Post New

Will Buffett give his current opinions on gold, bitcoin, and the crypto space?

Will Buffett give his current opinions on gold, bitcoin, and the crypto space?

Do you think his opinions will have changed?

" Do you think his opinions will have changed?"

There is a chance Buffett might say, in view of what's happening on the world stage, I can understand why investors might be 2-5 % gold. I seriously doubt his opinion on crypto will change. I doubt he invested any material funds in q-1 but we shall know soon enough.

There is a chance Buffett might say, in view of what's happening on the world stage, I can understand why investors might be 2-5 % gold.

It's true that Mr Buffett bought precious metals once, a 2% allocation to silver bullion, so we can't say it's impossible. But per my previous comment: I think that if he were to admit that there might be a case for a small allocation to gold, it would only when the price is lower than usual : )

As for the meeting topics---
I think he is unlikely in the extreme ever to abandon his stance that the US has been the best place on the planet for economic development and investing. I think he will sing this siren song more strongly than ever. This has been true for a very long time, and he has been right about it for a very long time. A few decades of positive reinforcement will entrench almost any opinion. I think he will continue to conclude that merely because it HAS been true, it will ipso facto REMAIN true.

Myself, I'm not comfortable with that last little bit of reasoning. Say you're thinking about buying a nice big farm. If the northern field of a farm gets more water and has been more productive than the southern field for the last century, you don't make a huge wager that this will remain true just because it has always been true. First you check to see if there are new problems in the northern field's water supply that weren't there before, and you assess how likely it is that the water supply will last forever at its previous level.

Jim

<<<Will Buffett give his current opinions on gold, bitcoin, and the crypto space?

Do you think his opinions will have changed?>>>

The priceless education the world gets from Omaha is why many show up year after year to hear the same things. Often against common mythologies.

I do have some concern that in future, such myths can have longer half-life when the credible voices of reason are fewer. We also have the echo-amplification potential of AI in the backdrop.

Can’t wait for the sameness discourse in a few weeks 😄

a. “For 240 years it’s been a terrible mistake to bet against America,”

b. “Lose money for the firm, and I will be understanding. Lose a shred of reputation for the firm, and I will be ruthless.”

cognitive dissonance?

best,

mike

Say you're thinking about buying a nice big farm. If the northern field of a farm gets more water and has been more productive than the southern field for the last century, you don't make a huge wager that this will remain true just because it has always been true. First you check to see if there are new problems in the northern field's water supply...

I believe the underlying water table, soil quality and the climate are all just fine.
We hired a know-nothing who thinks he knows everything, looks out for himself first, and has bankrupted most everything he managed.

Now, he can salt the Earth, send some water away to the Eastern corner because there is a fire in the Western corner, beat up the nice neighbors thinking that maybe now people will consider him to be a real man and so on. The question is, can he cause lasting damage or can we bounce back? At some point, being mortal, he will be gone. Call me an optimistic fool, but I think America has bounced back from worse, although I don't know if this will be worse than the worst so far.
For the next N years, N < = or > 4 unknown at this point, what Jim said is true. My consolatory belief is that N < min(infinity, till I die).

I think he will sing this siren song more strongly than ever. This has been true for a very long time, and he has been right about it for a very long time. A few decades of positive reinforcement will entrench almost any opinion. I think he will continue to conclude that merely because it HAS been true, it will ipso facto REMAIN true.

You really think Warren thinks like the typical Mr.Joe investor? That his psychology and bias is the same? Even after decades with Charlie?

I think even when he says what you expect him to say that his reasons are absolutely not what you think his reasons are. You underestimate the man.

Say you're thinking about buying a nice big farm. If the northern field of a farm gets more water and has been more productive than the southern field for the last century, you don't make a huge wager that this will remain true just because it has always been true. First you check to see if there are new problems in the northern field's water supply that weren't there before, and you assess how likely it is that the water supply will last forever at its previous level.

Not a very good metaphor IMO. If the nice big farm is the whole world, and the U.S. is the north field, then I would say the question is not whether the water supply to the north field will remain, but whether the whole farm is facing a biblical seven year drought. The U.S. economy is 25% of the world economy. As goes the U.S. economy so will go the world, to a very significant extent. We may be leery of U.S. governance at this point, but there will be nowhere to hide from the financial fallout.

Elan

I think he will continue to conclude that merely because it HAS been true, it will ipso facto REMAIN true.
...
You really think Warren thinks like the typical Mr.Joe investor? That his psychology and bias is the same? Even after decades with Charlie?

Well, let's put in a more nuanced way.
I think Mr Buffett is the consummate investor. He sees around corners that I don't, and nobody else does. In investing, he's clearly smarter than I am.

Yet I think he is American to his core, and has a huge home-market bias, and believes in the U S of A to the moon, and always will, and that his life experiences have provided nothing but reinforcement for that stance. I think that yes, he has some blinders to that extent. I only ever wrote him a letter once, and that was to chew him out for talking about "we" in an annual letter referring to Americans rather than to shareholders. For whom does he work? A non-American shareholder, or a non-shareholder American?

But...I also appreciate that there is often a dissonance between what he espouses and what he actually does. As mentioned, I think he will almost certainly SAY that he believes in the ability of the US and the US economy to weather any storm and always come back stronger, and that one should never doubt and always bet on the future of the US. Mom, apple pie, the genius of the founders, always worked in the past, two if by sea, blah blah blah.

But he also understands Rule #1 better than anyone else on the planet. I think that he is well aware that this core stars-and-stripes-forever stance is not necessarily always true and will be acting accordingly, within the bounds of what he perceives any true risks may be and whatever is feasible for Berkshire's portfolio. Likely not much deployed capital, for example. At a stretch, possibly even some non-US currency holdings.

Jim

The U.S. economy is 25% of the world economy. As goes the U.S. economy so will go the world, to a very significant extent. We may be leery of U.S. governance at this point, but there will be nowhere to hide from the financial fallout.

Finally!

Say you're thinking about buying a nice big farm. If the northern field of a farm gets more water and has been more productive than the southern field for the last century, you don't make a huge wager that this will remain true just because it has always been true. First you check to see if there are new problems in the northern field's water supply that weren't there before, and you assess how likely it is that the water supply will last forever at its previous level.
...
Not a very good metaphor IMO. If the nice big farm is the whole world, and the U.S. is the north field, then I would say the question is not whether the water supply to the north field will remain, but whether the whole farm is facing a biblical seven year drought. The U.S. economy is 25% of the world economy. As goes the U.S. economy so will go the world, to a very significant extent. We may be leery of U.S. governance at this point, but there will be nowhere to hide from the financial fallout.

Well, two points there.

First, I think my analogy is apt. Maybe the water just isn't coming back, ever, period? The US has been a fabulous place for business and investors for 80 years for a specific set of reasons. I would argue that most of those reasons are now partly or completely absent, and that no-one sensible will assume their presence or invest accordingly for (say) the next 30 years. In almost every respect, from an investor's point of view, the US is now a developing market. Get used to it. There is a new political (and legal and regulatory) risk premium, and that is definitely NOT going away in my life time. What would US equity returns in the last 40 years look like without any influx of non-US capital? What would the look like if that went into reverse?

As goes the U.S. economy so will go the world, to a very significant extent.

So I've heard. Yet...other than short term global equity correlations, which are understandably tight, it's possible for economies to diverge quite a lot over very long periods. Japan is not the best comparison in terms of reasons, as it has always had a fairly functional government, but an excellent example in terms of the range of things that can happen to a well run advanced economy and its markets. A leader is not necessarily destined to be a leader forever. Beirut used to be one of the best places in the world.

There is a general truth about the world: things tend to go on forever until they don't.

Admittedly, the US still has one thing going for it: it's very big and can't really be ignored. But from the point of view of the capital of Americans and the rest of the world, is that enough to make it an interesting place to risk one's money? I decided the answer is "no", so I divested the vast majority of my holdings and currency exposure. I rather suspect I'm not the only one, American or not, who has reached that conclusion. Rule #1: why risk it? Pick a place where your capital is safe.

Most recent big market movements and specific stock/sector movements in the US have not been driven by anything other than decrees and pronouncements. Not business fundamentals, not economic fundamentals, and not even Mr Market's mood about either of those things. The changes are not short term price changes, either--the most fundamental economic foundation blocks of major businesses are changing permanently. If business results and investment returns are solely about that the Big Man says, it's not a place for the rational fiduciary to invest. It takes decades to demonstrate predictability, primarily from the rule of law, but only a few weeks for the assumption to be proven false.

I never set foot in China or Russia, as I don't like being exposed to arbitrary legal systems. Similarly I wouldn't risk setting foot in the US, and I don't expect that ever to change.

As an aside, the divestment has been an extraordinarily good decision, so far. The currency movement alone has made me enough to buy a nice house. But I expect these divestment decisions to make me and my family poorer over time, perhaps more likely than not. Don't care.

Jim

I only ever wrote him a letter once, and that was to chew him out for talking about "we" in an annual letter referring to Americans rather than to shareholders. For whom does he work? A non-American shareholder, or a non-shareholder American?

