The United States Sovereign Wealth Fund

What to do with the government’s bounty?

Among the many policy initiatives rolled out in the opening days of Trump II is a proposal for a sovereign wealth fund, neatly solving the problem of the government’s overflowing coffers. The matter of the US Treasury having a negative wealth of some $36T is but a minor technicality. Oh, but the US government owns land, of some large value that I don’t know and isn’t at issue anyway. Presumably this wealth fund would permit the ownership of other assets, such as stocks.

It’s impressive how far the Land of the Free has come in this enlightened age. My generation was taught in school that government ownership of the means of production was called “communism”.

7 thoughts on “The United States Sovereign Wealth Fund

  1. Finster says:

    Assuming the matter of finding wealth to invest were to be overcome, one has to wonder what potential abuse such a fund might be subject to in the future. The US government, as a shareholder, would effectively put politicians on the on corporate boards across the fruited plain. Political fads like DEI and ESG would be small beans compared to what might lie ahead. Creeping communism.

  2. Mega says:

    I think we returning to “Big nation politics” ..the Big 3, Bear/Eagle/Dragon……the rest simply dont matter. I think a deal was struck over Syria, Russia agreed to give it up & thus free Israel in return for the end of Ukraine war.

    I was impressed to hear Rubio saying the end of UNIPOLAR world……a far cry for Obama talking about how “exceptional” the US was.
    With Trump, watch what he does, not what he says

    1. Finster says:

      Intriguing hypothesis about a Syria-Ukraine quid pro quo. Ending the Ukraine war was an issue popular with voters. Trump promised to end it on Day One, but is probably due a bit of slack given the previous admin stacked the playing field with obstacles. Nevertheless, progress will be forthcoming or his political capital will dwindle fast.

      The border crisis and inflation were the top issues with voters, but the war was well up there. Hence some frustration over distractions like TikTok, Softbank, bitcoin, and now, a sovereign wealth fund. And if other countries are losing confidence in the dollar, the solution is making the dollar worthy of confidence, not hectoring and threats.

      If the “end of the unipolar world” means the US not trying to boss the whole world around, that would be right up there too. The American public does not share the elite’s obsession with empire.

  3. Finster says:

    Okay so the latest bombshell from Trump is for the US to “take over” Gaza.

    If anything this highlights a sense of humor as a new administration survival skill. Another is to realize Trump says a lot of stuff, but only those things he says repeatedly are to be taken seriously.

    We’ll have to see how this ages, but it seems unlikely it would sit well with most of the Middle East. Trump was with Israel’s Netanyahu at the time he made the remark, and Netanyahu reacted tentatively but positively, at least diplomatically, but others may demur. It’s ultimately not up to the US to decide.

    The Greenland USA idea serves as an example. Greenland is geographically part of North America. I like it. I’d like to be able to visit Greenland without a passport. But it’s not up to me, is it? Mightn’t the people that live there have something to say on the matter?

    Not to mention eastern Ukraine. Literally. In years of war coverage, the opinions of the folks that live there have received little to no attention. Whether they would prefer to be ruled by autocrats in Kiev or autocrats in Moscow seems not to rate discussion.

    Government by consent of the governed?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *