Charlie Munger: ‘The Phone Is Not Ringing Off the Hook’ • Hacker News Board

Re: Charlie Munger: ‘The Phone Is Not Ringing Off the Hook’

#21

Post by bob33212 » Fri, Apr 17, 2020, 6:35 PM UTC

mattwad wrote: post #16

bob33212 wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the general public is open to the idea of taking care of folks who lost their jobs. The problem is drawing the line. If a taxi company goes bankrupt a lot of folks would expect the taxi drivers to start driving for Uber. If ESPN has to layoff some staff how long should they get help? Should they be expected to look for tangential jobs?

If helping some people that don't need it gets us to fix the issue for ones in need, who cares if a few people get extra help? Somehow, the Republican party, which uses this argument all the time, is fine with helping millionaires get millions in tax breaks when trying to help buttress the economy, then why do we care if some individual gets unneccessary food stamps? We have never just tried safety nets, because the…

I totally agree. Some of the same people who roll they eyes at homeless people asking for change and fire employees for a couple weeks of low productivity are the same people who are now taking free money from the government without any guilt.

Re: Charlie Munger: ‘The Phone Is Not Ringing Off the Hook’

#22

Post by jacquesm » Fri, Apr 17, 2020, 6:35 PM UTC

pmiller2 wrote: post #18

jacquesm wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The whole idea that 'being social' equates to 'socialism', the bogeyman edition is what will stop for instance the United States from adopting a more social agenda. Free - or at least affordable - public healthcare, public transportation, internet access and access to things like clean water should be a basic standard of living for any country that does not want to be labelled 'third world'. Instead, that whole agend…

I know. People have this idea that "socialism is when the government does stuff," if you'll excuse me in referencing a meme. They think Scandinavia is socialist because it has those things, but it is not: Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Finland, and Iceland are really social democracies. That is, they're capitalist countries with strong regulation and a social safety net. I'm not entirely sure whether full on socialism will…

And, annoyingly, that requires those parties to lose at least one election so they are incentivized more strongly than ever before to cast the current system in concrete. It pretty much guarantees the see-saw two party system for the foreseeable future. Imagining how America would look under a coalition government is an interesting exercise.

Re: Charlie Munger: ‘The Phone Is Not Ringing Off the Hook’

#23

Post by pmiller2 » Fri, Apr 17, 2020, 6:38 PM UTC

bob33212 wrote: post #12

pmiller2 wrote: post #4

This quote from Munger is what I find most interesting: > I do think, sooner or later, we’ll have an economy back, which will be a moderate economy. It’s quite possible that never again—not again in a long time—will we have a level of employment again like we just lost. We may never get that back for all practical purposes. I don’t know. There are roughly 2 ways this could go if what he says actually happens. One is…

I think the general public is open to the idea of taking care of folks who lost their jobs. The problem is drawing the line. If a taxi company goes bankrupt a lot of folks would expect the taxi drivers to start driving for Uber. If ESPN has to layoff some staff how long should they get help? Should they be expected to look for tangential jobs?

The general public, maybe, but elected representatives certainly are not, at least going by their actions. Take a look at the pathetic levels of benefits UI provides, and the limited duration. If we were providing people with a reasonable percentage of their former income, along with support in finding a new job, all for as long as it took for them to find other employment, then I wouldn't have a problem. There are some practical issues in implementing this, but this is essentially what a real unemployment insurance scheme should be. The system we have now unduly punishes people who lose their jobs, and serves only to keep workers firmly under the thumb of employers.

Re: Charlie Munger: ‘The Phone Is Not Ringing Off the Hook’

#24

Post by rabboRubble » Fri, Apr 17, 2020, 6:39 PM UTC

pmiller2 wrote: post #3

https://archive.is/eAFo7

curious FF / Safari through up security warnings for archive.is and archive.today. going at them from a roundabout way gives me a CloudFlare DNS error page. this's been going on the last week or so. wonder what the problem is?

Re: Charlie Munger: ‘The Phone Is Not Ringing Off the Hook’

#25

Post by jsanford9292 » Fri, Apr 17, 2020, 6:43 PM UTC

Value investing has been replaced by government support. Big companies like airlines are not allowed to "get cheap" anymore. From Berkshire Hathaway alone, there are hundreds of billions of dollars of private money waiting to step in during times like these. Instead, we will "bail out" aggressively managed companies and encourage all big companies to be more aggressive going forwards. Because they have a government backstop preventing them from failure. This will lead to more bailouts in the future, the burden of which falls to all American taxpayers. We are deviating from the incentives that make capitalism such an effective force.

