6 ms·
I agree, in so far as its the other way around. The key difference in opinion that may be surfacing here, is that other nations are willing to co-operate and p
by no_wizard 3y ago
I agree, in so far as its the other way around.
The key difference in opinion that may be surfacing here, is that other nations are willing to co-operate and push interests that also further US interests because they get tangible benefits from the US being the dominate superpower (IE, the western worlds military, de facto).
This is a strong incentive for countries to look the other way in times of crisis. Arguably, because congress is inept at proper budgeting and such, we should already have trouble selling in the debt markets, but treasures still sell just fine and at an ultra low cost to the government, despite some notion of "downgrade" by one of the bond rating agencies (I think Moodys?).
If I was looking at the US right now, and all the political in-fighting problems we are having, I wouldn't have nearly as much faith in the US government and buying its debt. This should have made debt more expensive to sell, and it hasn't.
I posit, one reason is, keep the US propped up to a certain extent (IE, not raising the cost of the US government bonds by refusing to buy at current value) would be that we are the worlds de facto military, and western nations are increasingly leaning on us with the turmoil that has bubbled up recently, and they have every incentive to keep the machine going right now because of it.
US consumers are also a great market, currently, and I doubt anyone wants to see that crumble, and that plays a big role here too.