LC

Something something chess with pigeons, buddy.

Take a look at the Trump tax bill and tell me where the deficit and debt are being reduced.

Well how else is he going to fund massive tax breaks for the 1% and massive spending which he can redirect to friendly entities, without declaring a "tax" on the low/middle classes? Same shit, different day. I'd complain about it but @73 Reds would call me a fool I should just go to church on Sunday and vote for a rapist on Tuesday

How did you previously account for this? My understanding is you have two options: 1) What you suggest bolded above, to consolidate these operations into Fairfax's overall income statement (either 100% for wholly owned associates, or on a pro-rata basis for partially owned associates) 2) Adjust FFH's carrying value of these operations on their balance sheet I presume you guys have been accounting for this via option 2)? I think ultimately the choice comes down to whether you believe these are an integral part of Fairfax's operations on a go-forward basis, and whether Fairfax has meaningful control over operating decisions. It may be worthwhile to do the analysis by segment as well, rather than fully consolidating everything - as to not muddy the waters, so to speak :D

Under this administration? I'm lucky ICE didn't pay me a visit

That post turned me into a "Veteran" here on COBF: If I'm the veteran, we're all in big trouble

*the one percent Made a slight adjustment for accuracy

https://thedailyadda.com/musks-doge-wasted-21-7b-paying-300k-federal-workers-to-do-nothing-senate-report-finds/ LOL what an unsurprising outcome.

Interesting business they're getting out of. Does it remind anyone else of Landbridge? I wonder why they're looking to exit.

When discussing a statistical topic with demagogues, you can’t expect a rational conclusion.

It's embarrassing that this even needs to be said.

Would you go further to say they expect a rise in rates? If they expect stable rates wouldn't they want to maintain duration at 4yrs or so?

Aside from Nintendo my other Japan positions are mostly domestic, with 5+ years (any mostly 10+) of consistent profitability, with dividends above the borrow rate. I think of it as self-funding, undervalued cigar butt portfolio. I let it sit there and have the option to periodically sell off stuff on price spikes. It's about 10% of the overall portfolio.

You think having a rational debate on the issues will change the MAGA mind on Trump's appropriateness as a leader? Epstein, however, has captured their attention for the past 10 years. Before that it was pizzagate. Remember that? These people are obsessed with this crap. I don't think any educated voter thinks the Epstein files are as problematic for America the country as, say, Trump's economic policy, foreign policy, immigration policy, tax policy, lack of respect for the courts, etc. etc. But if you're shooting pool, bring a pool cue not a basketball. (silly analogy but you get my point)

@Castanza I think we're relatively on the same page. On the threat of doxxing (and subsequent violence), I don't know whether it has become more prevalent, or not. Doxxing itself I am not so concerned about - law enforcement is required to identify themselves, the names of judges and prosecutors are publicly available...the real risk is whether criminals are taking that information and then targeting those people's homes and families. Maybe it is much more prevalent today than 3 years ago, and is just not being reported at all or being held close to the vest. I can't find any mention of incidents in the media, and I can't find any disclosures from the government about it. I imagine that if it were a prevalent issue, this administration would use it as justification to give more power to ICE/DHS and other law enforcement, but I could be wrong in that assumption.

Yeah I can admit there are certainly cases where identities should be concealed - not denying that at all. But those are special circumstances - not the entire DHS, border patrol, ICE, etc. who are tasked with making 3,000 arrests per day, operating around the entire country, without much evidence from doxxing-based violence...it's not like this is a special arrest and trial of Pablo Escobar or whatnot. I just think it's a bad idea for LEO to be masked in a free society, for reasons I quoted in the response to Castanza above.

