All Activity

Unless you cross the threshold for harassment or inciting violence.

‘Hate speech’ is permitted in the US though.

You can definitely criticize anything and anyone but you cannot denigrate other people doing so nor doing hate speech. The later isn’t allowed in the USA either. I agree that politicians have abused these protections do lawfare on people criticise them but that looks like it’s now exposed and likely will cease. We should wore more about our own issues. Voter suppression, Gerrymandering, freedom of press and unfettered corruption just to name a few.

If cherry picking is the issue, that’s one thing. We have that in hockey and it’s called the blue line. There was also for a time a ban on two line passes. What I saw last night was disgraceful. The Croatia goal unacceptable. But even prior, the Ronaldo goal, it’s not cherry picking if they have to go to slow motion and draw an imaginary line where the two players are exactly even except for one guys right hand! Next time I’ll just watch baseball….

What do you know about to which extent and about what I communicate with politicians,at municipipality, region and state? Nobody here where I live is asking me to shut up, dragging me to court! And I have no debt, that anyone can buy to press me in my belly butt! Germany is Germany, and we should all respect what Germans decides for them selves, based on Germanys own background, history and culture. It's your i.e. '<German> to <European>' projection, with no basis posted by you at all, in almost all your posts here, I'm objecting fiercely against. - - - o 0 o - - - To bent it neon : Why the f**ck can't you meet thy sisters and brothers in Europe in eye-height, in stead of pecking on them all the time? - It's simply sick to me.

Here is the short version of German soccer game:

Yes. You cannot criticize immigration policies in the UK. That's antithetical to Free Speech. The whole point of Free Speech is to allow challenges to government & power. That's why it is a bedrock of true democracies. Many "democracies" in Europe look like fake democracies.

If you cannot insult politicians or government policies, Europe does not have free speech--certainly not the Free Speech that matters. Europe's restrictions on free speech are autocratic--they are designed to allow the elite class of Europe (Ursula, Lagarde, Brussels gang and Company) to remain in power indefinitely.

LOL. You literally cannot criticize people in power and old retirees are under investigation for calling politicians "idiot" and "Pinocchio" and you are calling it "one specific unsatisfactory thing" when I point out that this occurs while European leaders literally say "Freedom of speech is the foundation of our strong and vibrant European democracy". You are just someone who is easily offended and can't come up with any real arguments.

OK, I was barking up the wrong tree. One chapter on the 3:1 leverage then!

That’s good on paper but in practise it really hurts free speech. What people regarding as insulting or hateful differs dramatically. Some consider talk or stopping immigration hateful for example.

AI´s answer if Europe has free speech: Yes, free speech is a fundamental right in Europe. European laws and the Charter of Fundamental Rights protect your right to hold opinions and share information without government interference. However, the European approach differs significantly from the US model. Unlike the near-absolute protections in the US, European free speech has strict legal limitations. In countries like Germany, for instance, freedom of expression (protected under Article 5 of the Basic Law) is balanced against other rights and public safety. Key differences in European free speech include: Hate Speech & Discrimination: Incitement to hatred, violence, or insults based on race, religion, or sexual orientation are criminal offenses. Historical Taboos: In Germany and several other nations, Holocaust denial and the display of unconstitutional symbols (like Nazi insignia) are strictly prohibited and punishable by imprisonment. Online Regulation: Under the EU's Digital Services Act, large social media platforms are legally required to swiftly remove flagged hate speech and illegal content. While you are entirely free to criticize politicians, participate in protests, and share your beliefs, you must navigate these specific legal boundaries regarding hate speech and public endangerment.

BBQ Index is running hot #Trumpflation

You clearly do NOT have "Free Speech" if you can not criticize politicians. Period.

Just the usual 'one specific unsatisfacty thing'that you don't like for a specific European country [where you don't live, so it not in in any way is up to you, and your business at all], and then you carry on with your eternal generalizations about blowing up - ungrounded - on Europe as a whole. It's mind boggling to experience this kind of 'logic' here on CofB&F.

Yep--and not being able to criticize the people in power is a hallmark of autocracies, not democracies.

Europe is so "transparent" that this picture is illegal in Germany: https://www.politico.eu/article/us-diplomat-attacks-eu-germany-over-investigation-against-man-who-called-friedrich-merz-pinocchio/

It's often better to not know so well, how the sausage is made

Egon [ @EgonKuhn ], Let's have some fun - it's Friday, right!? I know on the distance personally, professionally the CEO of Backahill put there by the Paulssons - it's certainly not a coincidence - because he is a pure play, 100% distilled unreasonable, endlessly demanding, bad manners a$$hole, sucking every available kJoule out of everyone around him for his own benefiit alone - however, he may have changed since then by now, though. At a moment in time I said to my boss, when I asked to be relieved from him [the Backahill CEO] in another context , getting an 'Absolutely NO!, -Period! - Just do as I ordered you.' : 'Ok then, but do never place me in a room with him, I may poor this little fat gnome out of the window!' <which got respected> - - - o 0 o - - - Pretty cool to have such a guy sitting around on boards watching over the Paulssons - and my - capital!

https://www.dw.com/en/germany-could-scrap-law-banning-insults-against-politicians/a-77630055 Hot off the presses. Germany might actually become more of a democracy. Germans are notoriously slow at making changes though so it might never happen. “private citizens found themselves under investigation by the police for publicly calling politicians "Schwachkopf" (idiot), "Lügenfritz" (lying Fritz) or "Pinocchio" on social media.” https://v4na.com/politika/retired-woman-fined-for-politician-caricature-153202/ https://sfg.media/en/a/germany-merz-insults-300-cases-court-disclosure/ Calling a politician an idiot is illegal in Germany and Ursula is preaching about Freedom of Speech? LMAO We all know from history that the Chancellor of Germany ought to be immune from insults, right?

I assume he means chapters in his book on leverage. Taking the number of chapters from two to one.

Missed the point yet again? Some questions may just be too difficult.. Or you simply have no answers. No worries, I'll stop asking.

I see. Of course I could stare at the endless rows of figures in TIKR for ages and still be none the wiser in the end If I understand you correctly, your impression from three years ago has been confirmed, and you’ve stuck with the investment vehicles of Paulsson and Lundberg, or perhaps even added to your holdings from time to time? Here in Germany my impression of REITs and REICs is that, while they somehow muddle through, they are ultimately treading water operationally. They are running, yet practically getting nowhere. Like a hamster on a wheel.

It really is quite amazing how folks rationalize laws where it is *illegal* to insult politicians. Knowing German history, they might have benefitted from allowing politicians to be insulted. Having laws against criticizing politicians is extremely un-democratic. Europe is not transparent. You asked “who promised Free Speech in the first place”? My answer: European/German leaders like Ursula. LOL. You come off as totally wrong because Free Speech has been a platitude of European leaders for a long time. In many ways it’s 1984-esque where they claim to champion things like Freedom of Speech and Democracy while doing the exact opposite (your post proves my point): “War is Peace” “Ignorance is Strength” etc etc

What do you mean, taking leverage from two to one? By my calculation, Fairfax invest an amount roughly equal to its equity in equity investments, and roughly twice its equity in fixed income investments. So I would have said thet have 3 to 1 leverage*, down from about 3.6 in 2021, but not 2 to 1 and certainly not 1 to 1. But perhaps you meant something else, and I don't see comments in this thread from sholland or patterson that might make it clear what you are referring to. *meaning they have $3 invested for every $1 of their own book value. But it depends how you define it. $1 invested for every $1 in book value, is that 1x leverage, or 0x leverage? Maybe the latter, in which case having 3 times as much investments as equity would be 2x leverage?