Marco Van Basten

Shocking article today on Bloomberg (originally published in UK Telegraph.) If I did not misread it, French government claims that immigration is a NET cost to France of E 41bn per annum.

You are actually can and US has been importing cement for a while. That's why a cement plant in the middle of the country is worth more than on the coast, since it is very expensive to truck cement but reasonably cheap to transport over water.

Anybody who applied for asylum from Mexico was an economic migrant and not a refugee. Had they really been in fear of their lives, they would have applied for asylum and permission to stay from Mexican government. Hundreds of thousands of US citizens live in Mexico, thousands of retirees move to Mexico from the US every year, and millions of US tourists visit Mexico year after year. So if you come to Mexico and continue to the US, you are not a refugee, you are an economic migrant.

Absolutely right, however it only applies if you are 20-30-40 and in good health. If you are close to retirement or ill or a family member is seriously ill and you have to devote time to caring for him, then this does not apply. You can be an incredible plumber but you probably cannot work past 65-70, same for electricians, carpenters, many doctors/lawyers/other professionals. Very small percentage of people can work post 70.

100% agree, but jurisdiction is paramount

According to AI overview of Google Search, USAID exact budget is complex due to co-managed accounts but total appropriations managed by USAID in FY 2024 were over $35bn. It is very nice that we cannot even get an accurate figure on what the actual budget is.

Actually that seems to be false on both counts. https://usafacts.org/answers/how-much-foreign-aid-does-the-us-provide/country/united-states/

There is plenty of money being spent on education, it is just being spent poorly. NYC spends $44K per kid in public school per year and gets horrible outcomes. Too many administrators, no accountability, declining standards, getting rid of things that work in the name of "those who lag behind should not feel bad", et cetera.

I was referring to banks, but some insurance companies that write only home and auto have at most one year.

I agree with you that it is cheap, however earnings are overstated since maintenance cap ex vastly exceeds depreciation, and management is lousy, keeps over promising and under-delivering. Why do you like this more than CP? What impact do you think the merger of NSC/UNP will have on the company? Thank you.

Congratulations on owning Fairfax for 18 years, I have held stocks for decades as well. In my opinion, different businesses have different risks, and I would not be comfortable with a 50% position in an insurance company while I would be comfortable with a 50% position in a company that owned several hundred gravel pits all over the US without any debt. We will have to agree to disagree, I hope you are right since I own Fairfax.

That is very different for two reasons: a) as an outsider, you have no idea what is really going on in the bank, and often insiders don't have a clue either; b) very few businesses are leveraged ten to one and where creditors can demand all of their money immediately.

Spek, average is a meaningless number. There was a guy named Patrick Edsparr on an HB-1 visa who was in charge of all proprietary trading at JP Morgan. His comp by itself divided by 25 would exceed $81,342. Oh, and I just pulled up my Goldman analyst class directory. More than 25% of people on the list were on Hb-1 visas, at a time when there were a dozen applicants for a each job opening at GS.

Unless your portfolio is a small fraction of your net worth, or you have a very stable job and the present value of future salary dwarfs your current portfolio, this allocation is very imprudent. A bank is a black box, and given the leverage can blow up at any point, even JPM had the London whale. To have 75% of the portfolio in two German banks is asking for trouble in my opinion.

Spek, this is just not true. When I was at JP Morgan in mid 2000s, I remember them advertising (as required by law) positions for which they were seeking HB1 visas with salaries listed at $40-60K for tech people in Manhattan. This was half of what people with those skills were commanding at that time in Manhattan. Similarly, when I was in academia, I saw postings (as required by law) stating that university was looking for professors on HB1 visas. At the same time, there were plenty of PhDs in the field, Americans to boot, looking for jobs. Foreigners they hired on HB1 visas had an accent so thick that I could not understand them. Oh, and the "research" these professors as well as many others in the field did was not worth the paper it was written on. Throwing a ton of regressions against the wall and see what sticks.

