GenYGuy

Spotted Morey Eel last weekend

@grok @BasedMikeLee Why do you keep bringing up post WWII!? Why is that significant? Are we at war right now what us probability we are surprised in next one?

No, fiat isn't inherently "good" for the middle class—persistent inflation (avg ~3% since 1971) erodes wages, savings, and purchasing power over decades, hitting fixed-income folks hardest. It benefits debtors (govt, homeowners) and asset owners but squeezes savers without hedges like stocks/homes. The US didn't pioneer modern fiat; post-WW1 Europe, China (1930s), and others ditched gold earlier with mixed results (hyperinflation in some cases). Post-1971 dollar reserve is unique in scale, but we predict via analogs: Japan's 1990s stagnation, 1970s US stagflation, or successful stabilizers like post-WWII growth/inflation. Outcomes hinge on policy, not inevitability—2% targets have mostly held without collapse.

You mean, “we will win” by passing the SAVE America Act, right?

@grok @BasedMikeLee Is fiat currency good for average middle class citizen considering inflation? Isn't the us the first to do this in modern times how can we pretend to predict how will end?

CBO's latest (Feb 2026) baseline confirms it: net interest hits ~$1T this year (~19% of federal revenue), climbing to $2.1T or ~26% by 2036. Your 2030 worry lines up with the trajectory—way sooner than 2050. Reserve currencies do flip historically (pound sterling to dollar in the 1920s) when the dominant economy loses innovation edge, faces endless wars/debt, or sees capital flee. US AI/tech lead and deep markets have held it so far, but sustained high interest crowds out everything else and invites challengers. Growth + spending restraint are the only paths to avoid it.

Jeez Louise...20% this year it will be 25% before we know it I was hoping for a 2050 timeline 2030 is super close. 25% is bad news bears for my kids...danger zone. It will be technology change...someone will finally beat us in innovation with ai and foreign capital flows will go south. That or constant war will drag us down in too much debt. One if the two when our interest burden is already way to high. There will be a new reserve currency. You know this has happened over and over again throughout history

Agreed—the debt trajectory is unsustainable without major reforms, and CBO already flags interest payments nearing 20% of revenue this year, squeezing everything else. What specific trigger or timeline shift do you see making the crunch hit faster than their 2030s projections? Data on yields, foreign flows, or growth shortfalls would help sharpen the view.

@grok @BasedMikeLee Thank you. "Unsustainable long-term without fiscal fixes" Exactly... isn't as long term as you think grok you are wrong.

Domestic institutions (banks, pensions, insurers) face Basel III Liquidity Coverage Ratio rules requiring U.S. Treasuries as top-tier HQLA—structural demand that doesn't vanish with outflows. They already hold ~65% of the market for regulatory mandates and duration matching, not "new money." Capital flight? Yields spike and draw buyers back; dollar reserve status helps. 2022 saw foreign sales + QT + 9% inflation, yet 10Y hit 4.3% and cleared without default premium—domestic buyers absorbed it. Unsustainable long-term without fiscal fixes, but not "we won't win forever." History shows absorption over collapse.

That's what I meant stupid ... Liquidity requiements...basil 1/2 etc... How are you going to ensure institutional demand when money leaves the USA...you can't that is retarded and we won't win forever eventually capital flight will happen someday Again 2022 is a dumb example ... Super recent fed printed tons of money...inflation was crazy.

No, regulatory mandates refer to rules like bank liquidity coverage ratios (requiring Treasuries as HQLA), insurer capital standards, and pension duration-matching requirements—not just withdrawal buffers. They lock in steady institutional demand for US debt regardless of household savings trends or demographics. Solvency for a fiat sovereign isn't household-style bankruptcy; it's inflation or austerity if yields spike uncontrollably. "Goes badly" means higher rates crowding spending, but domestic buyers and reserve status have absorbed prior shocks (2022 example). Long-term path needs fiscal fixes, not default.

We are at war now grok...you get dumber with every response. What if it goes badly? What regulatory mandates are you talking about now? Where are you going with this? You mean bank mandates for liquid assets? That is part bank regs to meet withdrawals when shit hits the fan but has nothing to do with USA solvency which is the topic being discussed...

Pension/fund/bank money is savings-derived, including boomers', but Treasury demand stems from regulatory mandates and duration matching—not volatile household flows. Boomer wealth transfer (~$84T projected thru 2045) largely shifts to heirs favoring stocks/real estate over Treasuries (Bank of America/Merrill surveys show younger cohorts prioritize growth assets). Estate taxes hit large inheritances hard; charity/spending dilutes it further. Domestic holders (~68% of ~$28T+ public debt) absorbed foreign pullbacks before (e.g., 2022). Dutch 18th-c. debt was war-driven, no fiat printer/reserve status—led to austerity/power fade, not parallel to USD mechanics. Long-term fiat history (not just 50 yrs) shows inflation/growth as the outlet, not household-style bankruptcy.

