Blake Hampton

First, let's separate the idea of currency and hard assets: Definition of currency: a standardization of money in any form, in use or circulation as a medium of exchange. Definition of hard assets: tangible assets or resources with fundamental value. In today's state, currency doesn't have any fundamental value outside of the faith people place in it as a unit of exchange. Contrarily, commodities have fundamental value because their consumption is necessary for human survival, thus making them "hard assets." I say in today's state because humanity has had instances of commodity money in the past; of course today we have fiat: I'll admit that I have no bulletproof argument for completely debunking Bitcoin as a form of future currency. Like I previously stated, the fundamental value of an unbacked currency is the faith placed in it. But I do strongly feel, as it stands now at least, that almost no one actually believes in Bitcoin as a true unit of exchange. It's not how people facilitate transactions; it's not how people are receiving their paychecks; it's not how debts are settled; and even the people who believe in Bitcoin look at its performance relative to USD as some form of proof. I know I use this quote a lot, but I think it perfectly captures what Bitcoin is: "Bitcoin is worthless, artificial gold." — Charlie Munger From the perspective as a store of value, Bitcoin is trying to fill a void that gold already does. People think of gold, and now maybe Bitcoin, as some form of base money, when in reality they're nothing more than a yellow metal and 1s and 0s. I don't really like gold, but if I were forced to pick between the two, I imagine I'd choose the one that both has a track record spanning thousands of years and is also tangible. But I don't want to own either because neither one of them do anything. The gold just ends up sitting there, and maybe the Bitcoin floats around the metaverse; fuck if I know. Moral of the story is that they're both unproductive. I don't think anyone on this board is stupid; certainly far from it. However, I do believe that some of you have some crazy ideas that have probably been reinforced by market performance over the prior couple decades. The recent low-interest-rate, money-is-free-and-abundant period we lived through is over. It was an anomaly born through responses to near-systemically destructive events that we still haven't paid for yet. The crazy thing to me is that a lot of us are probably in agreement that the United States is grossly mismanaging its currency. The disagreements seemingly come from how we think policy will respond, its future effects, the economic environment we'll ultimately see from those effects, and the best way to protect ourselves from it.

It's crazy that we've allowed Bitcoin to be regarded as anything more than speculative nonsense. Even today, Dumb Donald has decided to stake his own claim with his possibly even more worthless self-bailout, masked as a company. "Bitcoin is worthless, artificial gold." — Charlie Munger Assuming that you're being truthful about your returns, it's indeed impressive @james22 that you've had enough conviction to hold these assets through periods of extreme volatility—even though they have no variables that would lead anyone to believe they're actually worth anything. Then again, I guess the same sort of argument could be made about our current president. It's all built upon nothing besides blind faith. If I were you, I would set aside a good portion of that wealth away from Bitcoin to ensure you keep it when people start to appropriately value money again. I imagine the same conviction that made you rich is likely going to financially kill you.

I think I'm starting to view cash more like @Gregmal does I think, and please correct me if I’m wrong. In the short term, it’s unclear to me whether holding cash is a good move or not; I can imagine scenarios where it goes either way. But in the long term, I’m completely certain that it’s a losing bet.

"Despite what some commentators currently view as an extraordinary cash position at Berkshire, the great majority of your money remains in equities. That preference won’t change. While our ownership in marketable equities moved downward last year from $354 billion to $272 billion, the value of our non-quoted controlled equities increased somewhat and remains far greater than the value of the marketable portfolio. Berkshire shareholders can rest assured that we will forever deploy a substantial majority of their money in equities – mostly American equities although many of these will have international operations of significance. Berkshire will never prefer ownership of cash-equivalent assets over the ownership of good businesses, whether controlled or only partially owned. Paper money can see its value evaporate if fiscal folly prevails. In some countries, this reckless practice has become habitual, and, in our country’s short history, the U.S. has come close to the edge. Fixed-coupon bonds provide no protection against runaway currency. Businesses, as well as individuals with desired talents, however, will usually find a way to cope with monetary instability as long as their goods or services are desired by the country’s citizenry. So, too, with personal skills. Lacking such assets as athletic excellence, a wonderful voice, medical or legal skills or, for that matter, any special talents, I have had to rely on equities throughout my life. In effect, I have depended on the success of American businesses and I will continue to do so." Berkshire Hathaway Shareholder Letter (2024)

