Quote :

"Kris, you're wrong. Please look up who owns US government debt."

I didn't need to, but I did it for you:
http://www.fms.treas.gov/bulletin/b2010_3ofs.doc
Table OFS-2

And heres a graph if you don't like the chart:



So how was I wrong? Private investors and mutual funds are by far the smallest owners of of bonds, they total up to maybe 10-15%, a tiny amount.

Quote :

"So you are you agreeing with me that you don't forsee Americans willing to buy the bonds to suppress rates?"

I think it's irrelevant, we don't do it now, foreign and international buyers the ones who are increasingly purchasing them.

[Edited on December 12, 2010 at 6:53 PM. Reason : ]

12/12/2010 6:50:49 PM

Again, you are missing my point. If our own citizens aren't willing to own them then who the fuck will?! Once they realize it's never going to be paid back in full and that they should be compensated for the risk they are taking the yields will skyrocket. The only reason the Japs rates have stayed low is because the govt has convinced its citizens to hold its debt. That will not happen here I'm telling you.

12/12/2010 6:57:20 PM

June 2008 Kris? Really? It's closer to 30% now.

12/12/2010 8:39:31 PM

Quote :

"If our own citizens aren't willing to own them then who the fuck will?"

The reasons our citizens don't own them has little to do with whether or not they are worth owning.

Quote :

"June 2008 Kris? Really?"

Don't give me that, I posted a link to OFS-2. I posted the charts because I figured you'd be too lazy to click the link. I was right about that, but what I didn't expect is that you would blame me for your ignorance.

Quote :

"It's closer to 30% now."

No it's not.
Private: 531
Mutual Funds: 637
Private+MF:1168
Total debt: 13201

That comes out to less than 10%

Latest data from treasury:
http://www.fms.treas.gov/bulletin/b2010_4ofs.doc

[Edited on December 12, 2010 at 9:24 PM. Reason : ]

12/12/2010 9:08:37 PM

You're still wrong little buddy, keep trying.

[Edited on December 12, 2010 at 10:28 PM. Reason : Is it just me, or does column 3 not exist? ]

12/12/2010 10:24:49 PM

dude i cant have discussions with you. You are clearly a smart guy, but someone has brainwashed you with your socialist indoctrine to the point where you are incapable of using logic on these matters.

If only 30ish percent is held abroad then where do you think the majority of the rest is? Not to mention if even 3-4% of the people who owned US debt decided to dump it all at once it would start such a wave of panic that everyone else would be rushing for the exit also.

Have you not observed what has happened in Greece, Ireland, and Spain the past few months?

If citizens don't feel it is their patriotic duty to hold our debt, then who will feel it is their duty to own it???

The only people willing to own it are those who think it's yield is in line with its risk. Since they clearly are out of line, we can expect rational investors to dump treasuries. This really isn't complex...



[Edited on December 12, 2010 at 10:49 PM. Reason : a]

12/12/2010 10:42:59 PM

Quote :

"You're still wrong little buddy, keep trying."

This is what I get? You might as well have not even posted. You egg me on for how many posts telling me I'm wrong so matter-of-factly in your normal "gotcha" kind of manner. I post data proving my point, and all you can do is tell me I'm wrong?

Quote :

"Is it just me, or does column 3 not exist?"

Well more than half of column three is composed of "foreign and international", which isn't really relevant to "us citizen's ownership of debt".

I gave you exact numbers and referenced treasury data, If I'm so "wrong" then please explain how, and while you're at it, explain how you got the 30% number.

Quote :

"If only 30ish percent is held abroad then where do you think the majority of the rest is?"

It's in the chart I linked. Most of it is held by the federal reserve.

Quote :

"If citizens don't feel it is their patriotic duty to hold our debt, then who will feel it is their duty to own it???"

Probably the people who hold it now. It is stupid to use patriotism to drive your investment strategy, I'd be more worried about our economy if people in the US were that stupid as to invest for any other reason than making money.

Quote :

"The only people willing to own it are those who think it's yield is in line with its risk. Since they clearly are out of line, we can expect rational investors to dump treasuries. This really isn't complex..."

It's not complex, but it just doesn't follow. Why do you believe that capitalism is not able to price this market? Do you not believe in capitalism's ability to accurately price markets? If we were to believe that capitalism can accurately establish a market price, then should the risk not be accurately reflected in the price? Or do you just believe all investors are stupid and somehow you know something that they do not?

12/13/2010 12:04:49 AM

Quote :

"Why do you believe that capitalism is not able to price this market? Do you not believe in capitalism's ability to accurately price markets?"