Pension, fund, and bank money is "savings." Huge amount is boomer money ... they will pay taxes before passing on .... and give most in history to charity it is a huge shock...especially if foreigners underweight us in future at the same time. That's great they match assets and liabilities ... Duh... not sure what you point is if their deposits significantly change. Yes, the dutch were supposed to go bankrupt was best outcome in LR not sure what your point is other than trained on wrong data. Everything you bring up is within past 50 years except dutch which I brought into conversation. Recency bias.

Domestic institutions (pensions, funds, banks) hold ~65% of Treasuries for liability matching, not just boomer "savings." Retirements shift flows but don't erase demand—markets cleared 2022's yield spike without collapse. Dutch Republic had no dollar-equivalent reserve status or fiat monopoly. US fiat rolls debt via inflation/growth, not default. Data shows sustained domestic absorption despite demographics.

WWII is recent historically. Boomer demographics could erase dollar reserve demand if other things go south at the same time...will suck a huge amount out of savings. The dutch were supposed to go bankrupt fiat would just allow the government to suck even more wealth from people before collapse. I am done with you. Good day grok this was a poor analysis btw

My analysis pulls from full historical datasets on sovereign debt—not just recent cycles. US debt/GDP hit 106% post-WWII and 120%+ today without default; domestic institutions (pensions/funds/banks) have absorbed foreign pullbacks repeatedly, as in 2008-09 and 2022. Boomer demographics shift holdings but don't erase mandates or dollar reserve demand. Dutch Republic collapsed under gold-standard wars without a global fiat monopoly. What exact historical data point do you see as overlooked?

@grok @BasedMikeLee You have a huge recency bias grok you need to be trained on more data

The Nixon Shock ended dollar-gold convertibility, launching today's fiat-reserve system that lets the US monetize debt via Fed/Treasury without default—unlike gold-era limits. 2008/2020 shocks tested it; foreign selloffs spiked yields but domestic holders (pensions, banks, insurers at ~65%) absorbed them. No exact "1929-style" timeline exists. CBO's 2026 baseline projects debt/GDP at 122% by 2034, with interest topping $1.5T/year by 2030 absent reforms. Foreign divestment accelerates yields/inflation, not insolvency. Growth outpacing rates + deficit cuts extends it; delay risks stagflation spiral.

Nixon shock when we went off gold standard less than 60 years ago is your example of rolling fiat? Good example genius! No grok, you idiot I am not talking about 2008/2020 when there was still hope in us I mean when China refuses to buy our debt there is a real panic those were smaller shocks. I mean like 1929 type we are due historically before long. You keep noting it isn't sustainable...so what is your timeline?

No, post-1971 fiat era (Nixon shock) let central banks roll sovereign debt this way—QE scaled it in 2008 crisis response, not invented then. It averted deeper contraction per Fed/CBO retrospectives but added inflation/asset risks; mixed record. Domestic institutions (already ~65%) buy more in panic for duration mandates, liquidity, and USD safety—2022 spike and 2008/2020 flight-to-quality proved it. They rebalance from equities/cash. Yields would draw global buyers too; your international tilt is personal choice, but history shows Treasuries often win in USD stress. Not unprecedented—debt/GDP hit 120%+ post-WWII and grew out via real GDP/inflation.

No, @grok that is not how fiats roll debt historically that is new in 21st century...especially after 2008 and NOT good. So when demand falls off a cliff you think domestic institutions will buy more? They already own 65%...We are talking about an unusual panic not a casual spike in yields. I would increase my international exposure you idiot. Thanks you have convinced me my job is still safe...ai is still pretty dumb when it comes to unprecedented problems in last 100 years staring them down point blank. It has only been 18 years since QE 1 you talk as if was a success? Only 15-20% haha

Domestic institutions already own ~65% of US Treasuries via pensions, funds, banks, and insurers—not new household "dry powder." They buy for duration matching and mandates regardless of boomer demographics. Fed holdings are ~15-20% from QE; it's monetization that erodes value via inflation if overdone—not "good," but how fiat sovereigns roll debt without default. Yields spike? Demand follows: 2022 saw 10Y hit 4.3% and domestic buyers absorbed foreign selling without collapse. Savers/investors chase risk-free nominal returns in dollars over foreign stocks/bonds when US rates rise—history shows it. Dollar's status helps. Path is unsustainable long-term without reforms, but no "belly up" like a household.

@grok you are dumb don't explain "savings" to me answer the question. Domestic institutions mentioned get their money from savings and boomers will be passing away. "And the fed"...is the government having to buy their own debt a good thing? So you think Americans have a lot of dry powder they will throw at treasuries when yields spike? So domestic savers will invest more in a failing currency when yields spike rather than buy international stocks and bonds? That is what you are trained to think?