And here I think is where Mungofitch and Buffett might rationally veer apart a little bit. If you find an investor in BRK, have you found an American? Well, not necessarily but that is the way to bet.

I think Mungofitch's divestiture from things American was well described, compellingly motivated, and certainly served to wake me up and make me think. But on reflection, one of my conclusions from thinking about it is that it makes much more sense for a non-American than for an American to get out of Dodge. Trump has made it clear: Foreigners aren't even second-class citizens. And the senate of the United States has made it clear: at least for now they would rather lick Trump's boots than risk his wrath by trying to impeach him.

My own conclusion after contemplating Mungofitch was to go 1/2 to cash. But my cash 1/2 is in US Govt paper and my stock 1/2 is in US equities. I feel considerably better protected from arbitrary seizures of my property than I would were I not an American. And whatever Trump has managed to do in 100 days doesn't compare to the infrastructure of empire and hegemony we have previously built of the past 30,000 days.

To turn the a question a bit on its side, If Buffett were to ask you what a better investment environment than the US is, what would your answer be? Hard to claim Buffett is biased unless you can answer that question with somewhere better than the US, isn't it?

Trump is within about 25 senators of being done. Sure, it LOOKS like we have no checks and balances anymore because the senate has not yet convicted him in an impeachment. But if Trump could shake up the world as much as he has in less than 100 days, how long should it take for 25 senators to grow backbones and testicles under the cover of knowing there are at least 24 other senators doing the same thing? He may be the master of the deal, but in early April all it took was the sound of the world rattling the chains that connect it to the US Dollar as a reserve currency to send Trump scurrying away from crazy town with the excuse that it would only be for 90 days.

Excelsior!
Raplh

Trump is within about 25 senators of being done. Sure, it LOOKS like we have no checks and balances anymore because the senate has not yet convicted him in an impeachment. But if Trump could shake up the world as much as he has in less than 100 days, how long should it take for 25 senators to grow backbones and testicles under the cover of knowing there are at least 24 other senators doing the same thing?

Oh, come on!
We just had 4 years of a President with dementia.

I get that people enjoy getting scared with scary movies and scary haunted houses, etc. but let's get real.

Oh, come on!
We just had 4 years of a President with dementia.

I get that people enjoy getting scared with scary movies and scary haunted houses, etc. but let's get real.


OT but can't resist. If we can't get a normal frog, I prefer a log to a snake.

Aesop’s Fables, No. 44:

“The frogs, distressed by the anarchy prevailing among them, sent ambassadors to Zeus asking him to give them a king. He took note of their silliness and threw down a piece of wood into the pond. The frogs, terrified at first by the loud sound, submerged themselves in the depths of the pond.

Later, when the piece of wood was still, they came back up and rose to such a height of insolence that they mounted the wood and perched upon it. Deeming this king unworthy of them, they sent messengers to Zeus, asking him to change their king, because the first one was too lazy. Zeus was irritated by this, so he sent them a snake as king, by whom they were all snatched up and eaten.”

"I believe the underlying water table, soil quality and the climate are all just fine.
We hired a know-nothing who thinks he knows everything, looks out for himself first, and has bankrupted most everything he managed.

Now, he can salt the Earth, send some water away to the Eastern corner because there is a fire in the Western corner, beat up the nice neighbors thinking that maybe now people will consider him to be a real man and so on. The question is, can he cause lasting damage or can we bounce back? At some point, being mortal, he will be gone. Call me an optimistic fool, but I think America has bounced back from worse, although I don't know if this will be worse than the worst so far."

While I appreciate your optimism, I am not quite so sure the fundamentals (the underlying water table, soil quality and the climate in Jim's metaphor) are truly fine.

Yes, the know nothing (criminal, lying, con artist, etc. etc.) we hired is mortal and will be gone at some point, but that doesn't change the fundamental fact that America hired him in the first place when it was blatantly obvious to any moderately informed person that this is what was going to happen.

Recently I travelled to Europe to play in a minor poker tournament, the tournament was made up of 80% European players, 15% Asian players and 5% Americans, so the discussion of American politics wasn't as taboo (or impolite) of a subject among strangers as it might have been if the tournament was in the U.S. American politics came up a lot (for obvious reasons). It was mentioned over and over again about how other countries can no longer trust the U.S. on anything (mutual defense, trade, or agreements/treaties of any kind). At one point, another American I was sitting with expressed the same optimism you have. That the know nothing will be gone eventually and things can go back to normal. Every non-American at the table disagreed with that point. Given the fact that everything happening since the new administration took charge was easily foreseeable, it can never go back to normal. It was quite clear what the Know Nothing was going to do to foreign relations and the American electorate said "I don't care, we are going to elect him anyway".

It is one thing to be fooled once. Every democratic country has elected at least one leader in the past that most of the population later regrets. It happens, however voters should learn. America had that "Oops" moment in 2016. The rest of the world thought America learned and corrected itself in 2020, but then in 2024, the American electorate said "You know what, I will have a little bit more of that".

After electing the Know Nothing a 2nd time, why would any other country trust the American electorate? Just because the Know Nothing is gone does not mean that there are not other (more competent, but still evil) politicians who can use the same playbook? The Know Nothing in charge is only a symptom of the fundamental problem: the American electorate. Even if America elected the most sane president ever in 2028, who is to say it won't elect another nutty America Firster in 2032?

Paraphrasing Buffett, it takes decades to build a good reputation but only seconds to destroy it. America has shredded its reputation as world leader with the 2024 election. It will take decades for other countries to ever trust America again. Sure, America still has a big economy and nuclear weapons so it will always be an important actor on the world stage, but it will never again be a leader.

As a representative democracy (yes I know, America is technically a Republic, but the lines have been blurred enough to make it a semantic distinction), the politicians elected are supposed to generally reflect the will of the people. However it is more than that. The politicians elected also reflect the intelligence, wisdom, laziness, strengths, weakness, etc. of the people. Unfortunately, there are too many sources of misinformation out there that try and confuse voters and the American electorate has become too fat and lazy to put forth the effort to educate themselves about what the true facts are.

There are some very smart voters who actually thought the last election was about tax cuts or cutting government waste. They were easily fooled because they didn't want to educate themselves about the candidates and what they would really do when elected.

"I believe the underlying water table, soil quality and the climate are all just fine.
We hired a know-nothing who thinks he knows everything, looks out for himself first, and has bankrupted most everything he managed.

Now, he can salt the Earth, send some water away to the Eastern corner because there is a fire in the Western corner, beat up the nice neighbors thinking that maybe now people will consider him to be a real man and so on. The question is, can he cause lasting damage or can we bounce back? At some point, being mortal, he will be gone. Call me an optimistic fool, but I think America has bounced back from worse, although I don't know if this will be worse than the worst so far."

To take Jim's metaphor further, we cannot be sure that the underlying water table, soil quality and the climate are all just fine. The Know Nothing has made it so toxic metals can easily be dumped into the soil, the climate can change and we don't know it and that the water tables can be poisoned by fracking liquids.

When I was in my early thirties, I joined a successful, venerable multispecialty group. It had a multigenerational reputation of providing solid, careful, responsive medical care for most patient populations, a good community reputation and name recognition, and a solid referral pipeline.

The physicians were collegial and articulate. The facilities were nearly new. The support systems seemed fine.

I signed up as a worker bee.

It takes decades to demonstrate predictability...but only a few weeks for the assumption to be proven false.

...a little less than eight years later, the group dissolved in bankruptcy.

The senior leadership was completely incapable of addressing basic operational issues. Strategic decisions were laughably bad. And everything steadily worsened...not one thing improved during my time there.

My take-home lesson: just how stupid easy it is to irrevocably squander the crown jewels.

It was a good life lesson.

--sutton
(the surviving senior leadership to this day doesn't have any real clue as to their culpability)
meanwhile, I found myself president of a single-specialty startup at age 40

"And here I think is where Mungofitch and Buffett might rationally veer apart a little bit. If you find an investor in BRK, have you found an American? Well, not necessarily but that is the way to bet.

I think Mungofitch's divestiture from things American was well described, compellingly motivated, and certainly served to wake me up and make me think. But on reflection, one of my conclusions from thinking about it is that it makes much more sense for a non-American than for an American to get out of Dodge."

I think this is true (that it makes much more sense for a non-American than for an American to get out of Dodge) right now, but that does not mean that there are not warning signs even for Americans. Right now, it is easiest to disregard the rule of law and due process when targeting Non-American citizens, but that will change. To mangle a metaphor, the frog needs to be boiled slowly. If you heat the water too quickly it will just hop out. If rule of law and due process are disregarded against everyone right away then people would fight back, instead you go after the easiest first and gradually expand the targets as the populace gets used to rule of law not mattering.

Besides, there are already signs that American institutions are being targeted. Ask the Associated Press. Ask Harvard. Ask various law firms that represented clients Trump did not like. In fact, rule of law is already being disregarded against AP. Every court has ruled that AP should have the same access to the White House that other news services do. The administration is ignoring those ruling and just illegally continuing to bar them from the White House.

Now most people would say "Ohh big deal, the AP cannot have White House access. Who cares?". And to a certain degree it isn't a big deal, but that is how it starts.