Is he really hoarding cash though? The amount of cash he currently has offsets nearly the same amount of liabilities. I think he's ultimately trying to protect Berkshire, with the added plus of optionality. "This note is legal tender for all debts, public and private"

+1

I added some minor tweaks. Otherwise, well said.

One of the largest concerns that I've repeatedly heard from intelligent, grounded individuals who support Trump is that the government is "too large" or "too involved." I completely understand why they're frustrated about this. Like I said, I share a lot of those same concerns. However, one of the things I don't understand, is how you could've read anything about Trump preceding this election and thought that he would've been a good fit for that mold. Republicans like to talk about free trade, free markets, and smaller government, but everything we've seen so far is more Trump acting like a dictator than anything else. I don't understand how they could think that way outside of just not keeping up with it, so I simply label it as ignorance.

It’s also fascinating how some people seem to tie their identity to Trump: His supporters interpret criticism of him as a personal attack. They ought to call it The Trump Effect.

Short version: Trump is the master manipulator. The problem is that no one wants to admit they've been manipulated.

For context, I have a massive amount of respect for my granddad, and he voted for Trump. I'm not saying all Trump voters are evil—I'm saying they're ignorant. I don't think I've ever seen a Trump supporter who really kept up with policy or had a deep understanding of Trump's character, history, worldview, or anything like that. A lot of them have reasonable concerns about the government—concerns I often agree with—but Trump is simply not a real solution for any of those problems. In fact, I believe that he massively worsens a lot of them. Some of his voters whom I'd likely respect—such as my granddad—think they're voting for the lesser of two evils, but I strongly believe they've got it backwards. Unfortunately (or maybe fortunately?), they're going to figure it out.

Those dirty dollar dumpers.

Newsom as prez is this board's worst nightmare lol.

Even before the election, I came to the conclusion that Trump supporters fell into one or both of two camps: greed and ignorance. Of course, the ignorant camp far and away exceeds the greedy camp in sheer size, but it was always interesting to me how businesspeople generally assumed that Trump would be good for them. The orange man is nothing short of a sociopath, who I don't think is capable of caring about anyone outside of himself. The second that anyone gets in the way of something that he wants, in any facet of life, they become the enemy. Unfortunately, in a way that history could probably show a thousand times over, poor and desperate people looked to him like some sort of god that would deliver them from all of their problems. I'm not so certain that we've seen the end of this sort of behavior, and the really scary thing is that he could be just the beginning: Gavin Newsom is in the pipeline for 2028 democratic nominee. Take a distraught populace, promise to deliver them the entire world, give them an enemy, and you'll own them.

Facebook has fried the brain of the average American. It's also sad that people are this desperate, and I don't even think it's that bad yet.

Skip to 1:35 and watch through 2:42.

Here we go again...

Additional source:

This'll cover it: Trump Admin Savings Millions of fake social security recipients: $357 billion Colombian tranny pageants: $53 billion Gazan condoms: $151 billion Source: https://gettrumpwatches.com/?srsltid=AfmBOopufnxZeI3d0HNLaeECoPgKS-qR8ZOdxQ2ZHCP0LNguv8xA2uIJ

Monthly Treasury Statement (MTS)

WSJ, NYT, and common sense.

Insanity.

House Passes Trump Tax Bill After Last-Minute Changes - WSJ

Oh, no doubt it'll still be around. I'm 23 now, so by the time I'm eligible at 90, I'm sure my monthly check will be enough to buy a nice Snickers bar.