Quote from: K-Dog on May 19, 2025, 09:48 AMMy only real interest in 'am I rich' is to compare my situation to others with the deluded idea that if I and mine, have enough beans to be at least average, then we have enough beans to eat.  The idea being that when this Titanic goes down, you do not want to be below the top deck.  Not that it will matter if you do not get a lifeboat.

My main interest is more theoretical.  If you are going to view this as a Class War between 2 classes, Rich vs Poor, where is the line drawn, and on which side of the line does a given person stand?  Who do you fight with or for?  Do you have enough money to employ a Private Security Force to protect your property and life when the public police forces break down or become corrupted?  Will you attempt to maintain your wealth and position, or will you share it and freely give it away?  While others starve, will you hoard or share?  Are you with the crowd storming the Bastille, or are you one of the Royalty inside with their guards  defending the castle on the hill?  Which side are you on, boy, which side are you on?


When Warren Buffet said



Who was included in the Rich class?  Billionaires obviously, but also obviously it doesn't take a billion to be rich.  I think equally obviously $100M puts an individuals into the Rich class, but the line starts getting blurry below that.  At $10M a lot depends on other factors like nature of the assets, stage of life and family connections.

So, it's worthwhile to develop a decent idea of what "rich" actually means in Amerika in 2025?  This thread is examining that question.

Are you on the side of the working class and a vision of socialism — or are you siding with capital and its enforcers?

Which Side Are You On" was written in 1931.  Employment was at 25%, massive poverty collapsed faith in the  American Propaganda Dream.  The struggle in Harlan County where the song was written documents class war.  Mine owners had private militias (Pinkerton's), the police, and politicians. The miners had nothing but solidarity. Florence Reece's song captured this stark divide.

The song I post was written in 1949 by Les Rice, a farmer from New York State, USA. It deals with the perverse injustice, exploitation and inequality Rice saw all around him. Pete Seeger wrote about Les Rice and this song:

QuoteLike most small farmers, he was getting intolerably squeezed by the big companies which sold him all his fertilizer, insecticide and equipment, and the big companies that dictated to him the prices he would get for his produce. Out of that squeeze came this song.

China is selling Treasurys at rates unseen since 2008, while Japan's yields hit multi-decade highs, signaling a structural shift in global capital flows. The resulting pressure threatens the dollar's purchasing power, fuels inflation risks, and may force the Federal Reserve into controversial debt monetization.

File this under "you heard it here first".

I mentioned a week or so ago that the Chinese were likely to exercise the "nuclear option" and start dumping USTs, and lo & behold, that's exactly what's happening.  This could rapidly become a serious problem if da fed has to monetize the debt, which seems pretty unavoidable.  Hyperinflation in that scenario.

Another RE prediction comes to pass. 😀

RE

When the Japanese invaded Manchuria, people talked about the 'war in China.' When Germany invaded Poland in September 1939, well, that was 'the Polish War.' Then, the Winter War at the end of the same year was 'the war in Finland' as Finland was invaded by the Soviet Union," the source commented.

Much more to come.

RE

Quote from: RE on Apr 20, 2026, 02:59 AMI mentioned a week or so ago that the Chinese were likely to exercise the "nuclear option" and start dumping USTs, and lo & behold, that's exactly what's happening.  This could rapidly become a serious problem if da fed has to monetize the debt, which seems pretty unavoidable.  Hyperinflation in that scenario.

Another RE prediction comes to pass. 😀[/color]

RE

What is "the Fed monetizing the debt" signify? I'm  not sure I know what that means, "monetizing debt".

Quote from: TDoS on Apr 20, 2026, 03:04 PMWhat is "the Fed monetizing the debt" signify? I'm  not sure I know what that means, "monetizing debt".

Basically, it means issuing a debt instrument without having collateral to borrow against.  Money is a debt instrument, it's a note of infinite duration.  To do it, Da Fed issues USTs and buys them with money it prints rather than selling them to other banks and investors.  They have to do that because they don't have enough buyers for the debt on the open market.

RE

Isn't this what the government has been doing already, for the $30+ trillions we've already borrowed? We print money, hand it out, and put it on the countries tab?

Quote from: TDoS on Apr 20, 2026, 05:46 PMIsn't this what the government has been doing already, for the $30+ trillions we've already borrowed? We print money, hand it out, and put it on the countries tab?

No, not really.

When the FSoA wants to borrow money, it goes to Da Fed (a theoretically separate corporation, not a department of Da Goobermint) and asks for it, like you would ask for a loan at the bank.  To get that loan, you have to offer up collateral, which are the USTs.  What are they worth?  To find out, you sell them on the open market.  You've heard of treasury auctions, right?  What they sell for determines the interest rate, the price runs inversely to the yield.  The lower the price, the higher the interest.

When a big holder of USTs (like the Chinese) starts selling their supply, the interest rate goes up.  If they flood the market, the sky's the limit there.  The risk in holding them to maturity has gone up so there are not enough buyers.

At this point, the only option is for Da Fed itself to buy the USTs,  without any collateral.  Now nobody knows what the USTs are really worth, or by extension what the dollars they back are worth.  The more you print this way, the less they trade for, until they're worthless.  AKA, Hyperinflation.

RE