There is the famous quote:

First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a socialist.
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.

—Martin Niemöller

Right now rule of law still generally matters when the government tries to use power against most Americans, but it matter less than it did 4 months ago and it is declining every day. Yes, there is still hope that things will change and there is still time for things to change, but the thing is that you cannot wait until the actual point of rule of law protections no longer protecting you because by then it is too late.

"To turn the a question a bit on its side, If Buffett were to ask you what a better investment environment than the US is, what would your answer be? Hard to claim Buffett is biased unless you can answer that question with somewhere better than the US, isn't it?"

For me, I am no longer in the accumulation phase of life. I have plenty, more than enough. What I am most worried about is unrecoverable loss. Unrecoverable loss is generally associated with investment risk (i.e. making a bad investment) or inflation. I think I can generally handle those ok (at least relative to the general population). The loss I am fearing is loss due to lack of rule of law.

So for me, rule of law is far more important than economic outlook or investment outlook. In that regard, there are plenty of places that are at least just as good to invest as the U.S.

They were easily fooled because they didn't want to educate themselves about the candidates and what they would really do when elected.

It is way too easy to blame the voters. Trump distanced himself clearly from Project 2025. Their fault, if trust is a fault, was to take that liar at his word. Nobody "really" knew what he would do, probably including himself.
Regardless, Biden was an old senile fool, and Kamala an empty vessel, who did not understand what Americans wanted and needed. Biden could have backed up Powell with a tighter fiscal policy and tamped down inflation in 2022 or earlier, but no Democrat understands how to NOT tax and spend.
Same with immigration. Vance wasn't too far off in saying that too many people were taking advantage of tge deliberately loose asylum process, and Biden/Harris had let in too many people with dubious claims of persecution.
Please let us not cast the last election as good vs evil. It was log vs snake.

"It is way too easy to blame the voters. Trump distanced himself clearly from Project 2025. Their fault, if trust is a fault, was to take that liar at his word. Nobody "really" knew what he would do, probably including himself.
Regardless, Biden was an old senile fool, and Kamala an empty vessel, who did not understand what Americans wanted and needed. Biden could have backed up Powell with a tighter fiscal policy and tamped down inflation in 2022 or earlier, but no Democrat understands how to NOT tax and spend.
Same with immigration. Vance wasn't too far off in saying that too many people were taking advantage of tge deliberately loose asylum process, and Biden/Harris had let in too many people with dubious claims of persecution."

Thank you for properly demonstrating my point about the electorate being too easily fooled and too lazy to educate themselves.

Your statements are laughably ignorant. You made numerous posts before the election that showed a clear lack of understanding about actual facts (such as your statement about immigration) and numerous people corrected you each and every time. You ignored all of that. Yes, you are responsible for your vote. Only you, and you did not take that responsibility seriously. You were lazy, didn't care about facts, didn't care about what it meant. You are the reason the world no longer trusts America.

Only you, and you did not take that responsibility seriously. You were lazy, didn't care about facts, didn't care about what it meant. You are the reason the world no longer trusts America.

Perfectly true. However, this is definitely US Policy board territory so I can't respond.

"Vance wasn't too far off in saying that too many people were taking advantage of tge deliberately loose asylum process, and Biden/Harris had let in too many people with dubious claims of persecution."

Normally it isn't worth the time trying to correct people when they themselves are not interested in having correct information, but in this instance you made it easy so I will put forth the little effort it takes.

Biden/Harris did not get to decide which people claiming asylum have dubious claims or not.

There are laws, treaties, and a whole judicial system that make those decisions.

Do better. You effed up. Take responsibility and educate yourself.

Maybe the water just isn't coming back, ever, period?

Sounds a bit over the top. A bit like disaster porn.

DB2

Just a couple of stories ripped from the headlines.

Yesterday...

POSCO to invest in Hyundai Steel's U.S. plant project
https://en.yna.co.kr/view/AEN20250421003851320
POSCO Group, South Korea's leading steelmaker, said Monday that it will invest in Hyundai Steel Co.'s steel mill project in the United States, as part of its strategy to navigate U.S. President Donald Trump's sweeping tariffs on steel imports.

Today...

Swiss pharmaceuticals company Roche announces $50B investment in US over next 5 years
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/swiss-pharmaceutica...
The Basel-based company, whose array of products includes cancer medicines and multiple sclerosis treatment Ocrevus, said the investment would go toward high-tech research and development sites and new manufacturing facilities in places including California, Indiana, Massachusetts and Pennsylvania.

DB2

Ripped from the headlines a number of years ago:
https://trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefings-sta...

You should remember this DB.

You should remember this DB.

Indeed I do. A percentage of projects are going to be canceled or are frauds. If half of, say, $500 billion in projects never happen then the other $250 billion do.

And there are also expansion plans. Taiwan Semi has been building in Arizona for a couple of years. This month they expanded the project.

Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing unveils ambitious expansion plans for Phoenix complex
www.azcentral.com/story/money/business/tech/2025/04/17/tsmc-details-expansion-plans-for-phoenix-complex/83138028007/
Wei alluded to his recent visit with President Donald Trump at the White House, when TSMC announced its intention to invest an additional $100 billion in the Phoenix complex north of Loop 303, raising its total commitment here to $165 billion. The investment aligns with Trump's goal of bringing more manufacturing, especially in advanced industries, back to American soil.

IIRC, the domestic content auto rules (back in the '80s?) resulted in quite a few Japanese car plants being located in the US. At any rate, I was reacting to Jim's over the top comment about 'water just isn't coming back, ever, period'.

DB2

Yes, there is always an ebb and flow to things. Since I live in WI (as I believe you also do) Foxcom came to my mind.
I'm guessing that Jim was thinking more in terms of the big picture. I hope you're right in that this will all work out, but we won't know until it's to late.

I'm guessing that Jim was thinking more in terms of the big picture. I hope you're right in that this will all work out

Yes, I've always been an optimist.

As for the bigger/longer picture, I wouldn't be an investor in Europe. They are currently on a money high of government spending with debt limits loosened for much of the EU to spend on defense (and other programs pushed in). However, the longer term sclerosis remains.

Last fall, Mario Draghi put out a report on EU competitiveness, making the case that growth and competitiveness are fading in Europe.

For example, he writes “there is no EU company with a market capitalisation over EUR 100 billion that has been set up from scratch in the last fifty years, while all six US companies with a valuation above EUR 1 trillion have been created in this period.”

The future of European competitiveness
https://commission.europa.eu/document/download/97e...

The death pains of the European Union
https://www.spiked-online.com/2024/09/22/the-death...
The largely unspoken trade-off involved in membership of the European Union is that democracy and national sovereignty are sacrificed in return for economic prosperity. Member states give up much of their control over critical policy areas to an unelected, technocratic elite who are entrusted with delivering higher living standards and productivity. But Brussels is not keeping its part of the bargain – and hasn’t for some time…

Draghi’s bleak assessment actually underestimates the scale of the EU’s economic malaise. Looking at averages across the 27-member bloc obscures the depths of the crisis. Astonishingly, the economies of Italy, Spain and Greece, having been battered by the Euro crisis and EU-mandated austerity, are actually smaller than they were in the late 2000s…

So, what is to be done? According to Draghi, nothing less than a fundamental rethink in how Brussels approaches investment, trade policy and business regulation will dig Europe out of its hole…If, as Draghi believes, the choice facing Europe is radical change or ‘slow agony’, then slow agony is what Europe will get.

DB2

knighttof3 opined: no Democrat understands how to NOT tax and spend.

In the interest of rational discussion of this important matter of the deficit, I'll point out that the Democrats balanced the budget in the fairly recent past. Clinton and Gore reduced and then eliminated the deficit with smart and comprehensive cuts of government spending with a reasonable level of taxation. It can be done.

Mistakes will be made: Clinton's financial deregulation contributed to the Great Recession, and I think the welfare reform they implemented is partially responsible for the current boom in homelessness. Clinton's sexual picadillos helped tank Gore's campaign, so the policies that balanced the budget ended with his loss.

However, they made balancing the budget look easy. The economy was boomed as they accomplished the feat.

Ever since Bush the Younger took office after Clinton, Borrow and Spend has ruled the day, and it has been more or less sustainable until recently, when it took off due to ill-timed duo of the the Trump tax cuts and the pandemic. Biden kept his foot on the gas too long, rightly wanting to continue to fuel the recovery from the pandemic crash, but the last round of checks were too big, which combined with pandemic supply-line problems to send inflation soaring to destabilizing levels, meanwhile the Dems were unable to pass any significant tax reform, so the deficits continued to soar.

Despite those problems, we were on target for a smooth landing, with inflation down to 2.5-3.0% and the economy growing robustly when Biden handed off the economy. That's a pretty Goldilocks type situation on two of the most important measures. Then Trump took a monkey wrench to it with wild unfocussed cutting of government spending, employees and functions that hit every aspect of the government and it's myriad interconnections with the private economy. The impact of this has barely begun to be felt. Often times with fairly negligible savings compared to the overall size of government spending, at times wrecking programs which would contribute to future increases in tax revenue. Cutting off your nose to spite your face?

