in a coordinated fashion that would hurt the US, we both know is not going to happen though. So, in reality Canada is simply making itself more dependent on the US. There’s no need to do mental gymnastics to pretend that this is some 4D chess.

      • acargitz@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        I don’t pretend to know anything about international finance. I’m repeating what I’ve heard.

        • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.mlOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 month ago

          It’s also worth thinking about what you hear as well. People say all kinds of things, and a lot of time it’s just nonsense. As I pointed out, if holding US debt gave any actual leverage, then China would be doing that instead of selling it off now.

      • kent_eh@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        in reality Canada is simply making itself more dependent on the US.

        And doing so in a relatively carefully manner so as not to hurt ourselves unnecessarily.

        • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.mlOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 month ago

          Making ourselves more dependent on a hostile power is precisely what’s hurting us unnecessarily. Incredible that people can’t seem to understand this.

          • Jhex@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 month ago

            So what’s your point here?

            IIT you are both arguing it’s bad Canada held onto these investments while saying Canada cannot actually dump them without hurting itself

            • ☆ Yσɠƚԋσʂ ☆@lemmy.mlOP
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 month ago

              No, I’m saying Canada should not have continued increasing investments, which is what we did, and we should have been dumping them instead. And the sooner we start doing that the less pain we will be in long term. Let me know if any of that is still unclear to you.

              • Jhex@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 month ago

                Hmmm looks like Canada has increased that investment for the last 4-5 years. Without this year’s report, it’s hard to see if we still kept that 4-5 year old strategy going or not.

                Keep in mind that, until the Orange Pedophile’s second term (so early last year), Canada was only paying lip service to moving away from the USA

                And yes, you are talking on both sides of your mouth… here you tell me this:

                and we should have been dumping them instead

                While responding to another person about the exact same “dump” strategy:

                  • Jhex@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    1 month ago

                    yes, and you seemed to be arguing AGAINST that poster… hence my question

                    Also, letting bonds expire is not selling them so again, you are talking both ends here