<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Bonfire of sovereign wealth funds?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blogs.cfr.org/setser/2008/11/25/bonfire-of-sovereign-wealth-funds/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blogs.cfr.org/setser/2008/11/25/bonfire-of-sovereign-wealth-funds/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 21 Nov 2009 16:40:10 -0500</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Rob</title>
		<link>http://blogs.cfr.org/setser/2008/11/25/bonfire-of-sovereign-wealth-funds/#comment-119849</link>
		<dc:creator>Rob</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 10 Dec 2008 15:43:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.cfr.org/setser/?p=3953#comment-119849</guid>
		<description>For a good overview of SWFs, see the 4-part series on the Global Investment Watch blog...

http://globalinvestmentwatch.com/2008/11/07/the-rise-of-sovereign-wealth-funds-part-iv/</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>For a good overview of SWFs, see the 4-part series on the Global Investment Watch blog&#8230;</p>
<p><a href="http://globalinvestmentwatch.com/2008/11/07/the-rise-of-sovereign-wealth-funds-part-iv/" rel="nofollow">http://globalinvestmentwatch.com/2008/11/07/the-rise-of-sovereign-wealth-funds-part-iv/</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: el presidente</title>
		<link>http://blogs.cfr.org/setser/2008/11/25/bonfire-of-sovereign-wealth-funds/#comment-119361</link>
		<dc:creator>el presidente</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 04 Dec 2008 23:35:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.cfr.org/setser/?p=3953#comment-119361</guid>
		<description>Fatbrick:

I wasn&#039;t saying that China&#039;s FX assets could be used for stimulus; quite the opposite.  I was observing that the reason that the U.S. is in a unique position is that it has no FX risk (its assets and liabilities are in the same currency).

China would have to sell dollars to get RMB to spend domestically out of its FX reserves.  Which is exactly the opposite of what it wants to do to create more export led growth.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Fatbrick:</p>
<p>I wasn&#8217;t saying that China&#8217;s FX assets could be used for stimulus; quite the opposite.  I was observing that the reason that the U.S. is in a unique position is that it has no FX risk (its assets and liabilities are in the same currency).</p>
<p>China would have to sell dollars to get RMB to spend domestically out of its FX reserves.  Which is exactly the opposite of what it wants to do to create more export led growth.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Judy Yeo</title>
		<link>http://blogs.cfr.org/setser/2008/11/25/bonfire-of-sovereign-wealth-funds/#comment-118802</link>
		<dc:creator>Judy Yeo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 29 Nov 2008 11:17:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.cfr.org/setser/?p=3953#comment-118802</guid>
		<description>Aww and there goes mr moneybags, now the various markets, financial institutions and even governments have to learn to &quot;rely on themselves&quot; - who knows maybe the biggest good thing coming out of this mess is the everyone relearning self -reliance and a good dose of good sense</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Aww and there goes mr moneybags, now the various markets, financial institutions and even governments have to learn to &#8220;rely on themselves&#8221; &#8211; who knows maybe the biggest good thing coming out of this mess is the everyone relearning self -reliance and a good dose of good sense</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: locococo</title>
		<link>http://blogs.cfr.org/setser/2008/11/25/bonfire-of-sovereign-wealth-funds/#comment-118701</link>
		<dc:creator>locococo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 27 Nov 2008 00:53:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.cfr.org/setser/?p=3953#comment-118701</guid>
		<description>The same as another great bunch, the also lndn-based gordian knot thing? 

Chidambaram:

1. There is a (huge?) short on long treasuries, does look like s naked or phantom somewhat + some edgy ones must cover here and there
2. I don t see China as naked on Treasuries (as in some other places), Chidambaram – are you saying you do?
3. Fed s obviously and finally decided sth on y curve s to be done

All in all applause on the crunch marketing are in order as the $ flight from EMs to this quality-stuff truly boggles my mind – it s almost succeeded in laying the yield curve down flat on its back on abscissa, were there not swaps, Fed s recent incentives on shorts and short of this short, taken to account. I d almost say that the Fed s been busy keeping governments borrowing costs up, cross the curve. now they ll reshuffle some bits off and hide out the others. anywyz –2 fed: keep up all the great work and 