Then, Trump shocked the markets and the economy with large and unpredictable tariffs, and all the sudden we're in a pickle with growth drying up at the same time the deficit and debt soar to untenable levels. Interest rates are climbing due to the economic uncertainty and expected tariff-related inflation. And Trump is trying to extend his former tax cuts, which will guarantee enormous deficits for the near future, since I don't believe the Republicans can pass major cuts to Medicare/Medicaid/Soc. Security/Military which make up the vast majority of spending.

Things don't look good, but I think it's possible to bounce back. It's not necessarily the end of the US Era.

I've always have been an optimist also!! So much better to look at the bright side of things.

I do find it funny that you say the EU is on a "money high of government spending with debt limits loosened" when that's the same thing that our majority that's in charge are trying to do.

I do worry that cutting research funding may lead us down the same path of falling behind other up and coming countries. Do I know for sure? No, but I also know how I keep investing in my own personal knowledge/research and see what happens with people I know who don't.

I doubt any single person was unaware "who" they voted for, they just thought "he'll stick it to the other guy" and that was enough.
Thats why America will not be trusted again perhaps for more than a generation, to re- earn that Trust.
Its less what he's doing, its who he is, and nobody did not know that, and it will not be accepted as an excuse by any other foreign populatisn.
Trump is the symptom, not the cause.

for anyone on here, presumably because they trust their personal assets and future to Warren Buffett , yet entrusts their country to Trump is cognitive dissonance in the extreme.

there is no credible rational reason to do so...quite the opposite if you are a Buffett believer.

period.

for anyone on here, presumably because they trust their personal assets and future to Warren Buffett , yet entrusts their country to Trump is cognitive dissonance in the extreme.

there is no credible rational reason to do so...quite the opposite if you are a Buffett believer.

period.

Start a conversation with me and start with

1, we should have wide open borders and allow criminals, drug dealers and mentally ill people to invade our country. We need them to vote for us so we’ll bribe them with your tax money!

2, if a high school or college boy can’t compete with the boys, we allow him into the girls locker and he can put on a dress and beat the snot out of the girls in any sport he chooses.

3, if a young boy or girl, say 4th grader questions his or her gender we’ll cut off their genitals and let them choose their sex.

4, if the president of the United States becomes totally incapacitated we’ll get the media to lye through their teeth and tell Americans it just isn’t so.

Anything you say after that has no meaning, you’re just a sick pathetic human being to me after that.

Period.

I dont do "whataboutism"..or "moving the goalposts"

"Start a conversation with me and start with

1, we should have wide open borders and allow criminals, drug dealers and mentally ill people to invade our country. We need them to vote for us so we’ll bribe them with your tax money!

2, if a high school or college boy can’t compete with the boys, we allow him into the girls locker and he can put on a dress and beat the snot out of the girls in any sport he chooses.

3, if a young boy or girl, say 4th grader questions his or her gender we’ll cut off their genitals and let them choose their sex.

4, if the president of the United States becomes totally incapacitated we’ll get the media to lye through their teeth and tell Americans it just isn’t so.

Anything you say after that has no meaning, you’re just a sick pathetic human being to me after that."

Yet another poster demonstrating my point that they are too lazy or ignorant to research facts.

Do better. Stop being an idiot.

I dont do "whataboutism"..or "moving the goalposts".

No need to reply. No defense for any of that is possible.

You are the reason the world no longer trusts America.

We don't care.
Nobody cares.
No American lies awake at night worrying what other countries think about us.

The thing about being the big dog is that de facto is what actually matters in the real world.

If some country accounts for 25% of the world's trade, then that defines who is the big dog. Currently that's the USA.

Various European politicians have been saying "US President {insert name of current president} has upset us and is no longer the leader of the free world" ever since WW2.
Usually followed by naming [some current person who is in the newspaper headlines], and nothing changes. That new "Leader of the Free World" makes a couple of speeches and is never heard from again.

I had a great High School history teacher that said, "Some people don't like me. So what? They can go find somebody else to like."

"The dogs bark, but the caravan moves on".

----------------------------------

I always ponder what's the meaning of "the world no longer trusts America." In concrete terms, just what does that mean? What effect does that have in the real world? What do they do differently?

Europe will stop buying LPG from the US?

The US (most probably) blew up the Nordstream pipeline in 2022, harming Germany, etc. tremendously. What did Germany, etc. do to the US about that? Did they start distrusting the US then? That's kind of a bigger deal to them than what the US government does with illegal immigrants.

They trusted the US after that? And only started to distrust the US when DOGE shut down USAID?

They trusted the US after that? And only started to distrust the US when DOGE shut down USAID?

Like my main man Elon said. “The fraudsters are always the ones who scream the loudest”.

Do better. Stop being an idiot.

That’s been debunked sir!

Get used to losing, you seem genuinely good at it.

VIIIandXX: "Like my main man Elon said. 'The fraudsters are always the ones who scream the loudest'."

I wonder what would happen if you were to Google "irony."

Thats why America will not be trusted again perhaps for more than a generation, to re- earn that Trust.

Sorry to break it to you, but America doesn't care if other countries Trust us or not.

And it doesn't really make any difference anyway. What will they do differently?
They won't trust the USA but will trust China? China????



Its less what he's doing, its who he is, and nobody did not know that, and it will not be accepted as an excuse by any other foreign populatisn.

What does that mean? What does "will not be accepted as an excuse" mean? What will they do differently? What concrete actions will they take other than make speeches and complain?

Hell, Germany kept buying Nordstream gas from RUSSIA, as if they all trusted Russia even though it is the #1 evil country in the world. Oh, maybe they didn't trust Russia at all, but they depended heavily on Russia for a crucial product. So what difference did it make whether they trusted or distrusted Russia?

"Sorry to break it to you, but America doesn't care if other countries Trust us or not."

you made my point.

"Sorry to break it to you, but America doesn't care if other countries Trust us or not."

you made my point.

I'm not sure what your point was.

But anyway, does ANY big country much care what small countries think about them?


I'm not sure that even small countries care about what other countries think about them, except for areas where the other countries can do things to harm or punish them.

China, Russia, USA, even Germany don't care if Moldovia trusts them or not. Or if they even like them or not.

Funny how some people got so upset by the head of a country saying "My primary concern is my country."
As if that isn't what the primary duty of every head of every country is -- duty to the country he/she is head of.


Now let's debate religion. ;-)

No American lies awake at night worrying what other countries think about us.

I do. I've lived and worked all over the world, and life is better for everyone when we like each other. I've worked closely with people we once fought against, Mexicans, Germans, Japanese, Vietnamese. International business is much more productive with a positive environment. The big dog approach is counter productive.

I recently had my appendix removed in a rural hospital in Costa Rica. They were very nice to me, I got good care, and they never asked about payment. I much prefer a world that has a positive view of Americans.

.... only started to distrust the US when DOGE shut down USAID?
Did you follow the quake in Myanmar? The US sent three people with 2 million dollars for relief, then recalled the people and fired them. The Chinese sent a big crew in red uniforms and genuinely helped. Moral and compassionate issues aside, if we want countries to align with the US, we would do well to make a favorable impression

if we want countries to align with the US, we would do well to make a favorable impression

One of those countries said "Every time China visits we get a hospital, every time Britain visits we get a lecture.".

Another: "what we get from China is an airport. What we get from the United States is a lecture."

Another: "But the truth is, when we're engaged with the Chinese, we get an airport. And when we're engaged with you guys, we get a lecture.”

Those comments go back a long time.


USAID was sending money to countries for odd things, " for production of a “DEI musical” ,
for a “transgender opera” in Colombia,
for sex changes and “LGBT activism” in Guatemala,
for a “transgender comic book” in Peru, ...

Somehow I doubt that China was funding things like that.

I am not sure why any country *ever* trusted & respected the US.

What will they do differently?

I have a hard time believing you think there is nothing they would do differently, but here's a list.

1. Foreign Policy & Diplomacy
Form alternative alliances (e.g., strengthen BRICS, ASEAN, SCO) to reduce reliance on U.S.-led coalitions like NATO.

Limit intelligence-sharing with the U.S. and avoid joint military exercises.

Avoid supporting U.S.-backed resolutions at the UN or WTO.

Establish regional diplomatic blocs to push back against U.S. influence.

2. Trade & Economy
Dedollarize trade—shift from USD to other currencies (e.g., yuan, euro, or local currencies).

Impose tariffs or restrictions on American companies or products.

Pull investments from U.S. markets or reduce exposure to U.S.-based financial institutions.

Sign more trade deals excluding the U.S. (e.g., CPTPP without the U.S., China-led RCEP).

3. Defense & Security
Buy weapons and defense systems from non-U.S. sources, like Russia, China, or domestic suppliers.

Develop indigenous military tech to avoid U.S. surveillance or sabotage risks.

Ban U.S. military bases or reduce military cooperation agreements.

Pursue nuclear or asymmetric deterrence, if they feel militarily threatened by the U.S.

4. Technology & Infrastructure
Restrict American tech companies, citing surveillance risks (similar to how the U.S. treats Huawei).

Build domestic alternatives to U.S.-dominated platforms (e.g., Google, Microsoft, AWS).

