73 Reds

It's in my tax-deferred account - not a big deal but was thinking about moving the money into Fairfax India. It was a good call on your part, decent chance of a buyout and get paid to wait - thanks!

For any KW shareholders here, does it pay to continue to hold KW? Bought some shares about 4-5 months ago (thanks to @gfp) and wondering what others are doing with their shares?

Yeah, why build something useful out of otherwise wasted space?

Again, I'm not qualified to answer that question but there are some professional money managers here on this board. Totally understand wanting to work for a company like Fairfax but if you are truly exceptional at investing, you probably don't need to work for anyone.

Can't speak to the procedures you should take but it would seem that a verifiable track record is a must.

I think that is what is called "knit-picking". Neither you, nor I, nor anyone but those intricately involved in these matters knows all the details. We only know what is reported, which as we all know should be taken with multiple grains of salt. Our foundational principles are not under threat, regardless of the convenient narrative that creates for some. How many times do you need to see a crisis averted to finally recognize that there was no crisis?

Very much agree with that! Find something you're good at, whether it be a sector, series of reliably profitable companies or investments, or even a money-making activity and use your knowledge and experience to your advantage. Not comparing myself in any way to Buffett but he could evaluate a deal for Berkshire in less than an hour or less. Most of my deals are made in similar time. Leaves a lot of time for other things.

I mean anything is *possible* but that's not how most rational people live their lives. The World as we know it didn't end during Trump's first term even though we were all assured that it would, and as a policy voter I am satisfied with most of the policies put in place since his re-election.

The checks and balances are the very system under which the Country functions. No one individual materially affects it one way or another - at least not for long, hence "checks and balances". Do you recognize that as strongly as you and a few outspoken posters here may feel about Trump is the same way some others here felt about Biden and the trajectory he was taking the Country? Yet there was no whining, name-calling, daily ridicule, etc..., at least not since I've been a member on this Board (and I was a lurker for a time before joining). Go back and read some of your own recent posts. They don't address political issues in any way worth discussing and there are a lot of issues worthy of discussion!

John, Trump was elected to stem the growing tide of govt. intervention, a war on capitalism, unfettered, illegal immigration, and poor to non-existent foreign policy by the prior administration. The voters spoke. After two years we have mid term elections and the voters get to speak again, even while Trump is President. It is not coincidence that most often the mid term elections go against an incumbent administration. This is how checks and balances were intended to work.

The notion that Trump's current positions with regard to anything will have permanent, lasting effect on the US and its standing in the World lacks historical perspective.

Don't you see that this type of thought process completely undermines the system of checks and balances on which the United States has been built? Allowing current events to nullify an entire history and extrapolating current events into infinity is simply letting emotion dictate. You wouldn't let this happen when it comes to investing so why let it affect you this way when it comes to politics? This forum is better than daily venting about everything and anything Trump.

You just can't resist. I'll ask again - why do you even bother? Does it somehow make you feel better? I'm genuinely interested in what makes people's minds tick in this way.

My guess is the US has spent $100 billion+ on the Ukraine war. How much it will spend in the future is unknowable. How is this relevant?

Its also a talent pool. To your point, Israel is the size of the State of New Jersey and while China has a population of 1.5 billion people, Israel's entire population is comparable to that of New York City.

Not so much referring to the Country's ties with Israel but the fact that many of our large public tech companies, drug companies and defense companies, among others have bases in Israel. Coincidence? Yet some here would rather believe they are only there for the weather.

What about the fact that we (America) have large business interests in Israel. We also share common values and Israel has provided the only sense of stability in an otherwise rogue region. I could go on but why bother?

Of course the issue is Russia's nuclear capability. Which is precisely the reason why we must limit others, particularly terrorist regimes, from acquiring such weapons of mass destruction.

No one should have to intentionally weaken their defenses. The objective should be co-existence. Right now the mentality appears to be fight to the death. We all know how that will turn out without reasonable intervention. So its not as if there are a lot of good choices here.

Oh, so less death is OK? Some folks could use some perspective that does not include Trump.

Back atcha.

But isn't that a fatalistic view? There is no assurance that any country will act in the best interest of the World going forward when it comes to military action but that doesn't mean we should not at least try to put a stop to needless deaths as they occur or are imminently threatened if at all possible. Innocent Russians stand to lose a lot too; how many are fighting of their own volition? For obvious reasons we should not be involved in attempting regime change but that doesn't mean we simply ignore the bloodshed either. People can criticize the US all they want but I think that is what separates the US from most of the rest of the World. Whether we succeed or not at least we make an effort.

So you don't address an immediate threat just because it may resurface in the future?

Truly remarkable that you have to point that out. I guess some people need a nuclear terrorist attack to occur in order to recognize a problem.

Of course there will be a next time with Putin until he is gone. But to suggest this is worse than the Obama deal with Iran? Come on, at least Putin and Russia value their existence. Constant criticisms of the US without any better ideas are exactly what I said - worthless. Why even bother?