Draft:Pension superpowers: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively ← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 14:29, 27 December 2024 editB.Andersohn (talk \| contribs)Extended confirmed users2,215 edits →Further reading ← Previous edit		Latest revision as of 22:41, 30 December 2024 edit undoSignifica liberdade (talk \| contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators73,551 edits AFC draftTag: moveToDraft
(9 intermediate revisions by 7 users not shown)
Line 1:		Line 1:
			{{Draft article}}
⚫	The term '''pension superpowers''' (or "pension powers") was coined by Nicolas Firzli, executive director of the ] and the Hon. ], former pensions minister of Australia, who argue that: {{Blockquote\|text=At a time when government spending faces unprecedented limitations (fiscal austerity, debt crises, end of quantitative easing) and traditional sources of long-term capital such as banks (‘financial producers’) are constrained by draconian regulations (Basel solvency rules), institutional asset owners i.e. large pension funds, sovereign wealth funds and endowments have become the main source of capital in many countries. And their “share of voice” is set to rise further in the coming years: pension funds are now, by far, the world’s preeminent asset owners, with more than $ 55 trillions in combined assets. For perspective, this amount represents practically 90% of the overall GDP of all OECD countries put together. The largest pension funds are found in the United States, Canada, Australia, Japan, the Netherlands, the UK and Scandinavia (‘pension superpowers’).\|author=Firzli, Sherry et al.,\|title="The New Wealth of Nations: Pension Superpowers, Private Market Assets and GDP Growth"\|source=''Institutional Investment Research'' (Nov./Dec. 2025)}}
			{{Multiple issues\|
			{{Orphan\|date=December 2024}}
			{{notability\|date=December 2024}}
			}}

		⚫	The term '''pension superpowers''' (or "pension powers") was coined by Nicolas Firzli, executive director of the ] and the Hon. ], former pensions minister of Australia, who argue that: {{Blockquote\|text=At a time when government spending faces unprecedented limitations (fiscal austerity, debt crises, end of quantitative easing) and traditional sources of long-term capital such as banks (‘financial producers’) are constrained by draconian regulations (Basel solvency rules), institutional asset owners i.e. large pension funds, sovereign wealth funds and endowments have become the main source of capital in many countries. And their “share of voice” is set to rise further in the coming years: pension funds are now, by far, the world’s preeminent asset owners, with more than $ 55 trillions in combined assets. For perspective, this amount represents practically 90% of the overall GDP of all OECD countries put together. The largest pension funds are found in the United States, Canada, Australia, Japan, the Netherlands, the UK and Scandinavia (‘pension superpowers’).\|author=Firzli, Sherry et al.,\|title="The New Wealth of Nations: Pension Superpowers, Private Market Assets and GDP Growth"\|source=''Institutional Investment Research'' (Nov./Dec. 2025)}}

	== Further reading ==		== Further reading ==
Line 5:		Line 11:
	MN Firzli, N Sherry et al, "The New Wealth of Nations: Pension Superpowers, Private Market Assets and GDP Growth", Institutional Investment Research (2025), Vol. 22		MN Firzli, N Sherry et al, "The New Wealth of Nations: Pension Superpowers, Private Market Assets and GDP Growth", Institutional Investment Research (2025), Vol. 22


			{{Draft categories\|
			]
			]
			}}

			{{Drafts moved from mainspace\|date=December 2024}}

Latest revision as of 22:41, 30 December 2024

This is a draft article. It is a work in progress open to editing by anyone. Please ensure core content policies are met before publishing it as a live Misplaced Pages article.

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL
Easy tools: Citation bot (help) | Advanced: Fix bare URLs · Article logs · Draft logs.

Last edited by Significa liberdade (talk | contribs) 5 seconds ago. (Update) Finished drafting? Submit for review or Publish now

This article has multiple issues. Please help improve it or discuss these issues on the talk page. (Learn how and when to remove these messages)

The topic of this draft may not meet Misplaced Pages's general notability guideline. Please help to demonstrate the notability of the topic by citing reliable secondary sources that are independent of the topic and provide significant coverage of it beyond a mere trivial mention. Notability should be established before publishing this draft or submitting it via the articles for creation process.
Find sources: "Pension superpowers" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR (December 2024) (Learn how and when to remove this message)

(Learn how and when to remove this message)

The term pension superpowers (or "pension powers") was coined by Nicolas Firzli, executive director of the World Pensions Conference and the Hon. Nick Sherry, former pensions minister of Australia, who argue that:

At a time when government spending faces unprecedented limitations (fiscal austerity, debt crises, end of quantitative easing) and traditional sources of long-term capital such as banks (‘financial producers’) are constrained by draconian regulations (Basel solvency rules), institutional asset owners i.e. large pension funds, sovereign wealth funds and endowments have become the main source of capital in many countries. And their “share of voice” is set to rise further in the coming years: pension funds are now, by far, the world’s preeminent asset owners, with more than $ 55 trillions in combined assets. For perspective, this amount represents practically 90% of the overall GDP of all OECD countries put together. The largest pension funds are found in the United States, Canada, Australia, Japan, the Netherlands, the UK and Scandinavia (‘pension superpowers’).
— Firzli, Sherry et al.,, "The New Wealth of Nations: Pension Superpowers, Private Market Assets and GDP Growth", Institutional Investment Research (Nov./Dec. 2025)

Latest revision as of 22:41, 30 December 2024

Further reading