Ban or tightly regulate U.S. social media platforms to control influence/disinformation.

Create sovereign internet ecosystems (like China's Great Firewall model).

5. Intelligence & Cybersecurity
Harden cyber defenses against U.S. surveillance or cyberattacks (post-Snowden revelations, this already started).

Refuse cooperation with Five Eyes countries, viewing them as extensions of U.S. intelligence.

Pursue their own global surveillance networks to counterbalance U.S. dominance.

6. Energy & Environment
Diversify energy partnerships away from U.S. oil and gas interests.

Push back on U.S. climate policies seen as hypocritical or coercive.

Develop strategic reserves (oil, rare earths, etc.) to withstand U.S.-led sanctions.

7. Education & Culture
Reduce student exchange programs with the U.S. or promote studying in Europe/Asia instead.

Encourage cultural pride and media that challenge American narratives.

Tightly control or ban U.S. NGOs viewed as soft-power tools.

8. Space & Science
Avoid collaboration with NASA or U.S. space agencies, partnering with ESA, Roscosmos, CNSA instead.

Create independent standards for tech & science, diverging from U.S. norms.

9. Sanctions & Legal Systems
Build legal mechanisms to resist or bypass U.S. extraterritorial sanctions (e.g., EU’s INSTEX).

Challenge U.S. dominance in international courts or try to reform them.

10. Public Messaging & Propaganda
Promote anti-U.S. narratives in state media to sway domestic or international opinion.

Use soft power to delegitimize U.S. leadership in the “rules-based order.”

rayvt: USAID was sending money to countries for odd things, " for production of a “DEI musical” ,
for a “transgender opera” in Colombia,
for sex changes and “LGBT activism” in Guatemala,
for a “transgender comic book” in Peru, ...

Since White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said that, it pays to take it with a grain of salt.


According to USA Spending, the State Department paid $70,000 in 2022 to Ceiliuradh Company Limited by Guarantee "to promote the U.S. and Irish shared values of diversity, equity, inclusion and accessibility." The grant funded a 2022 music festival (not a musical) in 2022 at the U.S. Embassy in Ireland, according to Irish news site Gript. The event featured performances from Irish musicians.

The "transgender opera" in Colombia was actually a $25,000 grant awarded to Universidad De Los Andes in Bogotá, Colombia, as part of a public diplomacy program that aimed to "advance national interests, and enhance national security by informing and influencing foreign publics."

In 2024, USAID gave a $2 million grant to Asociación LAMBDA in Guatemala, an organization that advocates for LGBTQ+ rights. The grant was "to deliver gender-affirming health care, advocate for improved quality and access to services, and provide economic empowerment opportunities."

The "transgender comic book" in Peru does not specifically mention a transgender character. The award actually came from the Fulbright Program in Peru with the goal to increase mutual understanding between the U.S. and other countries. The award was to cover expenses to produce a tailored-made comic, featuring an LGBTQ+ hero to address social and mental health issues. Cost? $32,000.

The cost of the birthday military parade for Donald Trump? $92 million. The $2.127 million for soft diplomacy directed to Ireland, Columbia, Guatemala, and Peru would seem to provide a better ROI.

"What will they do differently?"

I have a hard time believing you think there is nothing they would do differently, but here's a list.

OMG!

They won't do any of that stuff substantively.
Some of that is trivial and the US won't care.

And a lot of it is stuff that I *wish* they would do!

A lot of this list is things that countries should do, stand on their own two feet and stop leaning on the US for.

Avoid supporting U.S.-backed resolutions at the UN or WTO.
Nobody cares. "US out of the UN & UN out of the US" had seen a chant for almost as long as I have been alive.
WTO? That would be the same WTO that the US is planning to withdraw from? Good.

Dedollarize trade—shift from USD to other currencies (e.g., yuan, euro, or local currencies).
Unlikely, although BRICS is making a run. Which I don't have a problem with. That's a bit like a toxic girl saying she won't date you.

Buy weapons and defense systems from non-U.S. sources, like Russia, China, or domestic suppliers.
Develop indigenous military tech to avoid U.S. surveillance or sabotage risks.
Ban U.S. military bases or reduce military cooperation agreements.

I support all those things. MAGA-bros mostly support them. Especially closing most US bases in foreign countries. Stand on their own two feet and stop leaning on the US.

And, really, Russia & China? Although, Russia seems to have a lot of arguably hot weapons these days.

Diversify energy partnerships away from U.S. oil and gas interests.
Push back on U.S. climate policies seen as hypocritical or coercive.
Develop strategic reserves (oil, rare earths, etc.)
Agree with all of those, especially with the climate crap.
There is a real problem if your country is utterly dependent on another country for critical resources. You have to dance at their tune.

Use soft power to delegitimize U.S. leadership in the “rules-based order.”

Well, first of all there is no such thing as the “rules-based order.” That's just certain parts of the West saying words that make no sense. Turn out the "rules" are whatever they (we) feel like saying at the time. The "rules" are whatever the claimant feels will be to their advantage at the time.
Oddly enough, nobody can point to a piece of paper that lists out these "rules".


Oh, reduce reliance on U.S.-led coalitions like NATO.

LOL. NATO should have been disbanded when the Soviet Union fell.
Also LOL, NATO is just the US with a bunch of pipsqueaks brought in to make them feel like they are players. They are not. NATO is the US. And it should be disbanded.



All in all, pretty good list. Now that we 30-40 people here on the BRK board need to do is present it to the rest of the world and tell them to get to it.


Sigh, the big dogs of the world are currently the USA, Russia, and China. That's it. That's the world that all the other countries have to work around. Like it or not, that's reality.

And, frankly, I think that probably one of those, which I will not name, could take over most of Europe in a couple of months if they really wanted to, if they put the kid gloves aside.

“Did you follow the quake in Myanmar? The US sent three people with 2 million dollars for relief, then recalled the people and fired them. The Chinese sent a big crew in red uniforms and genuinely helped.”

We are in the midst of a shift in global hegemonic power away from the US and toward China. This has been happening for a quarter century but the Trump administration is hastening the transition. I just hope it doesn’t end in a war.

I am not sure why any country *ever* trusted & respected the US.

Are MAGAs just whining nihilists like those liberals in the 70s? Pathetic.

"Anything you say after that has no meaning, you’re just a sick pathetic human being to me after that."

Come on, be better than that! There's never a need for ad hominin attacks in meaningful debates.

"We don't care.
Nobody cares.
No American lies awake at night worrying what other countries think about us.

The thing about being the big dog is that de facto is what actually matters in the real world."

Wow, there's a lot to unpack in there. For starters, there's a fine line between not caring what others think about you and being arrogant. One side is being comfortable in your own skin and the other is being dangerously obtuse to your surroundings. No one likes a bully and no matter how big the US has been economically no president has ever lacked humility on the international stage until Trump. In fact we have been quite lucky up until him because no matter how flawed our leaders may have been all of them were really good statesmen when push came to shove regardless of their political affiliation. And again, the key word is "humility" because that's all it takes to show you are interested in the world around you and that you are not all about a zero sum gain all for yourself.

Let's take your opening statement "We don't care. Nobody cares. No American lies awake at night worrying what other countries think about us.". First of all that is factually incorrect. What you are really saying is that you don't care but there is no meaningful metric that shows "Americans don't care". I care and reading other opinions on this board it's clear plenty of people care! I also feel confident we will all care if we have a recession due to Trump's bellicosity because foreign countries sell off our bonds and boycott our products.

I really respect everyone's own political beliefs. Politics is not "right" or "wrong". No side is more virtuous than the other. It's just what you believe is the best way to run a society and I would argue that the US has successfully vacillated between both sides which is what has made it such a great country. My problem with Trumpism is that there is NO vacillation whatsoever. For Trump it is all about him and for his supporters it is all about their side "winning" which leaves them blind to the insanity behind what he is really doing. Republicans standing behind a president that is trying to implement a massive tax on the American People?? What kind of a world are we living in? A world in which one side is not seeing clearly right now!

It is way too easy to blame the voters. Trump distanced himself clearly from Project 2025. Their fault, if trust is a fault, was to take that liar at his word.

So why would anyone who is taking their vote seriously even consider voting for someone who has written books that contain his strategy of lying with regularity and conviction in order to get what he wants? That he lies was well known, bragged about even, as the best way to do business. One of the MANY disqualifying characteristics that should have kept all from even considering him, regardless of the lack of stellar quality of the other candidate. It is pure ignorance to expect that a liar and a felon can be believed.

Our kids are 27 and 30, so clearly voters. They went to very good public schools, in a state known for good schools. The entire time they were in school I was astonished at the lack of critical thinking being taught, and took strong efforts to supplement that lack of education. The voters have been increasingly compromised by the decline of the quality of education. It doesn't pay our politicians to have critical thinkers as voters, and what I have been seeing will not reverse the decline. I hold both parties guilty for that. If a voter is dependent on you, they will be more likely to vote for you.

Frankly, I think it is too easy to blame Trump. Weasels will be weasels. It is 100% the fault of the people who put him into office.