Of course not. Have you not just witnessed the tech and housing bubble within ten years of each other?

Treasuries are considered safe because no one that's invested in them in the past 30 years has lost money. Now they are about to.

Quote :

"It is stupid to use patriotism to drive your investment strategy, I'd be more worried about our economy if people in the US were that stupid as to invest for any other reason than making money."

Again you are missing the point. Japan has stayed solvent because their citizens have sacrificed making money for pride in their country.

I do not believe US citizens or corporations will do the same. I certainly don't believe foreign investors will.

So the only other options are default or debasement of the currency.



[Edited on December 13, 2010 at 12:36 AM. Reason : add]

12/13/2010 12:34:14 AM

Quote :

" Well more than half of column three is composed of "foreign and international", which isn't really relevant to "us citizen's ownership of debt"."

So if I, a private US citizen, decide to purchase a 10 yr and store it in an account offshore, it wouldn't qualify as international, it would qualify as foreign?

12/13/2010 6:41:45 AM

Quote :

"Treasuries are considered safe because no one that's invested in them in the past 30 years has lost money."

Well people have lost money through oppurtunity costs. Why do you think investors of these bonds would not have done proper risk calculation? What do you know that the rest of the world does not?

Quote :

"Japan has stayed solvent because their citizens have sacrificed making money for pride in their country. I do not believe US citizens or corporations will do the same. I certainly don't believe foreign investors will. So the only other options are default or debasement of the currency."

You're begging the question. I'll state your premises that way it may make more sense:

If the US becomes insolvent, it's citizens will need to pick up the debt, or the system will fail
US citizens will not pick up the debt
Therefore the system will fail

12/13/2010 12:33:20 PM

If I were trolling you, I'd say show me where a US citizen would have to file any of that paperwork knowing it's a fools errand.

Instead, since you didn't answer the proper question so I'll state it more plainly.

What is the difference between 'international' and 'foreign'? If we're talking about how much US citizens own it's certainly important to understand what is meant by international. You're claiming that 'international' is debt not held by US citizens. If that is the case, why not classify that debt as just 'foreign'? Why the distinction?

[Edited on December 13, 2010 at 12:50 PM. Reason : Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States...US citizen lolerskates]

12/13/2010 12:49:21 PM

Quote :

"Instead, since you didn't answer the proper question so I'll state it more plainly. What is the difference between 'international' and 'foreign'?"

How about instead of asking me questions, you could look it up yourself just fine yourself by going into the linked page on the footnote of the table I gave to you?

Here I'll even get you started, here is the page referenced by footnote 8 specifying foriegn and international holders. Linked from that page you can find a specific breakdown of holders.
http://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/data-chart-center/tic/Pages/ticsec2.aspx

This is quite a stretch, even for you. But I expect soon you will start complaining about how I'm not clear enough or I'm talking about semantics or I don't back up my theory with fact. Why don't you just admit you had no idea how much debt US citizens held before claiming I was wrong about it?

12/13/2010 1:04:35 PM

(8,211.1-4,200.0)/13,561.6 = 0.295768936


[Edited on December 13, 2010 at 6:25 PM. Reason : This site agrees with me http://www.bullandbearwise.com/TreasuryOwnershipChart.asp]

12/13/2010 6:23:38 PM

I had guessed you might try something like that, but private != u.s. citizens.

12/13/2010 6:49:44 PM

And I figured that would be your next move as well. The Treasury is fine characterizing the debt that is held in this way as Private. So I'll defer to their expertise over yours. If US citizens didn't want their various investments held in US treasuries I'm pretty certain they have options for expressing this opinion in the form of US corporates, agencies, equities, or any foreign equivalent.

30% dawg.

[Edited on December 13, 2010 at 7:01 PM. Reason : .]

Btw, I will concede incorrectness on the earlier assertion about "international". I was trying to browse on my phone and epic failed.

[Edited on December 13, 2010 at 7:01 PM. Reason : .]

12/13/2010 7:00:54 PM

Quote :

"The Treasury is fine characterizing the debt that is held in this way as Private."

And it is correct in doing so, you are incorrect in equating to debt held privately to debt held by us citizens.

You're moving goalposts.

12/13/2010 7:12:12 PM

Kris, for fucks sake, you were completely fine with stating that private pension funds and mutual funds were US citizens holding US debt but you're going to ignore every other category that the Treasury itself is classifying as private? You're wrong. Admit it, and lets move on.

12/13/2010 7:44:17 PM

Holdings from corporations are completely different.