You are absolutely correct. However, if I have to choose between this and boys in my daughter's bathroom at school, it will be Trump every time.

I actually think that AI may benefit quite a few businesses including this one by reducing costs.

Or just someone who does not have high income or assets, but does not want to live in a Marxist society and hence either starve or being shot or being sent to a labor camp. By the way, Heastie - the speaker of NYS Assembly said he is happy to help Mamdani pass his tax increases. If Mamdani's agenda gets passed, my guess MSGE is going to be in big trouble and JOE will be a big beneficiary. Higher crime rates, massive inflation in NYC ($30 minimum wage), and a massive outflow of jobs from NYC since people will want 20-40% raises to deal with 20-40% inflation that will result from $30 minimum wage. @Gregmal, you suburban portfolio will do very well.

Bloomberg reported today that European regulators are going to ban catastrophe bonds from going into regular mutual funds. That should result in much lower demand, and hence higher pricing for catastrophe bonds, and an upward pressure on reinsurance rates ceteris paribus. Clearly a plus for Fairfax. The title is: Catastrophe bonds worth $17.5bn land in EU crosshairs. By Gautam Naik. At issue is the $17.5bn of catastrophe bonds sitting in funds sold under the UCITS label, an EU designation intended to protect retail investors.

@Spekulatius, so I am not an expert on theology, however it is easy to reconcile punishment for crime with Christianity. First of all, Christianity is both the New Testament and Old Testament, and lest you forget, eye for an eye is in the Old Testament. Moreover, I think in the Talmud it says that those who are merciful to the cruel are cruel to the merciful. Jesus Christ, being a Jew, was most likely familiar with this line of thinking, even though the Talmud was complied several centuries after his death.

Sure. Sizing also depends on how difficult the business is to destroy or how leveraged the business is. I would be fine having 50% of my portfolio in a company with thousands of gravel/crushed stone pits around the US that has no debt. I would not be comfortable with a 50% stake in a company that is heavily leveraged and operates in one jurisdiction unless it is a monopoly and can move easily.

I am all for having winners run, and I agree with you regarding 0.5% and 1% positions. I generally start with a 5% position, and sometimes as much as 10%. I am comfortable with GE/Safran/Airbus being a 30% position, and AMRZ/HDLMY/MCEM/ACA/CRH being another 30%+ (to be clear, if not for tax consequences, I'd be out of HDLMY & CRH.). I am just naturally weary of insurance companies given the black box nature and reliance on an incredible team to do well. I made Fairfax roughly an 8% position (at cost) at around USD 928 about a year and a half ago, right after Muddy Waters report came out. Regarding Fairfax, there is something else unique to me: I own New England Realty (NEN), a house in the Northeast and Fairfax. All of those are vulnerable to a major earthquake or major hurricane, so that impacts my decision making. This is my fourth decade of doing this. I still remember the Mexican Bolsa down 90% in dollar terms in 1994. I am just not comfortable having 40% in any name/industry at cost. I am fine with 20% at cost and 40% at market sure. Of course, if you show me a George Soros type bet (1992 against the British pound), then I think I will be like George...

I would add the following: the killer was clearly mentally ill, it was known by his family, and presumably law enforcement, and yet he was free to walk the streets. Perhaps, we need to bring back past practice of forced confinement of crazy people to mental institutions, and make sure that they are humanely run.

I think that you guys are insane to have 30-50% in Fairfax. Yes, Mr Watsa is a wonderful human being and an excellent manager, but everyone makes mistakes and insurance is a business where mistakes are easier to make than in say a manufacturing business (you don't know the cost of what you are selling for many years.) I understand, 5-10% at cost, say 10-20% at market, but 30-50%? As someone who has a large percentage of my net worth invested in Fairfax, I'd say I hope that you don't regret your choice, but in my opinion, this is extremely imprudent.

Charlie, could you please share what that fourth master's degree was in? Thank you.