73 Reds

Sure but they've got plenty of other assets to borrow against. Its one of many attractions of real estate as an investment asset - the potential for unlimited tax deferral without having to retain the same asset. I've always been surprised that as much as Buffett loves tax deferral he didn't invest more in real estate.

From a 64,000 foot vantage point it can't be bad for the people of Greenland to be the object of a bidding war. They just need to navigate the process to their best advantage.

There is one drawback to deferred tax liabilities: You're stuck with the appreciated asset for better or for worse.

Yep, we're seeing it the same way. But as usual it is all too convenient to blame Trump.

There does not seem to be a clear consensus of what Greenlanders want. Perhaps they don't even know what they want. Wanting "independence" comes with all types of consequences that no one wants to address. From an outside perspective the population now seems to be in a very good bargaining position and needs leadership and guidance from within.

Did you originally buy the coins or were they part of a collection? As a kid I was an avid collector; in fact vaguely remember when silver coins stopped being minted and had an Uncle who recommended that I keep all silver coins I get for change, etc... because they would be worth something someday. So I never actually bought any coins but have some silver dating as far back as the late 1700s. Never thought of selling it though since it is fun to look at every now and then and talk about with other collectors.

I've got hundreds of those old civil coins; curious, how much did they pay you per quarter?

Even if I was young, I'd allocate a small, but meaningful amount to Berkshire and gradually add over the years. Its been a LONG time since we've had a real, prolonged market downturn. Arguably it was the GFC in 2009 but even that was relatively short lived for financial markets. Intuitively it can never be a disadvantage to own the strongest balance sheet, the most investment capital and some of the smartest capital allocators. Berkshire's performance will be lumpy but IMO far better than most predict.

<<but sometimes we investors aren’t fully rational>> This. If something works for you, whether it be investment-related or anything at all, there is no need to justify or rationalize it to anyone else.

That's OK but you're right about the budget. The issue is always Congress. Reality is, Trump knows that he probably only has 2 years to get anything done. Taking baby steps doesn't accomplish anything. I have my doubts whether we can "grow our way" out of anything but given the other alternative it was the best of two evils IMO.

@Spooky Wish it didn't have to be this way but Biden created a domestic mess that costs money to resolve.

I think it depends mostly on your level of knowledge and experience and where you are at in life. I mean look at what the standard is in the money management industry - 60/40 stocks and bonds. Just who is that appropriate for? Going beyond that, they tell you it is all about each individual's risk tolerance. Well, unless you are well versed in finance and investments, how do most people even know what their risk tolerance really is in relation to the universe of investment assets? Any one asset class may be deemed "risky" by itself but combined with other asset classes does this change the risk profile? Then, once you achieve a certain point in life, be it retirement, success, quality of life, etc... it is very likely your investment mix may change yet again. For me there is an additional element that pretty much trumps everything else; that is the level of control over any investment. Because of the importance of this single factor, a public equity needs to surpass a very high hurdle rate for me to have any interest at all.

Pragmatists on both sides would agree with that.

Right, but you stop them from further killing. With Russia we can't simply destroy them, we have to stop the fighting and then try to figure out a better solution.

I think you're giving Putin far too much credit for rational, western thinking. Putin will do whatever he wants to do, regardless. Its almost like dealing with terrorists. No rhyme or reason other than pure destruction. So the immediate goal should be to minimize deaths. Only then can you begin to deal with the real issues.

Who else besides the US would you suggest to act as Mediator? And NATO remains vital. The objective always has to be deterrence through strength. NATO provides overall strength and the US provides strength to NATO. I mean in some form or fashion it is always better to crush the enemy before it has the opportunity to act rather than having to clean up dead victims of the enemy from a pile of rubble. Alliances like NATO provide us with that opportunity and the US fully recognizes that. The enemy here is well known and it is not Europe.

So is Trump that only elected official who doesn't always mean what he/she says?

Nah, that's just a convenient excuse. When the bottom tier recognizes that credit requires setting something aside ahead of time, they'll find a way to do it if obtaining credit is important enough. If it isn't, the excuse opponents keep making that those folks will not be able to get credit is just that - a sorry excuse. People here, of all places should recognize that excuses suck.

The US is not leaving NATO. You're better than some here who take every word Trump utters literally, figuratively and/or exponentially - whichever happens to suit their daily narrative. Alliances are indeed important but try to take a 64,000 foot view sometimes rather than getting bogged down in the usual diatribe from the usual suspects. Its all a matter of more equitable support from the parties who benefit the most.

Trump has demonstrated an enormous propensity to renegotiate. A little time and patience is needed.

Yeah but the livelihoods and economics for tens of millions of Americans were under threat under the last administration. Every trade decision then and now has positive and adverse consequences. But heck, the brightest, most qualified young people here couldn't get into the best schools and they wouldn't even know how to properly identify themselves on college applications - talk about peoples' futures being put in jeopardy. IMO we needed a recharge. Its certainly nothing personal.

See there is where a little perspective is needed. Trump does not have a lifetime appointment, contrary to some here who think he might. Most of the informed World recognizes US politics for what it is; a pendulum that swings in both directions. We needed some drastic changes domestically and Trump was elected to help reverse the pendulum's course. As I've stated many times, I'm largely satisfied. But when he goes too far, the pendulum will again swing the other way. Making mountains out of every political molehill suits the narratives of the party out of power and in this case, the national news media. Ultimately trade is based on need and economics, not the politician of the day.

Yeah but Canada still shares our border. Rhetorically I asked a while back how Canadians would feel if the US ceased to exist. Crickets for a response.

A few? On the contrary its only a few (the vulnerable) who are affected - in a positive way. Labels by you and others don't change the real issue. Again, could care less how it is viewed politically or who it aligns with for any or no reason.

OK, if they truly believe Beijing is a superior trading partner we vastly overestimated them.