You're moving goalposts.

12/13/2010 7:46:54 PM

The implications was that even the US doesn't want to hold US debt outside of the Fed. This isn't true. No goalposts were moved. No kittens were harmed in the correct analysis of the data.

Stop being so fucking butthurt about this.

12/13/2010 7:55:47 PM

Quote :

"The implications was that even the US doesn't want to hold US debt outside of the Fed."

The implications are irrelvant, it's too late to unmake the claim you've already made. We were talking about US citizens, and corporations and insurance companies and such are not US citizens.

Let me bring up a quote from the previous page:

me: Private US citizens own a small, small percentage of us bonds.

you: Kris, you're wrong. Please look up who owns US government debt.

Quote :

"Stop being so fucking butthurt about this."

I'm not butthurt, u mad?

[Edited on December 13, 2010 at 8:34 PM. Reason : ]

12/13/2010 8:31:54 PM

Kris, if you want to stick to very very strict language to make your points, then fucking do it. I'm not the guy that brought mutual funds into the equation in one instance as if every citizen that owns a mutual fund that owns USTs picked that specific fund because it owns USTs. You're more guilty than anyone in this section recently of being flimsy with language and getting more bent out of shape about it when your half-assed (yes, they are half-assed) posts get destroyed by those of us who are stupid enough to actually take the time to do so.

It's become utterly clear that you're way more interested in being steadfast on whatever initial point you made that you either didn't think through, stated incoherently, or used bad or misinterpreted data in it's stating than you are at actually having a debate about the spirit of the point you were making.

The bottom line is, the production, investments, and savings of private US citizens in one way or the other has bought USTs at to the tune of 30%. That is the topic Rally brought up, that is the answer. I'm done playing your stupid language game I called you out on last week and you're still doing it.

[Edited on December 13, 2010 at 9:20 PM. Reason : .]

12/13/2010 8:54:56 PM

Quote :

"if you want to stick to very very strict language to make your points"

It's not being very strict to exclude corporations from the term "citizens".

Quote :

"It's become utterly clear that you're way more interested in being steadfast on whatever initial point you made that you either didn't think through, stated incoherently, or used bad or misinterpreted data in it's stating than you are at actually having a debate about the spirit of the point you were making."

Why don't you just admit that you made an honest mistake and confused the terms "privately owned" and "citizen owned" and incorrectly attempted to call me out when my statement was perfectly valid. That would have been a perfectly respectable way to handle the situation. It's a very understandable mistake, and it could have happened to anyone, myself included.

Instead you've decided to act like a child and insult me when you made the mistake. The fact that you spent more than 3 posts trying to convince me that I'm wrong when I plainly gave the evidence to back up my claim is even more disheartening.

Quote :

"The bottom line is, the production, investments, and savings of private US citizens in one way or the other has bought USTs at to the tune of 30%. That is the topic Rally brought up, that is the answer."

Now see that is a reasonable statement, had you have simply made that point (with or without the apology for confusing the terms), I would have a good deal more respect for you. Son I am disappoint.

[Edited on December 13, 2010 at 9:43 PM. Reason : ]

12/13/2010 9:39:41 PM

Quote :

"It's not being very strict to exclude corporations from the term "citizens"."

Do you think when you post this shit? This is why I think you are nothing more than an extremely bored and terribly pathetic troll who gets a sick and twisted kick out of fucking with people on the internet. You clearly know economics and political systems and I can't imagine that you have read that much about it all and are just too stupid to properly apply it or to properly understand what you are reading. No, you are just fucking around.

Many US corporations are run by many US citizens beholden to many US investors. These people have a universe of places they can park their cash and they just so happen to choose USTs as do mutual funds (also run by US citizens which you don't seem to have a problem with), pensions, state and local governments and so on and so forth. It all adds up to US citizens holding 30% of the US debt.

Quote :

"Why don't you just admit that you made an honest mistake and confused the terms "privately owned" and "citizen owned" and incorrectly attempted to call me out when my statement was perfectly valid. "

Your statement was perfectly valid yet your own post where you are including mutual funds says that it isn't.

Quote :

"and it could have happened to anyone, myself included."

But you're the only guy in here who rather than make sure everyone understands what is being posted instead enjoys grabassery and general douchebaggery over the exact to the tee language that was used rather that triggering even one neuron to realize what was intended with the post when it is pretty clear. Rally brought up US citizens, and it wasn't further carved down into citizens, corporates, state and local governments, pensions, furries until you tried to respond to his point in what you obviously that was a clever way using bastardized data such that it suited your agenda...until you got called on it. The fucking Treasury doesn't even classify "private" the way you need it to for your original point to stand.

