She met Buffett herself, saw his genius, and made him her professor. He’d bring 20 annual reports to board meetings, teaching her line by line.
Yeah, uh, that's not all she did. She and Buffett apparently had a long-running (and public) affair, which in part led to Susan Buffett separating from him and moving to San Francisco.
Between this and the brutalization of railway workers, I have a more negative view of Buffett personally. But somehow he has a very positive reputation. Why is that?
Probably some modern interpretation of noblesse oblige. If a rising tide lifts all ships, great and small, then Buffett is the rain man. He’s probably the closest anyone came to making trickle down economics more than just a theory as an individual in business. He made a lot of folks very wealthy simply by making investing boring and easy through his focus on value investing.
I don’t know much about him, but I know Berkshire Hathaway. He didn’t even found it; he took it over by monetary force. He knew who worked their ass off and who just talked shit. He came across someone who wronged him in a business deal at Berkshire Hathaway before he ran it, and he literally drove the prior owners out of their own company over it. He says it was the biggest mistake he made, which leads me to believe he is generally a serious person, but he’s also principled. He’s a case study on overcoming yourself in order to make better decisions.
His business sense may not be as learnable, but I have tried to apply his lessons to my own life, and I didn’t have to pay anything for that.
Best as I can tell, (wannabe) investor types celebrate his accumulation of wealth. I appreciated his public statements about tax policy, rising inequity, etc. Otherwise, I was ambivalent about Buffet.
Buffet is a rentier. He does not create wealth; he merely transfers it.
His most successful strategy is to find tranches of underutilized capital, and buy a controlling interest. Which he then ladders up to buy yet more tranches. Most famously Geico.
It's fair to say that I'm far less impressed by this strategy than Acquired's hosts.
Rentier is distinct from the raider (aka private equity) play of buying controlling interest in a corporation, looting it, loading it up with debt, and then unloading the resulting dumpster fire.
So at least Buffet isn't actively destroying jobs and wealth. As far as I know.
Money, also they fake I drink X coke a day while knowing he can pay for any medication or doctor in the world. The humble rich is a facade to stay in power.
They provoked the strike on purpose by giving the workers an unacceptable contract. The aim was to wreck the union (they succeeded). They prepared in secret for two years for this.
A lot of Americans have been tricked into thinking that worker's rights are a bad thing. The Washington Post, owned by none other than Jeff Bezos, greatly contributed to this sad state of affairs.
I at least appreciate that Bezos is now transparent with his transactional beliefs, instead of trying to wrap them in some bullshit moral superiority.
During Trump I, WaPo was all "Democracy Dies In Darkness". Trump II is all about "Hey, we don't do presidential endorsements anymore" and "our opinion pages are only about defending personal liberties and free markets".
It's not simply always good or always bad. Sometimes unions get too powerful for the general good of the population. Workers rights come at a cost to non-workers and the general population. Do you really want to ban intermodal shipping containers to protect watersiders' rights to work inefficiently? That's an example of where unions were trying to rent-seek from the rest of the economy. Newspapers had similar problems with their printers and associated workers having probably too much power through their unions. If printer/etc. unions had their way, there'd be no internet news because that "stole" their jobs and their workers rights.
We should talk about the details of this particular strike then.
I don't know anything so I'm just copying from wikipedia, they could have a bad analysis:
The 1975–1976 Washington Post pressmen's strike was a strike action by The Washington Post's pressmen. The strike began on October 1, 1975. The Washington Post hired replacement workers to replace the union in December 1975. The last unions supporting the pressmen's strike returned to work in February 1976.
And then from the "Aftermath and Impact" section:
The outcome of the strike was viewed as a victory for the Post and a defeat for the labor unions involved.[6][9] The Post was estimated to save $2 million in 1976 as a result of hiring non-union pressmen.[4]
On October 2, 1976, to commemorate the 1-year anniversary of the start of the strike, a crowd of over 1000 supporting the pressmen met at McPherson Square. They proceeded to the Post's headquarters, where they burned Graham in effigy.
This doesn't seem like the worker's thought it was positive for them.
Readit News
Yeah, uh, that's not all she did. She and Buffett apparently had a long-running (and public) affair, which in part led to Susan Buffett separating from him and moving to San Francisco.
I don’t know much about him, but I know Berkshire Hathaway. He didn’t even found it; he took it over by monetary force. He knew who worked their ass off and who just talked shit. He came across someone who wronged him in a business deal at Berkshire Hathaway before he ran it, and he literally drove the prior owners out of their own company over it. He says it was the biggest mistake he made, which leads me to believe he is generally a serious person, but he’s also principled. He’s a case study on overcoming yourself in order to make better decisions.
His business sense may not be as learnable, but I have tried to apply his lessons to my own life, and I didn’t have to pay anything for that.
Until I listened to Acquired's episodes.
https://www.acquired.fm/episodes/berkshire-hathaway-part-i
Buffet is a rentier. He does not create wealth; he merely transfers it.
His most successful strategy is to find tranches of underutilized capital, and buy a controlling interest. Which he then ladders up to buy yet more tranches. Most famously Geico.
It's fair to say that I'm far less impressed by this strategy than Acquired's hosts.
Rentier is distinct from the raider (aka private equity) play of buying controlling interest in a corporation, looting it, loading it up with debt, and then unloading the resulting dumpster fire.
So at least Buffet isn't actively destroying jobs and wealth. As far as I know.
but that solves it
Dead Comment
Here's an account: https://www.huffpost.com/entry/wash-post-busted-pressmens-un...
During Trump I, WaPo was all "Democracy Dies In Darkness". Trump II is all about "Hey, we don't do presidential endorsements anymore" and "our opinion pages are only about defending personal liberties and free markets".
I don't know anything so I'm just copying from wikipedia, they could have a bad analysis:
The 1975–1976 Washington Post pressmen's strike was a strike action by The Washington Post's pressmen. The strike began on October 1, 1975. The Washington Post hired replacement workers to replace the union in December 1975. The last unions supporting the pressmen's strike returned to work in February 1976.
And then from the "Aftermath and Impact" section:
The outcome of the strike was viewed as a victory for the Post and a defeat for the labor unions involved.[6][9] The Post was estimated to save $2 million in 1976 as a result of hiring non-union pressmen.[4]
On October 2, 1976, to commemorate the 1-year anniversary of the start of the strike, a crowd of over 1000 supporting the pressmen met at McPherson Square. They proceeded to the Post's headquarters, where they burned Graham in effigy.
This doesn't seem like the worker's thought it was positive for them.
Dead Comment
Dead Comment
Dead Comment