Live data from Hacker News

Buffett to step down following six-decade run atop Berkshire

bloomberg.com

61–70 of 435 posts

Re: Buffett to step down following six-decade run atop Berkshire

#61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

I, similarity, can opt not to murder people. It is still an issue if others do it.

So you're saying it's no different than a murder complaining about murders.

Hard to take him seriously when he doesn't himself pay more tax

Re: Buffett to step down following six-decade run atop Berkshire

#62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At 94, if he had a health concern, I don't think he'd be planning out 7 months for stepping down.

I heard he has a knack for prediction. Pair that with advantageous events (or prior to) and 7mo ahead is the result of a calculation.

Sure, but at his age, heath issues spiral out of control very very very fast. I fully expect that he doesn't have a specific health concern right now and is planning ahead because if he did have a specific health issue, I don't expect that he would be able to plan 7 months ahead.

Re: Buffett to step down following six-decade run atop Berkshire

#63
post #24

Buffet on Tariffs > “It’s a big mistake, in my view, when you have seven and a half billion people that don’t like you very well, and you got 300 million that are crowing in some way about how well they’ve done - I don’t think it’s right, and I don’t think it’s wise,” Buffett said. “The United States won. I mean, we have become an incredibly important country, starting from nothing 250 years ago. There’s not been any…

Buffett actually does share a fear of trade deficits, though. His proposed solution, as an alternative to tariffs, were "import certificates"-essentially a marketable credit required to import goods. These would be earned via exports by exporters, be freely priced and traded, and would essentially bind import levels to export levels.

Sounds like it would achieve a similar effect, but would be far more complex to implement and yet would still have the effect of being a tax on imports while not actually generating any revenue for the federal government.

Re: Buffett to step down following six-decade run atop Berkshire

#65
post #33

Buffett worked, at least informally, with the Obama administration on some financial policy issues. And he is a proponent of greater taxes on the very rich. Here's one short video (2:46) in which he talks about it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VJzTsTU1xL8

If the US government really wanted to bring back industrial manufacturing, tax policy is one obvious route - eg a 2/3 tax on billionaire and corporate wealth, such as on the huge pile of cash Buffet-Berkshire is sitting on, but then offer a way out - invest that cash in domestic manufacturing and R & D and it won't be taxed.

This could motivate the private sector to go back to the Bell Labs model, too.

Re: Buffett to step down following six-decade run atop Berkshire

#66

I always run across great quotes from Warren Buffett, but I never spent any time actually reading any of his writings or anything written about him. What's the best place to start to absorb some of his wisdom? Anything that's applicable to startups, tech, and life in general, beyond being the CEO of a holding company?

Watch YouTube videos of old Berkshire meetings, especially ones with Charlie.

Re: Buffett to step down following six-decade run atop Berkshire

#68
post #33

Buffett worked, at least informally, with the Obama administration on some financial policy issues. And he is a proponent of greater taxes on the very rich. Here's one short video (2:46) in which he talks about it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VJzTsTU1xL8

If the US government really wanted to bring back industrial manufacturing, tax policy is one obvious route - eg a 2/3 tax on billionaire and corporate wealth, such as on the huge pile of cash Buffet-Berkshire is sitting on, but then offer a way out - invest that cash in domestic manufacturing and R & D and it won't be taxed. This could motivate the private sector to go back to the Bell Labs model, too.

As if the government could do better capital allocation in the economy than buffett

Re: Buffett to step down following six-decade run atop Berkshire

#69
post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Buffett actually does share a fear of trade deficits, though. His proposed solution, as an alternative to tariffs, were "import certificates"-essentially a marketable credit required to import goods. These would be earned via exports by exporters, be freely priced and traded, and would essentially bind import levels to export levels.

It's really a non-problem. Net capital inflows into the U.S. = U.S. trade deficit. The balance of payments is simply: Sales of assets – Purchases of assets = Purchases of goods – Sales of goods If you balance the trade, it means foreigners must stop investing into the US.

If you balance the trade, it means reduced foreign ownership of U.S. assets, yes, which means ownership of U.S. assets by domestic citizens will increase. One of the primary problems with an unbalanced trade deficit is that your own inhabitants are left with less wealth over time, as assets are sold off to fund consumption.

Re: Buffett to step down following six-decade run atop Berkshire

#70
post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Buffett actually does share a fear of trade deficits, though. His proposed solution, as an alternative to tariffs, were "import certificates"-essentially a marketable credit required to import goods. These would be earned via exports by exporters, be freely priced and traded, and would essentially bind import levels to export levels.

It's really a non-problem. Net capital inflows into the U.S. = U.S. trade deficit. The balance of payments is simply: Sales of assets – Purchases of assets = Purchases of goods – Sales of goods If you balance the trade, it means foreigners must stop investing into the US.

It was a problem to Warren Buffet and he used a parable in the past to explain the issue:

A perpetuation of this transfer will lead to major trouble. To understand why, take a wildly fanciful trip with me to two isolated, side-by-side islands of equal size, Squanderville and Thriftville. Land is the only capital asset on these islands, and their communities are primitive, needing only food and producing only food. Working eight hours a day, in fact, each inhabitant can produce enough food to sustain himself or herself. And for a long time that’s how things go along. On each island everybody works the prescribed eight hours a day, which means that each society is self-sufficient.

Eventually, though, the industrious citizens of Thriftville decide to do some serious saving and investing, and they start to work 16 hours a day. In this mode they continue to live off the food they produce in eight hours of work but begin exporting an equal amount to their one and only trading outlet, Squanderville.

The citizens of Squanderville are ecstatic about this turn of events, since they can now live their lives free from toil but eat as well as ever. Oh, yes, there’s a quid pro quo–but to the Squanders, it seems harmless: All that the Thrifts want in exchange for their food is Squanderbonds (which are denominated, naturally, in Squanderbucks).

Over time Thriftville accumulates an enormous amount of these bonds, which at their core represent claim checks on the future output of Squanderville. A few pundits in Squanderville smell trouble coming. They foresee that for the Squanders both to eat and to pay off–or simply service–the debt they’re piling up will eventually require them to work more than eight hours a day. But the residents of Squanderville are in no mood to listen to such doomsaying. Meanwhile, the citizens of Thriftville begin to get nervous. Just how good, they ask, are the IOUs of a shiftless island? So the Thrifts change strategy: Though they continue to hold some bonds, they sell most of them to Squanderville residents for Squanderbucks and use the proceeds to buy Squanderville land. And eventually the Thrifts own all of Squanderville.

At that point, the Squanders are forced to deal with an ugly equation: They must now not only return to working eight hours a day in order to eat–they have nothing left to trade–but must also work additional hours to service their debt and pay Thriftville rent on the land so imprudently sold. In effect, Squanderville has been colonized by purchase rather than conquest. It can be argued, of course, that the present value of the future production that Squanderville must forever ship to Thriftville only equates to the production Thriftville initially gave up and that therefore both have received a fair deal. But since one generation of Squanders gets the free ride and future generations pay in perpetuity for it, there are–in economist talk–some pretty dramatic “intergenerational inequities.”

Source: https://www.berkshirehathaway.com/letters/growing.pdf

Post reply on HN