73 Reds

Who was the last socialist mayor?

Sanjeev, that is one of the funniest posts I have ever read from you.

Oh, so only when the *desired* congress/courts are making those policies that you want. Got it.

If congress/courts are so good at buffering extreme policies, why are you and others so concerned with Trump? I appreciate your response but believe that socialism is far more than a marketing issue.

It is hard to imagine why anyone who works and pays taxes would be for him. How do any of his supporters believe everything he wants to provide will be paid for? Do they even care? Perhaps it is a longshot but if anyone on this Board is a Mamdani supporter, or even supports Bernie Sanders, I am genuinely interested in your rationale.

Can someone (anyone) explain the appeal of socialism to a city like NYC? Has it worked anywhere? How most NY democrats remain largely silent on this issue is mystifying. Are they purposely trying to destroy their own city?

Interesting graphs, but are we talking about profit margins or deflationary trends? Indeed, more competition reduces profit margins for each competitor, but how does that translate to price inflation/deflation? If we are addressing prices, some items cost more, others less. For me personally, its somewhat of a wash; for every item that may cost more, computer/office equipment, airline travel, certain luxury items, even some real estate, (albeit in depressed areas where I like to invest) costs the same or less than it did 1 or 2 decades ago. And certain items that cost more, such as vehicles, vacation experiences, athletic equipment, medical procedures, etc.. are of far higher quality than their equivalents 20 years ago. So when we consider that the currency we use to measure prices has certainly decreased in value in the last 20 years, it would seem that price deflation in real (buying power) terms is the predominant trend. You're right about the polarization issue yet many people with political differences - even here on this Board - cannot even agree on basic underlying facts and assumptions. That does make having a useful discussion very difficult.

Having reconsidered the issue, I'll gladly accept "cult status" from the likes of @dwy000.

Data to demonstrate that technology makes things more efficient and therefore cheaper to generate or produce? Is anyone arguing against that point? As for divisiveness in the US, there has always been differences between political parties, but they have become much more stark IMO due to big money being thrown at divisive issues by corrupt people and organizations with far from pure motives.

Yes, corruption is at the heart of the matter. We need to ask ourselves where the money comes from to support all of the outlier positions and abhorrent causes of the day. Root out the money and the forces behind it, and we go a long way to resolving many of our issues.

Sure, he causes folks to question their own assumptions. I mean even as obvious as Fairfax was to a lot of us several years ago, there were undoubtedly many more people who were exposed to Fairfax as a potential investment at the same time who looked at it and passed. To each, their own.

No one dares to ask why the country is divided.

IMO deflation over the past few decades is primarily due to the efficiencies of new technologies and resulting competition.

Kudos to you for that, and acknowledging that in spite of TDS by many here on this board, the voting majority in the US supports the current polices in place regardless whether anyone here in the US or abroad feels otherwise. And for the record, when it comes to major issues plaguing the Globe there is only one leader willing to stand up for badly needed change and it is the one individual many here love to hate. In fact, I don't see any other country doing a damn thing about the issues I care about most.

I don't want to talk about it? Talk about what? Sorry, I have no idea what you are talking about though I do find your posts entertaining.

Huh?

Sure, but knowing the financial details would be nice, particularly because its been a while and it is strange to hear about the deal from the company being acquired 11 days later.

Evidently the deal closed over a week ago and Berkshire has not announced anything. Strange.

You're overthinking this. He's been very wrong for very long. No need to try and rationalize it. At some point in the future underwriting may not be as strong or the stock could have a downdraft and he'll claim victory even though a broken clock is also right twice a day.

Is there any way to find out who the buyer was (maybe Fairfax itself)?

You don't want to discuss the issues because discussions involve accepting answers that you don't like and won't change. And thinking those who disagree with you are in a "cult" doesn't bode well for further discussions.

Countries do (and should) look out for their own best interests. I find it interesting how many non US citizens try to advise the US on what is good for the US. In reality they are often looking at the consequences for themselves and their own countries. Parsing every detail, tariff, meeting and reaction in real time is not going to prove terribly productive IMO. Immediate reactions are just that and nothing more.

@dwy000 LOL. 10 minutes to Woppner.

Asked and answered. Seems to be a pattern.

That was a good idea. But I didn't hear anyone but Buffett suggesting it while the US got hosed.