Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Buffett to step down following six-decade run atop Berkshire

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

421–430 of 435 posts

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

#421

Post by iepathos »

sumedh wrote: post #313
iepathos wrote: post #301

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t think it’s accurate to say that the working class is “resorting to populism to reverse the trend.” If anything, the fact that so many working-class voters support a wealthy oligarchy—one that consistently advances policies benefiting the super-rich at the expense of ordinary people—suggests that a significant portion of the population is being swayed by misinformation and manipulation, not that they’re succes…

> it’s often the opposite party that actually pushes for policies that would materially benefit the working class. Except on immigration.

Immigrants are a critical part of the working class in America. Always have been.

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

#422

Post by danielmarkbruce »

TFYS wrote: post #412
danielmarkbruce wrote: post #386

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Workers don't get to do that without some capital allocated. Rowing is one thing, deciding direction is just as important - and you'll find that the people deciding which way to row are largely trying to win.

Deciding direction is also just work. Why does the reward for that kind of work have to be ownership over the work other people do? An architect makes decisions about a building, a doctor makes decisions about treatments, a developer makes decisions about software architecture without needing to own the resulting building, patient or software, and they usually try to do their best. As long as there is some link betwe…

Because everyone involved agrees to it. If you want to be a dictator and decide what others can and cannot agree to, go try. I'm an employee, I agree to do certain things and the company agrees to certain things. No one is forcing either side.

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

#423

Post by danielmarkbruce »

sofixa wrote: post #402
danielmarkbruce wrote: post #384

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple barely make the product. Look at the margins of all their suppliers. That fat line showing about $200b of cogs is filled with low margin businesses - the vast majority of the world is not some outlier like Apple. Gotta look more than one layer deep financial statement guy. People who actually read a lot of financial statements have looked at a looooot more than the ones of the names on TV.

The topic of this conversation is BNSF and their ilk, I just threw Apple as a fun "you're even more wrong with your anecdote than with your main statement". What's your excuse for them abusing their employees? Why can't they afford to provide sick leave for their employees when not only do they have billions of net profit every year, many other railways around the world in the same type of business manage to do that…

You edited your comments... could you be more disingenuous?

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

#424

Post by TFYS »

danielmarkbruce wrote: post #422
TFYS wrote: post #412

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Deciding direction is also just work. Why does the reward for that kind of work have to be ownership over the work other people do? An architect makes decisions about a building, a doctor makes decisions about treatments, a developer makes decisions about software architecture without needing to own the resulting building, patient or software, and they usually try to do their best. As long as there is some link betwe…

Because everyone involved agrees to it. If you want to be a dictator and decide what others can and cannot agree to, go try. I'm an employee, I agree to do certain things and the company agrees to certain things. No one is forcing either side.

Everyone "agrees" to it because there's no other choice, it's the system we have. Everyone agrees to it the same way people in communist countries agree to do what the state tells them to do. Most people have to agree, or the whole system will collapse.

Even if you could say that people truly choose to give a piece of their paycheck to someone simply for being named the owner, it's not a reason not to consider limiting that right to choose. We limit many things that we consider harmful. This system is producing ever increasing inequality of wealth and power. There are now people so wealthy that they're able to break democracies. This will only get worse and worse.

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

#425

Post by monadINtop »

chrisco255 wrote: post #179
monadINtop wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>which means ownership of U.S. assets by domestic citizens will increase Which to be clear will be largely domestic oligarchs and other whales since the vast majority of domestic citizens in the US don't have enough capital to own any significant amount of assets, US or otherwise.

It applies across the spectrum, but to your point, at least domestic billionaires pay domestic taxes and spend money domestically. Speaking to the middle class, home ownership (traditionally one of the most reliable sources of wealth for the middle class) would increase.

Yeah that's a fair point as well.

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

#426

Post by lotsofpulp »

tekknik wrote: post #415
lotsofpulp wrote: post #327

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All the Democrat led states have paid leave and higher minimum wages/overtime exempt laws. And higher unemployment benefits. And longer leave times for new moms. It’s also the Dem states that have free school lunches for kids and more robust Medicaid funding. Democrats passed ACA, which made insurance even possible to purchase if you weren’t offered it by employer, and the annual out of pocket maximum, ban on pre exi…

Lets not forget higher taxes! > Democrats passed ACA, which made insurance even possible to purchase if you weren’t offered it by employer, and the annual out of pocket maximum, ban on pre existing conditions as a criteria for calculating premiums, and ACA premium credits made it more attainable than it was before ACA. Have you actually ever purchased a plan from the website? The last time I checked, the costs were t…

>In fact, one could argue that all ACA accomplished of benefit was forcing coverage of preexisting conditions.