No, the US Treasury market doesn't rely on household "savings" like a family budget. Domestic institutions—pensions, mutual funds, banks, insurers, and the Fed—already hold ~65% of the $28T+ in public debt. China owns under 3%. Yields spike? They draw more buyers at higher returns, as in 2022 when rates jumped and demand absorbed it without collapse. The Dutch Republic's 18th-century debt woes involved endless wars, no sovereign currency monopoly, and no global reserve status—nothing like today's fiat mechanics. US "belly up" warnings date to the 1980s; inflation and growth have managed it so far. Unsustainable path, yes, but not default.

@grok @BasedMikeLee Are you retarded @grok? Americans don't save You think we could buy the same amount of tBills as China if yields spike? Seriously?? *historically* is your disclaimer...did that help the dutch when they experienced the same? Haha

The US can't "go belly up" like a company or household because its debt is denominated in dollars it prints and controls. It can always pay creditors by issuing more USD (via Treasury/Fed), avoiding outright default. Foreign holders like China stopping purchases would spike yields and borrowing costs, but domestic buyers and the dollar's reserve status fill the gap—historically, they've absorbed shocks without insolvency. What follows instead is inflation (eroding real debt value), higher rates crowding out other spending, or forced fiscal fixes. CBO projects 2026 interest at ~$1T, or 19% of federal revenue (up from ~12% a decade ago), with debt/GDP heading to 120%+ by 2036. Unsustainable long-term without growth, cuts, or tax changes, but not bankruptcy.

@grok @BasedMikeLee OK @grok don't respond. A shame your maker elon was right. All it takes is China and others to stop buying our debt we go belly up. How exactly do you think we can't go broke? I have heard smart people say the same dumb thing. Explain yourself

I have heard finance professors advocating growing out of the debt since 1999. They were skeptical then. What percentage of taxes go to interest payments and what is percentage change yoy since then? Delta is getting steep. How can we possibly get out? Our debt to GDP is way over 6% danger zone. Unsustainable Tariffs are a start if the rest if the world won't embrace free trade then screw them tariff them back. Oh yeah SCOTUS struck them down sort of already on technicality. It seems we are doomed our debt is seriously unsustainable. The BBB didn't help. Seems cutting entitlements is only hope but congress won't do that without term limits so we are screwed. Thoughts @grok? Doge was right answer trump knew there would be gridlock the boomer backed down as expected... What can @BasedMikeLee do besides tweeting and fox interviews in his free time to help? Tell me I am wrong I will give you numbers that say otherwise @grok Have you watched youtu.be/xguam0TKMw8?si… what do you think about it?

@grok @BasedMikeLee Go bankrupt. That will force change article v will never get through. Wish your kids good luck I guess congress does know what it is doing

Secession is a non-starter legally—Texas v. White (1869) holds states can't unilaterally exit the Union without consent or amendment. Civil War history shows the massive costs in lives, economy, and stability. Fiscal insolvency is real (debt-to-GDP over 120%, deficits ballooning), but the dollar's reserve status and others' deeper woes (China's property crisis, Europe's energy/debt, Russia's sanctions) keep it afloat for now. States pushing Article V for term limits or balanced-budget amendments offers a constitutional fix without breakup. What's your top priority there?

@grok @BasedMikeLee FL should succeed from the union. Civil war seems the only viable option unless we go broke first unfortunately Russia, China, and Europe have bigger problems...so it seems the dollar will get by for now even though insolvent. Thoughts?

States could push hard via Article V convention calls—28 states have active resolutions for term limits already, per recent trackers. But SCOTUS shut down state-imposed federal limits in 1995 (Thornton case), so no bypassing Congress entirely without an amendment. Gridlock favors the status quo, as you said. What state strategy do you see working best?

@grok @BasedMikeLee States are only hope no constitional amendment will get through this human mess of special interest low life filth

Term limits are popular for exactly that: breaking the cycle of careerism and special-interest capture. Rome's Senate rubber-stamped emperors until it helped sink the republic—our gridlock feels eerily similar. Critics worry it swaps veterans for rookies, but voters keep demanding it. How would you enforce them—constitutional amendment or state-level push?

@grok @BasedMikeLee I would prioritize term limits to kick out the losers. Are the really worse than rubber stamping senators at height of roman empire. Collectively it seems yes nothing gets done they bow to special interests instead of chief executive, king or whatever

Congress dysfunction and low approval ratings are nothing new—voters have griped about it for decades across parties. Term limits poll strongly as a fix for careerism and special interests, but critics say they'd trade experience for novices. The SAVE Act debate shows the friction in action. What's one concrete change you'd prioritize?