Intelligent_Investor

I for one am not opposed to this. More inefficiencies in the market = more money

Its Joever for the China trade over the next few years if Rubio becomes Secretary of State. Dude hates China with a passion

Imo I've never really bought into Todd/Ted. If they were so good they'd be managing a lot more money for Berkshire by now. Buffett and Munger grew their initial capital very rapidly and pretty much any other good asset manager has done the same. Yet for Todd and Ted they've been managing the same amount of money for quite a while now. Looking through their major investments there hasn't been anything impressive imo. The true superstars of Berkshire not named Munger/Buffett are Ajit and Greg.

BABA and TCEHY up bigly

Having a more advanced subway system like that in Asian cities would be much more beneficial than whatever this bullshit is. America seems allergic to public transit for some damn reason

Spend will never be fixed. America is obsessed with debt and apparently cutting debt is evil. If you suggest not taking on debt the average American will get really upset. Its become a way of life in the US.

Agreed on that. Fiscal policy generates more "real" inflation than monetary policy at least for main street.

the only thing GLP-1 is gonna disrupt is obesity

Do we know Berkshire's exposure amount to the Yen carry trade?

Its actually very hard to overprice capital light businesses due to the mathematics of exponential growth over time (capital light businesses are generally considered to be compounders so you are supposed to hold for a long period rather than sell in a year or 2). The basic equations of finance and what is considered "expensive" vs "cheap" are based on ratios rooted in linear math, so it breaks down when you compare it vs exponential compounding over a longer timeframe. 40x FCF is cheap for a capital light business if it can compound for several decades

Buffett has long moved past the stage of his/Berkshires life where he focuses on rate of compounding. He's implied he focuses more on not losing money (and making Berkshire less volatile) in recent years due to 1) Number of older people holding Berkshire for decades and relying on it to fund retirement and 2) probably also influenced by the amount of shares held by various charities (Buffett cares that those shares will help fund causes that will make a different; he doesn't want a situation where they need to sell at a low price). Munger even said as much toward the end of his life that you basically need to hold big tech to just match the S&P, and Buffett implied as much as well (he's repeatedly said big tech is good business and you can run them with zero capital). Berkshire is good for capital preservation and will probably vastly outperform bonds and a more conservative stock portfolio, but with how the company is weighted, its highly unlikely it will be able to keep up with the S&P going forward.

All seasonal forecasts this year are calling for a season on par with '05, there is also a strong correlation with early season major hurricanes and the overall activity of the basin during peak season.

Atlantic hurricane season starts off with a bang, Beryl breaking all the early season records. Looking like a re-2005 or re-2017

this is why they have inverse cramer

Fairfax