3 ms·
Regardless of the moral angle, it means that the USA financial system does not remain impartial over political disputes. This has nothing to do with what I thin
by DevKoala 4y ago
Regardless of the moral angle, it means that the USA financial system does not remain impartial over political disputes. This has nothing to do with what I think about the war.
Clearly, plenty of other international asset managers agree that there is a level of risk associated in letting the USA hold your assets when they can sanction you due to political disagreements. For example a sanction could befallen on Israel over Palestine in the future, or over China if they do invade Taiwan. That is what I mean.
- gigatexal 4y agoSanctions have always been a thing. Confiscation of funds are an escalation sure but they are the logical next step when you’re part of a banking system that goes through the federal reserve. The fed though is a good place to park your good or money. Allies of the US who park their money with the fed are assured it will be there, it will remain liquid, and any foreign actor that tries to take it by force will meet the US military which until tested seems to be the best in the world.
- DevKoala 4y agoI understand that for the USA and allies, the fed is the best place to park your money, but some allies such as Israel in this case are trying to remain neutral when it comes to financial systems. My understanding is that soon an economy in which the US doesn’t participate will form among nations such as Russia/China/Brazil. I don’t know what will be the store of value in this economy, maybe the currency of one of those nations, maybe gold, or crypto. Israel is just trying to get ahead.