Quote :

" The fact that you spent more than 3 posts trying to convince me that I'm wrong when I plainly gave the evidence to back up my claim is even more disheartening."

Disheartening? Did you really just post that? Does your life suck this hard that you get your jollies in this way? Do you have a huge amount of angst built up because you're just a programmer and all the bankers are the ones making the big bucks?

Quote :

"I would have a good deal more respect for you"

I don't want or need your respect. My arguments stand on their own merits. Your's stand on being obtuse about the language used and crying when the spirit of your argument is lost because the language you used was malformed.

12/13/2010 10:02:50 PM

Quote :

"Many US corporations are run by many US citizens beholden to many US investors."

But they are not US citizens, and they are not necessarily owned or run by US citizens.

Quote :

"Your statement was perfectly valid yet your own post where you are including mutual funds says that it isn't."

What?

Quote :

"Do you have a huge amount of angst built up because you're just a programmer and all the bankers are the ones making the big bucks?"

I'm doing just fine monetarily and otherwise and your attempt to insult and belittle me personally just shows your immaturity and inability to actually participate in a reasonable discussion. You resort to this kind of childishness when you are unable to defend your argument any further, and I believe you've done this in pretty much any debate I've ever been in with you.

Quote :

"I don't want or need your respect."

I don't care what you want or need, I'm just letting you know.

12/13/2010 10:33:57 PM

Quote :

"But they are not US citizens, and they are not necessarily owned or run by US citizens."

Only you are hung up on the distinction between individual private US citizens versus the rest of the world. You're hung up on it because you half assed an argument (starting with fucking June 2008 data when were talking about everything in the economy that happened after that) and you were wrong. You misunderstood rallys point then you go an blame me for moving goalposts when you were the one that set them on the damn 30 yard line to begin with. It doesn't do dick to address Rallys point, that is, absent the Fed and Foreigners, who will buy US Debt? Who is left? US interests in some fashion obviously because they are the last chunk left of that Venn diagram of people. His point was not about mom and pop investor and you're again the idiot that missed that and has us wasting more stupid posts over bullshit. He obviously wasn't talking about a class of investors that are out there managing their own accounts selecting a basket of USTs, commodities, equities, currencies, corporates at whatever their risk tolerance is because this is an infinitesimally small population in the investing world. Furthermore, about this

Quote :

"What?"

you simply can't distinguish mutual funds from all the other buckets the Treasury is lumping under "private" that isn't "foreign or international". Mutual funds are managed in a similar vein as a company and invest across the same spectrum (and more) I just mentioned. Just like pensions, just like state and local governments. Which is why everything you're arguing about "citizen" vs "private" isn't even dead on arrival, it was aborted with RU-485 and a swift kick to the uterus for good measure.

If you want to keep arguing the difference, take it up with the fucking Treasury.

Quote :

"You resort to this kind of childishness when you are unable to defend your argument any further"

I'm insulting you because you won't go away when you've been internet demolished. My points are ironclad, the Treasury agrees, one of your own posts disagrees with the point you're trying to make. There hasn't been anything more certain in this section in months than just how bad you have lost this topic.

Please, feel free to waste the time of another post saying the same thing for a 4th time, my next one will likely be in response to rally (ironically enough, echoing some of your points).

[Edited on December 13, 2010 at 10:55 PM. Reason : .]

12/13/2010 10:52:47 PM

Quote :

"starting with fucking June 2008 data when were talking about everything in the economy that happened after that"

I linked the current OFS data. I posted the graphs because the percentages remain fairly similar to current ones and they are much easier to illustrate the point.

Quote :

"You misunderstood rallys point then you go an blame me for moving goalposts when you were the one that set them on the damn 30 yard line to begin with."

I stated that US citizens own few us bonds, you said I was wrong and I posted data proving my point. You can try to twist it all you want, but that's what happened.

Quote :

"Mutual funds are managed in a similar vein as a company and invest across the same spectrum (and more) I just mentioned. Just like pensions, just like state and local governments."

Mutual funds are directly owned by investors. Company holdings are indirectly owned by individual investors who may or may not be citizens. But this is all irrelevant. We said citizens, it's not my fault you don't know what a "citizen" is.

Quote :

"My points are ironclad"

You admitted one of them was not. You are too stubborn to admit the other was not as well. So let me ask you this: "Is a corporation a us citizen?".

12/13/2010 11:06:02 PM