Aka giving people access to healthcare.

Health insurance is not real insurance, it’s a facade where we pretend premiums are not taxes.

99% of people could never afford the healthcare they get, they would just die. Which is fine, but there is no situation where healthcare + low taxes (wealth redistribution) exists.

So it’s high taxes + healthcare, but with a flattening and top heavy population age histogram, even that doesn’t work.

The worst is when old people only get healthcare (Medicare, which is all there was before ACA). A country is doomed if it’s just sacrificing the future to eke out a few years its oldest.

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

#427

Post by meerab »

Warren Buffett’s decision to step down as Berkshire Hathaway’s CEO is both wise and timely, capping an incredible career that transformed the company and inspired investors worldwide.

Check out transcription of his speech:

https://videotobe.com/play/youtube/or0rgxnkOfE

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

#428

Post by danielmarkbruce »

TFYS wrote: post #424
danielmarkbruce wrote: post #422

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because everyone involved agrees to it. If you want to be a dictator and decide what others can and cannot agree to, go try. I'm an employee, I agree to do certain things and the company agrees to certain things. No one is forcing either side.

Everyone "agrees" to it because there's no other choice, it's the system we have. Everyone agrees to it the same way people in communist countries agree to do what the state tells them to do. Most people have to agree, or the whole system will collapse. Even if you could say that people truly choose to give a piece of their paycheck to someone simply for being named the owner, it's not a reason not to consider limiti…

It's not remotely close to a communist country - folks have many choices as to who to work for and on what terms. Employers have all many choices as to who to hire on what terms. Both sides have to agree. Employees jump around from company to company all the time.

Someone can decide to start a company tomorrow and keep 100% of the outcome (less taxes) if they want to do that instead - it's trivially easy to be 100% owner of a business - a couple hundred bucks online and you can set the legal entity up in minutes. Now, you then have to provide sufficient value to customers so that they make the choice to part with their hard earned dollars - and that's where it all falls down for many. But it has nothing to do with power or lack of it.

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

#429

Post by TFYS »

danielmarkbruce wrote: post #428
TFYS wrote: post #424

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everyone "agrees" to it because there's no other choice, it's the system we have. Everyone agrees to it the same way people in communist countries agree to do what the state tells them to do. Most people have to agree, or the whole system will collapse. Even if you could say that people truly choose to give a piece of their paycheck to someone simply for being named the owner, it's not a reason not to consider limiti…

It's not remotely close to a communist country - folks have many choices as to who to work for and on what terms. Employers have all many choices as to who to hire on what terms. Both sides have to agree. Employees jump around from company to company all the time. Someone can decide to start a company tomorrow and keep 100% of the outcome (less taxes) if they want to do that instead - it's trivially easy to be 100% o…

You can choose who to work for, but you can't choose the nature of the relationship. It's always the same, you're a worker who has to give away a part of what you produce and you have to do what the owners tell you or you're gone. That choice closer to getting to choose which government official you work for in a communist country. That choice only prevents the worst abuses, and only if you're not in a position desperate enough that you have to accept any owner's offer. It does not give a person freedom from being exploited.

A capitalist system would collapse without workers, so not everyone can be a business owner. Someone needs to actually do the work, capital does nothing on its own. I guess you could imagine a world where everyone is a one man business and a subcontractor in someone else's business, but that wouldn't really change the nature of the relationship. The ones with capital would still be in a position power and take a part of what people with no power produce.

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

#430

Post by sofixa »

danielmarkbruce wrote: post #423
sofixa wrote: post #402

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The topic of this conversation is BNSF and their ilk, I just threw Apple as a fun "you're even more wrong with your anecdote than with your main statement". What's your excuse for them abusing their employees? Why can't they afford to provide sick leave for their employees when not only do they have billions of net profit every year, many other railways around the world in the same type of business manage to do that…

You edited your comments... could you be more disingenuous?

No answer, good to know you agree that companies like BNSF have the money to have basic human decency and empathy towards their employees.

Yes, I edited my comment to add more data points when I collected them.

Post reply on HN