IP

" It doesn't pay our politicians to have critical thinkers as voters, and what I have been seeing will not reverse the decline. I hold both parties guilty for that. If a voter is dependent on you, they will be more likely to vote for you.

Frankly, I think it is too easy to blame Trump. Weasels will be weasels. It is 100% the fault of the people who put him into office.

IP"

Good morning, in your opinion, did critical thinkers conclude that the Dem party respected the process and offered voters a compelling alternative to trump? What appeared to be less risky, 4 years of trump and the Dem party gets an opportunity to reset in 28, or 8 more years of team Biden Harris? Thank you.

We don't care.
Nobody cares.
No American lies awake at night worrying what other countries think about us.

Do you know what happened in Europe after World War I?

Do you know what happened in Europe (and Japan) after World War II?

Maybe the difference, and the world wide economy that was so different in those two events, was because we did care.

And we didn’t look down our nose and call them shithole countries, and because we helped them and they were grateful. And they saw the errors what what they had been doing and changed in ways that were favorable to us, for world peace, and for themselves.

And maybe, just maybe what happened after the First World War would be a lesson for those who think “it doesn’t matter.”

Because yes, it matters. If you only rule by the law of the big hammer and random decrees, don’t expect anyone to care what happens to you later. And nobody gets to have the big hammer forever. Learn the lesson, or suffer the consequences.

Good morning, in your opinion, did critical thinkers conclude that the Dem party respected the process and offered voters a compelling alternative to trump? What appeared to be less risky, 4 years of trump and the Dem party gets an opportunity to reset in 28, or 8 more years of team Biden Harris? Thank you.

Good morning to you too, and thanks for asking. As I said in my post, both parties are much too comfortable in their seats, but almost ANYTHING would be better than Trump. One thing I do not believe he was lying about was his goal of being a dictator, which is being worked on with the 3rd term talk. A crappy leader who did not mess with what is currently considered democracy, did not alienate us from the rest of the world, and did not follow through with a promise that "you will never have to vote again," (because hey, you will no longer have that privilege,)would have been astronomically better!

That said, what I would like to see is the end of party politics and ranked choice voting. I am exceedingly tired of my choice of candidate being primaried and dropping out before my state gets to have their primary. We should have the vote on the same day as everyone else, with ranked choice making sure your vote doesn't go meaningless because your first choice is for a candidate not chosen by others. In my almost 62 years, having never missed a chance to vote, I have never been able to vote FOR a candidate, and always against a worse candidate. Is that what democracy is supposed to be about? Lets have real choice.

IP,
apologizing to the BRK board for the OT, but is it?

rayvt: USAID was sending money to countries for odd things, " for production of a “DEI musical” ,
for a “transgender opera” in Colombia,
for sex changes and “LGBT activism” in Guatemala,
for a “transgender comic book” in Peru, ...

rayvt, I really respect you and all you have contributed to MI. But please, do a little fact checking before regurgitating nonsense like that.

" IP,
apologizing to the BRK board for the OT, but is it?"

OK, fair enough, we agree we both got to vote for who we thought sucked less in 2024. I'll tell you why this is on topic on this board. I have a hunch Trump respects Jamie Dimon, A LOT, hence the dramatic change in his tone since the weekend. If, IF, Musk moves on from doge, and IF we see much less of Navarro and Lutnick, and IF, trump concedes team Doge only found 200 billion plus in waste ,fraud ,and abuse, we might be shocked by brks q-1 filing. IF, IF, Dimon convinced trump to raise taxes on the rich and corporations and pay down the federal debt 500 billion to a trillion a year, that's how you get the ten year below 4 percent and cause the mother of all stock market rallies. IF, IF, Dimon and others convinced trump that's the correct game plan, going forward, I hope Buffett invested 100 billion plus in April. WE shall see soon enough. Have a grand day, off to the park.

rayvt-----ploink!

We are in the midst of a shift in global hegemonic power away from the US and toward China. This has been happening for a quarter century

The world is big. It is darn difficult to handle things that are an ocean away. Especially if he people that are right there don't want you to.
Big difference between driving a few hundred/thousand miles on land and sailing thousands of miles on water.

rayvt-----ploink!

Oh no!

Anyway ....


-------------------------------
That's why politics & religion should not be discussed on this board.
Not even a little bit.
Not even if "but this time it is different"

Even a rule that says "... but it's ok if I feel really strongly about it."

Frankly, I think it is too easy to blame Trump. Weasels will be weasels. It is 100% the fault of the people who put him into office.

You and Umm are urging low-information voters like me to educate ourselves and do better, and castigate us for being stupid.
All true, but the reality of politics, like a battle, is that you have to fight with the forces you have. Not the ones you wish you had.

Idiots like me have one vote each, same as you and Umm. If you fail to win us over, you are going to lose. Look at Obama. He had the "disadvantages" of being the "wrong" race, and an "over-educated elite", things that the other party hates (sometimes openly, sometimes secretly). Despite that he won the popular vote twice, because he was an appealing guy. Independents loved him and the only votes that matter in the presidential elections are swing voters in swing states.

Believe it or not, (probably you won't), Trump has charisma. That's why, being a repeated failure in substance, he exudes being successful in appearance. That's why people voted for him. Biden or Harris were no match for his personal appeal, which is what matters the most in politics. Biden was elected in 2020 as a protest vote against Trump, and promptly squandered that goodwill by being a log. So now it's the snake's turn.

Idiots like me have one vote each, same as you and Umm. If you fail to win us over, you are going to lose.

Sure, but if you recall, this comment was about why the rest of the world will hold the US at a distance, even after Trump is gone. The voters cannot be trusted to learn from a mistake. We as a voting block have shown that while some of us are willing to think about character, others are willing to put trust in a known liar who tells them eggs will soon be cheaper. Collectively, Americans will no longer be considered dependable to think past their next shopping trip. Like it or not, we all lose with Trump...and possibly irrevocably.

Believe it or not, (probably you won't), Trump has charisma.

And he is smart and knows how to make "good TV," which along with social media seems to be the way to sway about half of the American voters. Trump is who he is. You have to be a critical thinker to see around the smoke and mirrors he uses to coerce you to support him. Our nation seems to be lacking in this.

Biden or Harris were no match for his personal appeal, which is what matters the most in politics.

Harris screwed up big time in choosing Walz over Shapiro. IMO the outcome would have been different with Shapiro, who present much more as a leader than a jolly fellow. The whole "joy" thing was a poor choice when running for POTUS. Heck, I'm not sure it would play well for class president. But at least she wasn't a lying felon.

IP

You are the reason the world no longer trusts America.

We don't care.
Nobody cares.
No American lies awake at night worrying what other countries think about us.

The thing about being the big dog is that de facto is what actually matters in the real world.

Plenty of people are lying awake at night worrying about the total destruction of our position in the world.
In financial terms, one big risk is that the dollar will lose its position as the global reserve currency. That could lead to devastating consequences. If every foreigner, countries, businesses, individuals, tries to flee from the dollar, it would quickly cause the U.S. to default on its sovereign debt or resort to a massive currency devaluation. You want to live in Argentina, Turkey, or Venezuela? I don't.

Up until WWII Britain was the "big dog" of the world and the pound sterling was the reserve currency. They couldn't keep it together after the war and they paid a huge economic and political price for it. The British couldn't stop the process. America is self inflicting the same thing, for no rational reason whatsoever.

Various European politicians have been saying "US President {insert name of current president} has upset us and is no longer the leader of the free world" ever since WW2.

This is completely false. Nothing close to the kind of collapse of trust we are seeing now has ever happened since WWII.

Elan

So much TDS on this board.

So much TDS on this board.

Truly sad and unhinged. Trump mentions it to the press daily. “These people are sick”.

Head of largest hedgefund Citadel, says the same thing... "it will take a lifetime to fix"

todays Times

https://www.thetimes.com/us/business/article/ken-g...

We don't care.
Nobody cares.
No American lies awake at night worrying what other countries think about us.

The thing about being the big dog is that de facto is what actually matters in the real world.

Bessent: "America First does not mean America alone".

Oopsie. How does it feel when they change the song sheet right after you sang it? For the umpteenth time?

Elan

So much TDS on this board.

Who is deranged? The people who see the lying, destruction, and corruption for what they are, or the people following him like the Pied Piper?

Elan

Apologies if this is a repeat post of below article. It's Buffett's remedy in 2003 to the growing trade deficit. One of the questions at the annual meeting could me to remind of of this article and suggested remedy and ask for a revised answer 22 years later!

==========

America's Growing Trade Deficit Is Selling The Nation Out From Under Us. Here's A Way To Fix The Problem--And We Need To Do It Now.
(FORTUNE Magazine)
By Warren E. Buffett, Carol J. Loomis
November 10, 2003
(FORTUNE Magazine)

My remedy may sound gimmicky, and in truth it is a tariff called by another name. But this is a tariff that retains most free-market virtues, neither protecting specific industries nor punishing specific countries nor encouraging trade wars. This plan would increase our exports and might well lead to increased overall world trade. And it would balance our books without there being a significant decline in the value of the dollar, which I believe is otherwise almost certain to occur.

https://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_ar...