Re: Charlie Munger: ‘The Phone Is Not Ringing Off the Hook’

#26

Post by aguyfromnb » Fri, Apr 17, 2020, 6:46 PM UTC

pmiller2 wrote: post #5

sputknick wrote: post #2

I think the challenge here is the government is probably offering better terms than can be expected from Buffet. If someone is offering me free money, and someone will give me money if I give them control of my company guess which one I'm calling first.

I wonder if that means Berkshire's recent bond offering was a mistake: https://www.fool.com/investing/2020/04/12/this-warren-buffet... Berkshire has always held a ton of cash for just such an occasion. They can just buy up equity on the open market and take substantial control of a company. But, did they need even more money?

>Berkshire has always held a ton of cash for just such an occasion.

Perhaps the occasion hasn't presented itself yet...

Re: Charlie Munger: ‘The Phone Is Not Ringing Off the Hook’

#27

Post by bumby » Fri, Apr 17, 2020, 6:46 PM UTC

kick wrote: post #20

ctdonath wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The USA is effectively 50 countries with different demographics, geography, culture, and needs. Trying to impose any “one size fits all” solution won’t work because it’s not appropriate for a significant number of them.

The USA is a single country with what's effectively two demographics, and one-and-a-half breeds of politician. "50 countries with different demographics geography culture and needs!" is a complete fabrication. Wyoming doesn't even have a million people in it; implying Wyoming is a country is like implying a go-kart is a jet.

I don’t think culture is population dependent. Baltimore and Wyoming have roughly the same population but very different cultural attitudes, beliefs, ways of life etc. Its hard to make a case they should have the same policies and expect the same results

Re: Charlie Munger: ‘The Phone Is Not Ringing Off the Hook’

#28

Post by [deleted] » Fri, Apr 17, 2020, 6:49 PM UTC

markstos wrote: post #8

sputknick wrote: post #2

I think the challenge here is the government is probably offering better terms than can be expected from Buffet. If someone is offering me free money, and someone will give me money if I give them control of my company guess which one I'm calling first.

The US government as considered taking equity stakes, too. https://www.marketplace.org/2020/03/20/covid19-financial-bai...

[deleted]

Re: Charlie Munger: ‘The Phone Is Not Ringing Off the Hook’

#29

Post by CapriciousCptl » Fri, Apr 17, 2020, 6:50 PM UTC

pmiller2 wrote: post #5

sputknick wrote: post #2

I think the challenge here is the government is probably offering better terms than can be expected from Buffet. If someone is offering me free money, and someone will give me money if I give them control of my company guess which one I'm calling first.

I wonder if that means Berkshire's recent bond offering was a mistake: https://www.fool.com/investing/2020/04/12/this-warren-buffet... Berkshire has always held a ton of cash for just such an occasion. They can just buy up equity on the open market and take substantial control of a company. But, did they need even more money?

It's Yen-denominated debt-- mostly useful to Berkshire so they can make Yen-denominated investments without currency risk. It's at less than 1% a year, which costs virtually nothing given the options it opens up for Berkshire. And you'll note that that debt makes up less than 1% of its total cash position, it's really just there so Berkshire can buy something quickly in Yen if an opportunity shows up.

Re: Charlie Munger: ‘The Phone Is Not Ringing Off the Hook’

#30

Post by jsanford9292 » Fri, Apr 17, 2020, 6:51 PM UTC

bob33212 wrote: post #21

mattwad wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If helping some people that don't need it gets us to fix the issue for ones in need, who cares if a few people get extra help? Somehow, the Republican party, which uses this argument all the time, is fine with helping millionaires get millions in tax breaks when trying to help buttress the economy, then why do we care if some individual gets unneccessary food stamps? We have never just tried safety nets, because the…

I totally agree. Some of the same people who roll they eyes at homeless people asking for change and fire employees for a couple weeks of low productivity are the same people who are now taking free money from the government without any guilt.

Sometimes I wish we could pick a US state and turn it into this vision. Social safety net for all, free healthcare for all, no loopholes for the rich. There are so many people who would like to see how this plays out. And more importantly, the expectation of the outcome varies WILDLY from smart person to smart person. Personally, I believe this state would be bankrupt in a matter of years, companies that produce tax revenue would move elsewhere, and moral hazard for those who don't feel like working would rear its head in ways not seen since the USSR.