381–390 of 454 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
More than Charlie Munger.
I take that has having done nothing then. Its ok, surprising though because of how low class your comment was.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not OP but mr Munger and Buffet have also held steady course in an increasingly hype driven financial world. And they've stayed course since the 60s! For that alone they've become (cult) legends among small time investors. As a small time investor myself born in the 90s it is insane the amount of bullsh*t social media will push onto you regarding finance. Their annual meetings where they answer questions are some of…
That's all great, but does it qualify for a hero? They did't do anything with the cash except piling it up and multiplying. By all means they could do that - don't get me wrong again, but that doesn't make them heroes, does it? Their videos are by far _not only_ sane advice out there. They are good, but any decent book on the subject value much more.
Moreover, he taught and inspired many others do the same.
That's a hero in my book. Not some sports player, actor or worse - some politician - people are usually worshipping.
RIP Charlie Munger.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's all great, but does it qualify for a hero? They did't do anything with the cash except piling it up and multiplying. By all means they could do that - don't get me wrong again, but that doesn't make them heroes, does it? Their videos are by far _not only_ sane advice out there. They are good, but any decent book on the subject value much more.
He is a defacto investment hero. Berkshire Hathaway is reality in sea of insanity. They defined the strategy of finding companies with a good structure, good fundamentals, and a good product and capitalising them. If you are looking for positive externalities to qualify "hero", he probably played a part in creating a large number of the companies you have ever heard of, employing millions and large part of the succes…
Would you kindly clarify what “defacto investment hero” means? Hopefully not in cult-like definitions.
To be clear, i am not looking for any positive externalities, just wondering what he did to warrant being called a hero. That’s it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is "everything" the family home? In a divorce it's much more about the kids than it is about the wife. The kids get stability in a divorce. Where possible kids live in their home with their primary carer, don't have to move to a new school etc. Why is the wife the primary carer? It starts because the husband can't get pregnant or breastfeed. It's supplemented by the likelihood that he's already the highest earner, wh…
Divorce is about people not wanting to live and share their life together, it is a union where both parties should benefit (why else go into such an agreement). In many cases after a divorce the man does not get to see his children due to the women getting more money the less the man take care of the children. This is really bad for the children, research show that children do a lot worse the less they have contact w…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's all great, but does it qualify for a hero? They did't do anything with the cash except piling it up and multiplying. By all means they could do that - don't get me wrong again, but that doesn't make them heroes, does it? Their videos are by far _not only_ sane advice out there. They are good, but any decent book on the subject value much more.
I mean, half of Australia views Don Bradman as a hero and all he really did was play cricket very well. Same with certain actors (Alan Rickman springs to mind), chess legends like Gary Kasparov, albeit on a smaller scale. I think I understand what you're getting at - Charlie Munger didn't change the world the way, say, Jonas Salk did - but that doesn't mean that people aren't going to idolize him. He was at the top o…
It’s understandable some people will idolise him - pretty much like they can do same for anyone else, no matter how big or small, benevolent or malevolent his/her impact is.
Was just wondering if there is objectively something justifying the definition or it’s deeply subjective.
Guess I grasped the answer by now
A legend of the business and investing world. Acquired podcast got to do one of (possible the) last interviews with him a month ago for anyone looking for recent content from him: https://www.acquired.fm/episodes/charlie-munger Also Stripe Press is releasing just next week a book (technically re-release of an older book) on his collected thoughts: https://press.stripe.com/poor-charlies-almanack
Remotely related, but that site of Stripe Press is great! Thanks for linking.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I was just on a campus this past weekend and half the windows were blacked out by the residents themselves. Natural light shining into where you sleep is overrated.
I really dislike the "Light On Two Sides Of Every Room" pattern of Christopher Alexander, which is ideally accomplished with two externally facing windows on different walls. Windows compromise how I would like to layout the room's interior to my own preferences. I don't care what an architect envisioned for a generic human habitability, I want a space to feel habitable to me. Most of the time that means eliminating…
Alexander and his team absolutely expected people to adapt the patterns to individual preferences, and so stated right up front. As a matter of general preferences, “light on two sides” was found through diligent research to be a “deep and inescapable property of a well-formed environment”. So if you’re designing a habitation for thousands of people, maybe lean heavily that way.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Would you mind to explain why? Arguably the guy did nothing worthy of admiration. Sure he managed to multiply cashflow, but on my books that doesn't stand nearly to definition of hero. Don't get me wrong - I enjoy his books and interviews perhaps like everyone else. He was incredibly smart character, no doubt about that. But hero? Not trolling, genuinely curious.
Im not trolling here either. Genuinely wondering who your heroes are? Could be a case of mismatched focuses. If someone is focused on tech, they might idealize Musk or Jobs. If someone has roots in the financial realm, they might thing Buffet is their hero. That’s why I’m asking. Is it possible you can’t understand why Munger is a hero to some because you don’t live in that world? For the record my heroes are Steve I…
Absolutely so. That’s why i am wondering if those people who consider him as a hero can explain reasons. Loving making money is a legitimate reason - no problem with that, everyone has own goals in life.
My heroes, if you will, happen to be regular people, whose names won’t tell you anything, so I hope you kindly excuse me on that.
Again, there’s arguably nothing wrong with idealising, however by definition it rarely has anything to do with real life qualities. Again, nothing wrong with it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't see any explanation of why in your opinion it is stupid, I would be interested to know one architect view on that.
Natural light, fresh air, second means of egress, bla bla. The egregious thing is it tries to solve a complex problem by overweighting a single aspect. It’s like if you wanted to make a safer car by building it out of 500mm thick concrete. Oh, it’d be safe alright, but slow, wallowy, dangerous for others, poor gas mileage. Fast downhill, I guess. Wouldn’t be any better as an EV. It might be good for a few people, app…
Your argument is:
> it tries to solve a complex problem by overweighting a single aspect.
But it does solve the problem? And unlike your concrete car example, the only downside here is that students won't have natural light in their dorms, which as many people in this thread have suggested probably isn't as big of a problem as having to share a room for many (perhaps most) students.
I think it's fine to say you don't like it and perhaps in most cases are better trade-offs that could be made, but it seems to me that for some people who just want to use their dorm for sleeping this trade-off does work. Would you not recognise this?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Every financial advisor and 401k plan recommends index funds by default, and it is how the vast majority of people and organizations store their wealth. It doesn't need any more cheerleaders or icons. It had simply become synonymous with investing at large. This is passive investing, not value investing. Value investing is very much active investing, otherwise how would you select the undervalued assets? Value inve…
The term "value investing" is confusing because it is used in two different ways: The first way it's used is to describe buying stocks that are cheap relative to their current financial characteristics (price to book, price to earnings, price to FCF, etc). This approach is usually contrasted with "growth", which would refer to investing in companies with a compelling thesis and bright future ahead of them. A second w…