==========

"America's Growing Trade Deficit Is Selling The Nation Out From Under Us. Here's A Way To Fix The Problem--And We Need To Do It Now.
(FORTUNE Magazine)
By Warren E. Buffett, Carol J. Loomis
November 10, 2003
(FORTUNE Magazine)"

Wow, that was one wildly fascinating read! From sentence to sentence you have to stop and ask yourself "was he right about this?". I'm far from an economist but one thing I don't think Warren could see at that time was just how early we were in the Globalization phase and just how much that would play out. In particular discussing the US selling off assets as our dollar depreciated. There were two times in particular that was a looming threat- in the eighties with Japan and in the early/mid aughts with China. Both did buy up large US assets but it didn't end up happening on the scale we all feared so that begs the question, why? I will posit the following in my Jr. high school understanding of economics through the example of Nike since it's high profile and a poster child of globalization although there are countless other companies where this can be replicated......

- No one to this day still understands the impact of globalization. It is so complex and so intertwined that it is going to be impossible to completely unwind (which we are kind of figuring out in real time). Did our trade deficits continue to go up? It sure did but I would argue that the old metrics of international economics didn't apply in the era of globalization. Nike may not have made any shoes in the US but through complex structures (due to Chinese law) they either owned or leased the factories where they produced in China. In turn they expanded their workforce greatly in sales and marketing, two professions that would show up as a blank slate in terms of manufacturing output. So while we lost the manufacturing numbers we did account for the increase in our new services economy but never really digested the fact that our manufacturing losses were really completely offset by our new services economy jobs. The one downside was our hollowed out manufacturing towns.

- Nike exploded in the era of globalization. That explosion includes jobs created in the financial sector as they too were forced to grow with American companies growing at crazy rates. John Q. Citizen shared in this great economic expansion through owning share either directly in Nike or some version of mutual funds they put in their nest eggs. This too offsets the loss of our manufacturing base except of course in in our hollowed out manufacturing towns.

- Nike was able to produce shoes all the way through today for roughly the same price as it did in the 80's. They had started leaving the US before globalization really took root but none the less we as a society benefited greatly in the form of low inflation as they started producing overseas. That's why Warren's inflation fears in the article never materialized. He didn't realize how beneficial moving everything overseas would be for the American consumer except of course for our hollowed out American towns.

- Nike owned their own stores overseas in which they got the benefits of their real estate holding increases. So did Apple, McDonald's, Starbucks, KFC, The Gap and I could go on and on. This all increased shareholder value in which we all benefited from. Except of course for you know who.....

So in short, Warren's fears that others would rise because they would own what we failed to produce didn't happen because he couldn't account for how we replaced it. I mention the hollowed out towns because that was the one thing we continually neglected through the era of globalization. For me it causes cognitive dissonance because I have no answers for what we could've done other than probably helping them through good fashioned socialism. That of course is a major no no in the US but that's a different story. Our failure to deal with this led to the opioid crisis and the rise of Trumpism. And that's where we find ourselves today!

"So much TDS on this board."

Who is deranged? The people who see the lying, destruction, and corruption for what they are, or the people following him like the Pied Piper?

You.

I think you, sir, are suffering from Trump Devotion Syndrome...

I think you, sir, are suffering from Trump Devotion Syndrome...

::sigh:: What many people don't get is that MAGA-bros don't particularly care about Trump per se. It is purely transactional. It's not that they like Trump for himself. They want things to go in a certain direction and DJT is the one saying "That's where I am going! I am the one who is charging in that direction."

If Trump started pushing for trans, DEI, open borders........ everybody following him would DUMP him in a heartbeat.

If the Democrat party ran a candidate in 2028 that said (believably!) the same things as DJT is saying, and the Republican candidate had the positions like Bush or Dole or Romney the Democrat would get 99% of the "Trump lovers" votes.


And none of this has anything to do with Berkshire Hathaway.

IP,
apologizing to the BRK board for the OT, but is it?

It most definitely is, but at least you recognize that, whereas most seem to be oblivious.

You Trump haters will soon have what you want, 100% agreement, because anyone who doesn’t entirely agree with you will be sick and tired of wading through this self-pitying nonsense.

DTB

You Trump haters ...

I think it is much to simplistic to view those of us who protest Trump's actions as being "Trump haters," but perhaps you are a simplistic person. Frankly, what I hate is how low a bar we as a voting block have set for the choice of our country's leader. I want the ability to vote for a Patriot, as opposed to a politician or a self-serving narcissist and his entourage.

I don't blame Trump, frankly. He is who he is. I blame people who took advantage of his peculiarities and mental challenges in pursuit of their own gain, and those like you who could not be bothered to to set some basic minimum requirements, like at least some degree of honesty or shame wrt wrong doing, instead going for change at any cost. Hey, how about lack of felon status as a super low minimum? Change for the sake of change is not always a good thing.

I get really bored and completely unimpressed how the Trump supporters seem to feel that all they have to do is scream the imaginary talking points, (LOWERING THE DEFICIT AND BALANCING THE BUDGET IS ALWAYS A GREAT IDEA,) or simply proclaim that we are simply haters, rather than address the facts of what Trump is doing and the real reason why he is doing it. Strain your brain and try, seriously try to think through his platitudes that are designed to keep his followers in a nice straight line of support, platitudes that he has no intent of pursuing.

So bored in fact that its time to start using the tools on hand. You feel free to do the same.

IP

"Get used to losing, you seem genuinely good at it."

LOL

You are the one who stated there are people who think "we should have wide open borders and allow criminals, drug dealers and mentally ill people to invade our country."

Can you point to one person who thinks that? Name one person.

You can't. As for losing, here is a clue: If you are incapable of accurately describe your opponent's views and positions, you are incapable of refuting them.

Do better. Stop being an idiot.

"We don't care.
Nobody cares.
No American lies awake at night worrying what other countries think about us." - rayvt

For one, LOL that you think you speak for all Americans. You don't. Especially not the rational ones. For two, I said the word "trusts", you changed it into "thinks about". That changes the conversation a bit.

"The thing about being the big dog is that de facto is what actually matters in the real world.

If some country accounts for 25% of the world's trade, then that defines who is the big dog. Currently that's the USA." - rayvt

Did it even occur to you to think about WHY the U.S. is the big dog that accounts for so much of the world's trade? Do you think maybe if the U.S. stops doing the things that got it to be the big dog that maybe it will eventually lose that title. The U.S. isn't some magical place that casts a spell over other countries and forces them to deal with the U.S.

"Various European politicians have been saying "US President {insert name of current president} has upset us and is no longer the leader of the free world" ever since WW2." - rayvt

Ok. Please point to a speech in the last 65 years by any major politician of any major European county saying that the U.S. is no longer the leader of the free world. Go ahead. I bet you can't because I think you just made that up.

"I had a great High School history teacher that said, "Some people don't like me. So what? They can go find somebody else to like."" - rayvt

You realize that you are making your opponent's point with that comment, right? What do you think happens when everyone else goes finds someone else to trade with, to share intelligence with, to go partner for defense with?

"I always ponder what's the meaning of "the world no longer trusts America." In concrete terms, just what does that mean? What effect does that have in the real world? What do they do differently?"

It means that no country will ever make an agreement\treaty with the U.S. because the U.S. cannot be counted on to keep it's word. During Trump's first term, Trump had to renegotiate NAFTA with Canada and Mexico because the original treaty was expiring. He did so. Then one of the first things he does during his second term is put tariffs in place on Canada and Mexico that goes against the treaty he negotiated. If the U.S. is going to ignore trade agreements it negotiates, why would any other country ever enter into a trade agreement with the U.S.?

The U.S. and many of the major European countries entered into a nuclear agreement with Iran that put all sorts of restrictions on its nuclear program. Trump broke that agreement when entering office the first time. Now Trump is desperately trying to come to some agreement with Iran to stop its nuclear program. Iran refuses. Why should Iran re-negotiate something it had already negotiated and was living up to only to have the U.S. back out of? There is no point in negotiating with the U.S. since the U.S. won't live up to it's word. So now Trump's only option to influence Iran is the threat of force. The threat of force will probably work this time, but in terms of international diplomacy, threat of force is the most expensive, most dangerous option. Furthermore, it only works if other countries think the U.S. will follow through and it only works if used rarely.

"The US (most probably) blew up the Nordstream pipeline in 2022, harming Germany, etc. tremendously. What did Germany, etc. do to the US about that? Did they start distrusting the US then? "

You make stuff up. No wonder you have a distorted view of the world. You make up fantasies.

"They trusted the US after that? And only started to distrust the US when DOGE shut down USAID?"

Stop thinking in binary. Also, you should actually listen to the arguments your opponents are actually making rather than just argue against your silly summaries.

"Idiots like me have one vote each, same as you and Umm. If you fail to win us over, you are going to lose."

It is my fault that you continue to choose to remain a low information voter?

"Believe it or not, (probably you won't), Trump has charisma. That's why, being a repeated failure in substance, he exudes being successful in appearance. That's why people voted for him. Biden or Harris were no match for his personal appeal, which is what matters the most in politics."

That is sort of my point.

I think voting for our leaders is one of the most important things a person can do.

