HINT: Not who you think.
https://www.thebalance.com/who-owns-the ... bt-3306124
ntragovernmental Holdings. This is the federal debt owed to 230 other federal agencies. It totals $5.554 trillion, almost 30 percent of the debt.
ntragovernmental Holdings. This is the federal debt owed to 230 other federal agencies. It totals $5.554 trillion, almost 30 percent of the debt.
China's "Currency Manipulator" charge is based on their purchasing of Treasuries to keep the $ high so their exports will be attractive. BUT, that's a red herring: WHAT ELSE IS CHINA (and every other nation) GOING TO DO WITH ALL THE $ THEY HAVE?GrumpyCatFace wrote:Interesting breakdown of the national debt, and who it's owed to.
HINT: Not who you think.
https://www.thebalance.com/who-owns-the ... bt-3306124
ntragovernmental Holdings. This is the federal debt owed to 230 other federal agencies. It totals $5.554 trillion, almost 30 percent of the debt.
If that were the case, then every other currency in the world would also lose value against the dollar, at the same rate. China's central bank does much, much worse than that. They explicitly declare the value of the Yuan, rather than even pretending to use market forces to do it.Martin Hash wrote:China's "Currency Manipulator" charge is based on their purchasing of Treasuries to keep the $ high so their exports will be attractive. BUT, that's a red herring: WHAT ELSE IS CHINA (and every other nation) GOING TO DO WITH ALL THE $ THEY HAVE?GrumpyCatFace wrote:Interesting breakdown of the national debt, and who it's owed to.
HINT: Not who you think.
https://www.thebalance.com/who-owns-the ... bt-3306124
ntragovernmental Holdings. This is the federal debt owed to 230 other federal agencies. It totals $5.554 trillion, almost 30 percent of the debt.
No. Please do a basic google search. I'm on my phone.Martin Hash wrote:The actual mechanism China uses is buying Treasuries, which pushes the $ up, and yeah, raising tide lifts all ships, other exporters should be kissing China's ass. (Wait! they do.)
Farm groups and Farm Belt politicians have vigorously complained about the effects of the Trump administration’s proposed $4.8 billion in annual cuts to the $23 billion in subsidies currently given to farmers. They argue the cuts will hurt agricultural production, raise food prices and make ordinary households worse off.
Eventually, possibly, maybe returning a measure of the free market to agriculture, and allowing small farms to exist again. Yeah. They're going to be pissed, until they figure out what it really means.TheReal_ND wrote:Pissing off the corn belt? Hmm. Ok