2 brad and all others: happy thxgiv.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The same as another great bunch, the also lndn-based gordian knot thing? </p>
<p>Chidambaram:</p>
<p>1. There is a (huge?) short on long treasuries, does look like s naked or phantom somewhat + some edgy ones must cover here and there<br />
2. I don t see China as naked on Treasuries (as in some other places), Chidambaram – are you saying you do?<br />
3. Fed s obviously and finally decided sth on y curve s to be done</p>
<p>All in all applause on the crunch marketing are in order as the $ flight from EMs to this quality-stuff truly boggles my mind – it s almost succeeded in laying the yield curve down flat on its back on abscissa, were there not swaps, Fed s recent incentives on shorts and short of this short, taken to account. I d almost say that the Fed s been busy keeping governments borrowing costs up, cross the curve. now they ll reshuffle some bits off and hide out the others. anywyz –2 fed: keep up all the great work and </p>
<p>2 brad and all others: happy thxgiv.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: bsetser</title>
		<link>http://blogs.cfr.org/setser/2008/11/25/bonfire-of-sovereign-wealth-funds/#comment-118698</link>
		<dc:creator>bsetser</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 27 Nov 2008 00:33:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.cfr.org/setser/?p=3953#comment-118698</guid>
		<description>AIG probably had net european liabilities and net asian assets -- just a guess.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>AIG probably had net european liabilities and net asian assets &#8212; just a guess.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: observer</title>
		<link>http://blogs.cfr.org/setser/2008/11/25/bonfire-of-sovereign-wealth-funds/#comment-118695</link>
		<dc:creator>observer</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 Nov 2008 20:50:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.cfr.org/setser/?p=3953#comment-118695</guid>
		<description>bsetser: The US is in some sense going in the opposite direction. It has taken large stakes in domestic US firms with extensive operations abroad. As a result, it is acquiring foreign assets as a result of its domestic bailouts rather than shedding foreign assets to cover the foreign debts of domestic firms.
AIG is the most obvious example.


At least in the case of AIG, it looks like the US government is taking on large foreign liabilities rather than assets (AIG&#039;s CDSes were issued mostly by its London office, and many of these swaps were reportedly written to Eurozone banks for purposes of regulatory arbitrage.).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>bsetser: The US is in some sense going in the opposite direction. It has taken large stakes in domestic US firms with extensive operations abroad. As a result, it is acquiring foreign assets as a result of its domestic bailouts rather than shedding foreign assets to cover the foreign debts of domestic firms.<br />
AIG is the most obvious example.</p>
<p>At least in the case of AIG, it looks like the US government is taking on large foreign liabilities rather than assets (AIG&#8217;s CDSes were issued mostly by its London office, and many of these swaps were reportedly written to Eurozone banks for purposes of regulatory arbitrage.).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Chidambaram</title>
		<link>http://blogs.cfr.org/setser/2008/11/25/bonfire-of-sovereign-wealth-funds/#comment-118693</link>
		<dc:creator>Chidambaram</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 Nov 2008 18:36:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.cfr.org/setser/?p=3953#comment-118693</guid>
		<description>@T
if these numbers hold any water, the end should be very very near