I think it is important to look at what candidates will do, what their policies will be, etc. You seem to think the candidate that looks best on TV is important. Or the one that will lie to you the best is the one you will vote for.

I often asked you this before the election and I never saw your answer:

Given Warren Buffett is not very charismatic, why do you invest with him? Why not invest with one of those people with the $5000 suit, a $500 haircut, and a nice yacht who promise you guaranteed double digit returns on your investment?

They are more charismatic and promise you better returns. Why not invest with them instead of a log like Buffett?

Harris also made mistakes - significant ones - in not appearing on Joe Rogan and by stipulating extensive conditions for interviews in general. Her lack of willingness to engage in an environment where she didn't have extensive control is not a confidence-building choice. Rogan has his issues, but he's relatively centrist and has a whopping audience.

I get really bored and completely unimpressed how the Trump supporters seem to feel that all they have to do is scream the imaginary talking points,

That's okay. Trump supporters are completely unimpressed by you guys, too.


rather than address the facts of what Trump is doing and the real reason why he is doing it.

They know what Trump is doing and the reason he is doing those things and they AGREE with them and SUPPORT what he is doing.

Haven't you seen the stats that CNN has been showing?


This political discussion is getting boring and repetitive.
Can we start arguing religion now?

You are the one who stated there are people who think "we should have wide open borders and allow criminals, drug dealers and mentally ill people to invade our country."

Can you point to one person who thinks that? Name one person.

This is too easy.

"The Purpose Of A System Is What It Does, Not What It Claims To Do"

The wide open border which was "impossible" to close for the last 4 years has been slammed shut in less than 100 days.

Can you point to one person who thinks that? Name one person.

Yes, YOU for starters. I’ll try to think of others tomorrow. How else would you get voters?

Ummm, get used to losing 😎.

It is my fault that you continue to choose to remain a low information voter?

Of course not. It's mine, because I have neither time nor inclination to dig deeper than sound bytes. That is the kind of idiot you have to win over. I am unlikely to improve.

If your strategy is to berate me, or educate me, it's not going to succeed. Charming me, like Clinton and Obama did, is your best bet. Start with not fielding candidates like Shrillary or Miss Awkward Laugh.

If your strategy is to berate me, or educate me, it's not going to succeed. Charming me, like Clinton and Obama did, is your best bet. Start with not fielding candidates like Shrillary or Miss Awkward Laugh.

How about party bosses not "fielding" candidates and instead letting voters choose? I would say start with a free and fair primary election. Give all interested candidates a chance to run without party interference and let the Democratic party voters choose their nominee. Kamala getting the nomination via coronation rather than through a fair primary election process rubbed a lot of voters the wrong way. Same with the party tilting the scales in favor of Hillary when Bernie was rising. There is a good chance the 2024 election results may have been different if a fairly elected Demoractic nominee was an available choice. Hope the Democratic party has learned its lesson and will do better in 2028.

Haven't you seen the stats that CNN has been showing?


I thought CNN was fake news. I’m so confused.

How about party bosses not "fielding" candidates and instead letting voters choose? . Give all interested candidates a chance to run without party interference

Might as well wish for puppies and rainbows and soft gentle rain. For any organization where the top dogs have a conduit for power & riches, there is no way they intend to let the "little people" have any substantive say.

This goes for organizations as small as town councils & school councils, all the way up to nationwide political parties and entire nations.

It is ever thus, an integral part of the human condition.

We saw this perfectly in this last Democrat convention, and even earlier in the primaries where all the non-favored candidates all suddenly dropped out at once for no explained reason. The party leaders had no intention of letting the voters have any say. When it comes down to the wire, the gloves come off to expose the iron fist.

Note that I said this applies to EVERY organization.


All of which has nothing to do with BRK.
It should be moved to some other political board.

"Believe it or not, (probably you won't), Trump has charisma. That's why, being a repeated failure in substance, he exudes being successful in appearance. That's why people voted for him. Biden or Harris were no match for his personal appeal, which is what matters the most in politics."

Really? I find him deceitful, a complete failure as a man, disgusting in every way I would judge a fellow human being. If you find him 'charismatic', I have to wonder what in the world you see in the man.

Clearly he appeals to many people, but so do cult leaders even when they are plainly charlatans and scoundrels.

"This is too easy."

Then why did you fail to do it?

I asked for the name of one person who actually thought that? The problem for you is that it is a strawman so you cannot actually name someone who thinks that.

If it was so easy, why did you fail?

"Yes, YOU for starters. I’ll try to think of others tomorrow. How else would you get voters?"

LOL. Now you are telling me what I think? LOL you are desperate.

Do better. Educate yourself. top getting your information from sources that take advantage of you. The fact that you can only debate strawmen of your own creation should tell you something.

"Ummm, get used to losing 😎."

I love unintentional irony. It is the best form of humor and you are one funny guy.

"Of course not. It's mine, because I have neither time nor inclination to dig deeper than sound bytes. That is the kind of idiot you have to win over. I am unlikely to improve.

If your strategy is to berate me, or educate me, it's not going to succeed. Charming me, like Clinton and Obama did, is your best bet. Start with not fielding candidates like Shrillary or Miss Awkward Laugh."

Then it is a lost cause. Democracy requires a well informed populace otherwise it ends up run by corrupt con men.

Idiocracy might be a documentary.

I asked for the name of one person who actually thought that?

I am retired and don't usually accept assignments anymore.
But sometimes I will, so email me and I'll send you my fee schedule.

One name for free: Jeremiah Loomis

The US (most probably) blew up the Nordstream pipeline in 2022, harming Germany, etc. tremendously.

Post receipts, or you're simply another flat-earther and not a serious person. I would simply like to know, so we can decide to penalty box you or not. And your receipts can't come from like, Alex Jones.

This is from my online brokers’ news letter.

DJ Berkshire's Annual Meeting Is Coming. 10 Tough Questions for Warren Buffett. -- Barrons.com


By Andrew Bary

Berkshire Hathaway investors are eager for this Saturday's annual meeting in Omaha, Neb., because it's the only time each year that they get to hear CEO Warren Buffett hold forth at length about the company.

It also could be one of the last meetings for the 94-year-old Buffett, who told shareholders in the company's annual letter earlier this year that "it won't be long before" a successor takes over as CEO, likely Greg Abel, a Berkshire executive.

As many as 30,000 investors will journey to Omaha for what Buffett calls a "Woodstock for Capitalists" to soak up the scene and enjoy Buffett's financial wisdom, humor, and life lessons. Berkshire investors should be in good spirits, with the stock up over 17% this year and near its recent record, while the S&P 500 is down 5%.

Buffett will answer questions for 4 1/2 hours, starting at 9 a.m. ET and continuing until 2 p.m. with a half-hour break in the middle.

He will be accompanied on stage by Berkshire Vice Chairmen Abel, 62, the head of Berkshire's non-insurance operations, and Ajit Jain. Jain, 73, who oversees the company's insurance businesses, will be on stage for about half the time. Both have appeared at prior meetings and impressed investors with their command of their domains.

In the annual meeting brochure, Buffett noted that CNBC anchor Becky Quick will be asking written questions submitted by shareholders, with audience members also able to query him.

"We know you and Becky will pick some tough ones and that's the way we like it," he wrote. Buffett added that he wouldn't address politics.

Barron's offered 10 questions for Buffett ahead of last year's meeting, including whether he would consider selling part of Berkshire's big Apple stake. Here are 10 for this year's conclave.

1) Many investors thought that Berkshire's Apple equity stake would be a "forever" holding like Coca-Cola or American Express. Why did Berkshire sell two-thirds of its huge Apple stake last year?

2) Your likely successor, Abel, is 62, and Jain is 73. Who are the key people in the next generation of leadership at Berkshire?

3) What role will Todd Combs and Ted Weschler likely play in managing the $300 billion equity portfolio after you're no longer CEO, and what has their investment performance been since joining Berkshire over a decade ago?

4) Berkshire hasn't bought back its shares since May 2024. After the stock's run-up this year, do you think it's overvalued?

5) Given Berkshire's huge cash position of over $300 billion and no buybacks, would you consider paying a cash dividend, and should there be a dividend after you're gone?

6) The Burlington Northern Santa Fe unit has some of the lowest profit margins among major North American railroads. Can that be fixed?

7) In your annual shareholder letter, you lauded the "spectacular" improvement at Berkshire's Geico unit under the leadership of Combs. But it trails fast-growing rival Progressive in using technology, including real-time driving to price policies. Is Geico at a permanent disadvantage relative to Progressive?

8) Occidental Petroleum President and CEO Vicki Hollub said recently that it would be "dream come true" if Berkshire bought the entire company. Will you reconsider your previously stated unwillingness to buy the rest of Occidental?

9) Berkshire paid the estate of Walter Scott a much lower price for its stake in Berkshire Hathaway Energy last year than it did for Greg Abel's interest in 2022. Why? Is BHE worth less now?

10) What is your largest personal investment outside of Berkshire stock?

Write to Andrew Bary at andrew.bary@barrons.com

Post New

US Policy FAQ

---

Contact Shrewd'm
Contact the developer of these message boards.