Why Buffett and Gates are betting on US (10 reasons)

http://www.cnbc.com/id/33940689 is the video of the entire thing. I posted it in the MBA vs Law thread. This video should be stickies in the Warren Buffett sub-forum.

Xnarg said: We need a Buffett section.

Maybe it could be combined with the insurance section, since he is so active in that industry.

Or cross-posted to Adult Friend Finder, since he's also pretty active in that industry.

You don't need to post every single mainstreet article you think is cool.

I find it interesting that most of the reasons aren't a bet on the US. I don't they were answering this to say that the US was the best place to invest in the near future. Instead he is saying that it is still a good place to bet on in the future. Huge difference. Anybody looking at Buffett's international exposure would have to conclude that it is higher than at any other time in Buffett's career. I think given Buffett's time horizon and the fact that he doesn't really sell companies also is more in line with his strategy. And also he only buys what he knows and understands. This is a natural proclivity towards buying US companies. But the fact that he is buying in other countries has to tell you that he is more bullish in some other countries than this proclivity is worth.

So I think that if you asked Buffett about China in the right setting he would tell you that he is more bullish on China than on the US.

Not to bump up this thread but your article was offset by one released the next day:

'25 reasons not to bet on America'

wotus said: delzy, so you think all this buffett/gates pr is just an exit strategy so they will have the liq to move into international investments? any facts to support that?

It's public knowledge that quite a large % of Gates & Buffets money is going to Africa. Ok, I'm not sure how giving it away to poor people will make them richer, but they are much smarter than I am.

Xnarg said: To understand how Buffett makes money, one needs to consider his position that the inheritance tax should be increased.

Buffett makes a lot of money selling insurance policies designed to circumvent such taxes.

Thus, raise the inheritance tax and you raise Buffett's profit. He's no dummy.

And if Buffett honestly believed that he should pay more in taxes, then there's absolutely nothing preventing him. He can just mail a check to the US Bureau of Public Debt.

brettdoyle said: Xnarg said: To understand how Buffett makes money, one needs to consider his position that the inheritance tax should be increased.

Buffett makes a lot of money selling insurance policies designed to circumvent such taxes.

Thus, raise the inheritance tax and you raise Buffett's profit. He's no dummy.

And if Buffett honestly believed that he should pay more in taxes, then there's absolutely nothing preventing him. He can just mail a check to the US Bureau of Public Debt.

Would that be considered a charitable contribution? If so, should he take a tax deduction against it?

EvilCapitalist said: nycll said: brettdoyle said: And if Buffett honestly believed that he should pay more in taxes, then there's absolutely nothing preventing him. He can just mail a check to the US Bureau of Public Debt.Your brilliant post just made me realize that we should make paying taxes voluntary.

No, but if you think that the US government could do better with the money than you could it is very easy for you to help the US government to get more money - just send in extra.Why? So that you can pay less taxes?

Btw, I don't think the government can do most things better and I can.

tolamapS said: Buffet has been making increasingly uncharacteristic bets. First, selling volatility and downside protection on a few billion dollars of global equities in a low-vol regime at the top of the bull market. Now this BNI purchase at outrageous prices. To his credit, GS and GE funding deals were good, but amounts were much smaller.

The reality is that he is old, and he does not care any more. While he is smart, stingy, goes for very good deals, basic game theory works here. At this point, he is not really betting his money - it is OPM. Even that portion which is technically and legally his is not really his, because he has no way of taking that money with him to the Otherworld.

I wouldn't say he is making uncharacteristic bets. If anything his "bets" are pretty much in-line with what he's done historically. There've been many times he's invested in companies that "make stuff" and are fundamental to what he believes. He wants to be able to understand how they make money, doing so for BNI is pretty easy, that and he loves trains. It's his toy company and its only an "outrageous price" because of current valuation, not long-term valuation.

As far as OPM, a huge portion of his money is still wrapped up in BRK and his ethics don't really consider it OPM, it's never been and never will be his viewpoint.

What's funny is that you look at the situation from your own eyes and not from what we've seen from him historically. He doesn't give a crap about the money himself, he just wants to be the best at the game, the winnings from the game are nothing more than a byproduct, something to collect. Thus it doesn't matter about the "otherworld"

pier0188 said: delzy said: Yes, Buffet and Gates are telling everyone to invest in domestic assets while they liquidate and invest in global assets. They're rich because:
a: they are smarter than you
b: They are more ruthless than you
c: They love their money more than you
d: they have worse ethics than you
e: They both want you dead so they can have your resources.

Don't be a sucker, they aren't betting on the US, they're betting on themselves.

Is there anything you can't turn into a conspiracy theory of ignorance?