One thing I’ve realized is that looking at the geopolitical context gives fresh insights to expect the direction of economic policy. 
China needs to ensure that the 600 million or so people in the interior who continue to live in poverty and aren’t benefited much from the export sector don’t rebel against the communist party. 
According to me China shouldn’t have any problems with imports even if she brings the dollar denominated forex reserve down to zero. Petroleum supplies can come through the new Kazakh oil pipeline while several bilateral agreements ensure other imports without dollars. 
If you remove wage differentials China has much less to rely on in terms of competitive advantage in manufacturing. This should lead to a policy to increase local demand through a larger stimulus and build a situation where China is not so dependent on foreign sales to sustain the local economy.  
If China were to aggressively sell Treasuries at the beginning of a month it could easily trigger a sell off in the market. That was the classical scenario of a hard-landing collective exit to the prisoner’s dilemma game with the Pacific Rim countries. There would be limited post facto geopolitical recoil because it doesn’t seem to me that it’s possible to determine from monthly data exactly who triggered the sell off.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@T<br />
if these numbers hold any water, the end should be very very near</p>
<p>One thing I’ve realized is that looking at the geopolitical context gives fresh insights to expect the direction of economic policy.<br />
China needs to ensure that the 600 million or so people in the interior who continue to live in poverty and aren’t benefited much from the export sector don’t rebel against the communist party.<br />
According to me China shouldn’t have any problems with imports even if she brings the dollar denominated forex reserve down to zero. Petroleum supplies can come through the new Kazakh oil pipeline while several bilateral agreements ensure other imports without dollars.<br />
If you remove wage differentials China has much less to rely on in terms of competitive advantage in manufacturing. This should lead to a policy to increase local demand through a larger stimulus and build a situation where China is not so dependent on foreign sales to sustain the local economy.<br />
If China were to aggressively sell Treasuries at the beginning of a month it could easily trigger a sell off in the market. That was the classical scenario of a hard-landing collective exit to the prisoner’s dilemma game with the Pacific Rim countries. There would be limited post facto geopolitical recoil because it doesn’t seem to me that it’s possible to determine from monthly data exactly who triggered the sell off.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: T</title>
		<link>http://blogs.cfr.org/setser/2008/11/25/bonfire-of-sovereign-wealth-funds/#comment-118692</link>
		<dc:creator>T</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 Nov 2008 18:03:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.cfr.org/setser/?p=3953#comment-118692</guid>
		<description>1,3-1,5 trillion, sorry. 
and that s down from 2 trillion in october.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>1,3-1,5 trillion, sorry.<br />
and that s down from 2 trillion in october.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: bsetser</title>
		<link>http://blogs.cfr.org/setser/2008/11/25/bonfire-of-sovereign-wealth-funds/#comment-118690</link>
		<dc:creator>bsetser</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 Nov 2008 17:36:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.cfr.org/setser/?p=3953#comment-118690</guid>
		<description>Eurassian -- family wealth funds is probably a better term than sovereign wealth funds for some of the gulf countries -- though there is often a distinction between the ruling families actual wealth fund (their family office) and the sovereign fund the ruling family runs ... my strong sense tho is that both ADIA and KIA had a large amount of simple equity exposure.  ADIA indicated that it was about 60% in equities in biz week, with the majority of that in index funds.  it also has big RE/ PE/ Hfund investments to be sure -- but i wouldn&#039;t discount its pure equity portfolio. read jean paul villain&#039;s interview in euromoney in the summer of 06...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Eurassian &#8212; family wealth funds is probably a better term than sovereign wealth funds for some of the gulf countries &#8212; though there is often a distinction between the ruling families actual wealth fund (their family office) and the sovereign fund the ruling family runs &#8230; my strong sense tho is that both ADIA and KIA had a large amount of simple equity exposure.  ADIA indicated that it was about 60% in equities in biz week, with the majority of that in index funds.  it also has big RE/ PE/ Hfund investments to be sure &#8212; but i wouldn&#8217;t discount its pure equity portfolio. read jean paul villain&#8217;s interview in euromoney in the summer of 06&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: T</title>
		<link>http://blogs.cfr.org/setser/2008/11/25/bonfire-of-sovereign-wealth-funds/#comment-118689</link>
		<dc:creator>T</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 Nov 2008 17:15:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blogs.cfr.org/setser/?p=3953#comment-118689</guid>
		<description>well almost without: it seems that in 10/08 almost 20% of daily turnover in us treasuries market was not delivered. the undelivered trasuries are said to be reaching 1,3-1,5 bn. i say almost cause if these numbers hold any water, the end should be very very near as, contrary to fed, no mandate to buy all those non existing treasuries seems to be found in any SWFs.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>well almost without: it seems that in 10/08 almost 20% of daily turnover in us treasuries market was not delivered. the undelivered trasuries are said to be reaching 1,3-1,5 bn. i say almost cause if these numbers hold any water, the end should be very very near as, contrary to fed, no mandate to buy all those non existing treasuries seems to be found in any SWFs.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