Worse ethics? LOL. Both people have pretty good ethics.Maybe you should ask some of the countless "partners" MS stole technology from and ran out of business. I think you are confusing ethics with profits. You are the ignorant one. These guys go have secret meetings to discuss population control and you think that's not a eugenics conspiracy? Why can't they have these meetings in a public forum? Just ask Ted Turner if he wants you dead.

nycll said: delzy said: Maybe you should ask some of the countless "partners" MS stole technology from and ran out of business. I think you are confusing ethics with profits. You are the ignorant one. Technology can be protected by IP rights. What MSFT stole from other tech companies fit more into the category of "ideas". In all business, ideas are cheap, it all comes down to execution. Fierce competition doesn't mean questionable ethics.Do you live in a dream world? MS stole legally protected technologies and played the courts to run these guys broke. If you think this is good business, you do not understand what ethics are. What kool-aid are you drinking? I want some.

delzy said: nycll said: delzy said: Maybe you should ask some of the countless "partners" MS stole technology from and ran out of business. I think you are confusing ethics with profits. You are the ignorant one. Technology can be protected by IP rights. What MSFT stole from other tech companies fit more into the category of "ideas". In all business, ideas are cheap, it all comes down to execution. Fierce competition doesn't mean questionable ethics.Do you live in a dream world? MS stole legally protected technologies and played the courts to run these guys broke. If you think this is good business, you do not understand what ethics are. What kool-aid are you drinking? I want some.

What specific technologies? I do love how your "GI Joe" sense of fair play ignores the fact that overall MS has done very well for its shareholders and returned enormous value, far more than most other companies. Furthermore, the amount of technology advancements MADE by MS has outweighed some of the ways it has done business, which haven't been that egregious. You need to get over your black/white sense of the world and stop demonizing people for no reason.

pier0188 said: delzy said: pier0188 said: delzy said: Yes, Buffet and Gates are telling everyone to invest in domestic assets while they liquidate and invest in global assets. They're rich because:
a: they are smarter than you
b: They are more ruthless than you
c: They love their money more than you
d: they have worse ethics than you
e: They both want you dead so they can have your resources.

Don't be a sucker, they aren't betting on the US, they're betting on themselves.

Is there anything you can't turn into a conspiracy theory of ignorance?

Worse ethics? LOL. Both people have pretty good ethics.Maybe you should ask some of the countless "partners" MS stole technology from and ran out of business. I think you are confusing ethics with profits. You are the ignorant one. These guys go have secret meetings to discuss population control and you think that's not a eugenics conspiracy? Why can't they have these meetings in a public forum? Just ask Ted Turner if he wants you dead.

So you take one part truth and then warp it into some psychotic vision of eugenics? Please, the discussion of slowing population growth in unsustainable areas isn't eugenics, it's realism. Furthermore, if they truly believed in eugenics, then why are they so in favor of stopping HIV/AIDS in Africa? Ohh wait, if they truly wanted those people to be culled, they would just let them kill off the population.

Then you entertain this whole Ted Turner thing as a formula of further insanity. Let's look at this realistically. Societies without options have historically devolved into warlike clans followed with cases of cannibalism. Ever read up on the history of Easter Island? Those people destroyed their whole island by putting up stupid statues, putting the largest palm trees on the planet into extinction (they used the largest trees to transport the statues). This lead to the smaller trees being vulnerable to disease and, most likely, rats, which ate the nuts. After they were landlocked (since no more trees to build canoes to leave or fish), they ate the birds. After they destroyed 24/25 of the bird species (including all of the land based birds), they turned to local fish. Since the local fish population were close-land fish (Easter Island has limited reefs for abundant fish), they destroyed all of those stocks.

Now what? The people went to war with each other and DID resort to cannibalism, what else was there to eat? They were nearly saved by the "Birdman" competition, but then the Europeans came. The population had gone from greater than a hundred thousand to under 20K. The Euros culled more, taking thousands as slaves for SAmer. The population eventually died as smallpox came back with some of the returned slaves.


This is pattern of societies that break down. You need to wise the hell up and look at history. I know it's pretty popular to run around screaming CONSPIRACY CONSPIRACY, but you're ignoring reality.Your conclusions could not be more wrong. The breakdown of societies is ALWAYS due to destruction of liberty and the inefficiencies of a tyrannical super class. If you call humanity the enemy, you are also a eugenicist. Don't feel bad, you are in "good" company. I think you should take a good look at the benefits globalism has brought to the areas it's been designed to exploit. It's not a conspiracy theory that these communities are experiencing lower standards of living than before their contributions to globalism. Maybe you should try to break the mind-control that makes you think that multi-national corporations are good and humanity is bad.

delzy said: The breakdown of societies is ALWAYS due to destruction of liberty and the inefficiencies of a tyrannical super class. I agree. A super class can only exist with enormous amount of wealth being concentrated within a small group of elites. I don't think Buffett/Gates philosophy as being consistent with wealth concentration at all.

What's great is a bunch of posts got deleted but the original post remained.

Xnarg said: MS has been probably the most ruthless firm in the software business since their inception.Still, I'd rather not have Larry Ellison and Oracle Corp. in the position of Microsoft.