I don't think judges, prosecutors etc are living in gated communities (I mean, obviously some are). In fact I knew many who lived in the same area of Brooklyn (Flatbush) as I did - they were my friends. I lost count of how many shootings I heard in the 10 years I lived there. And I looked for news instances of ICE agents being doxxed and harmed - the worst I found was someone dumping trash on an ICE agent's front yard. The DHS says there is an 830% increase in assaults on ICE officers, but they don't release volume (was it 1 assult -> 8 assaults?) and it was during the line of duty, not violence done outside the line of duty. So I don't buy that argument, neither on its merits nor in practice. Regardless whether you agree with that or not - I think it's a bad idea for law enforcement to wear masks. Symbolically and practically. I think the NYC BAR association has written a reasonable rebuttal on hiding the identity of LE officers, I agree with their arguments: https://www.nycbar.org/press-releases/statement-on-wearing-of-masks-by-ice-agents/ There was a NYC precinct commander who also wrote a piece, much in the similar vein: https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2025/07/face-covering-masks-ice-officers/683392/ And the libertarian Cato institute has a similar blog post: https://www.cato.org/blog/ice-agents-seizing-people-now-routinely-wear-masks-thats-wrong I think the argument generally comes down to this: "The driving principle here is obvious: In a free society, people should know who is policing them... Hiding your face from the public as a federal agent undermines the legitimacy of our nation’s police, and can be mistaken for cowardice. Although the risks of showing your face as you police America’s streets are not negligible, they’re worth taking, because the consequences of concealment are more dire. This is why the hazards of policing are morally different from those of being, say, a lumberjack, even though felling trees is statistically more dangerous than making arrests. In policing a free society, some of the risks arise from protecting freedom itself, so even if you can reduce those risks, you often shouldn’t... Descending on a person in public, laying hands on them, and taking them to a distant prison is a naked expression of state power. For it to be tolerated in a democracy committed to an inalienable right to liberty, it must be just that: naked. It cannot be done by shadowy, masked agents. " As a side note: it is pretty funny that 3 years ago, much of law enforcement was vehemently against wearing COVID masks. Maybe now they're all afraid of the flu? But I think they know what they're doing is unconstitutional and IMO morally wrong in some cases, and they'd rather hide their face versus take ownership of their behavior

Criminal statute of limitations had passed. If you don't think putting your fingers inside a person's without consent is rape, that's on you. I've got no problem with more border control to prevent illegal immigrants from entering the country. But that doesn't mean you get to crap all over the Constitution to correct for illegal immigrants already in the country. @Castanza Do you think judges and prosecutors should be allowed to wear masks and conceal their identity? What about legislators? Military generals? The President? These people and their families all get threats of violence and death on a regular basis, and have upheld the transparency of the judicial and legislative systems for years.

I feel like I am being held to higher standards than federal agents responsible for arresting, detaining, and deporting American citizens Looks to me like the term "Rapist" is appropriate: The judge above has ruled that it is not defamation to call Trump a rapist.

I've provided how the courts have defined "due process". By your logic, Trump never committed a felony because MAGA disagrees with how the courts define "felony" And we've come full circle: And to be clear - I have nothing against deporting illegal immigrants, but why trample on the rights of Americans? How much was Trump granted for ICE/Border control in the tax bill? 150 billion? Surely he can hire more lawyers and judges to do things Constitutionally.

Detaining citizens for two weeks without access to representation is not due process. Arresting people without reasonable suspicion of committing a crime is also not due process. In fact these examples are the exact opposite of due process, as ruled by courts for decades. I could go on but really, at some point the juice is simply not worth the squeeze.

I'll take modest improvement over Q1. I voted 50-59 but I am thinking in the 45-55 range. High level guesstimates: Strong operating performance (taking the industry expectation of lower claims + still firmed pricing) Decent gains in the equity portfolio Share of associates probably middling Fixed income portfolio probably not much change from Q1 Not sure how active they are on repurchases but probably slowing down?

On that we agree! Let's see if ICE/DHS is doing that: Honestly the 10 minutes it took to google these cases should be 9 more minutes than necessary to understand ICE's behavior is not only unconstitutional, but obviously driven by the Rapist in Chief's strongarm politics.

There is really nothing more to say - this quoted post reads as if global politics during the late 18th and 19th century never occurred, and as if the entire legal system is irrelevant. A blissful way to propose solutions, I am sure.

I just don't see how enabling masked "agents" to pick people up off the streets, throw them in a cage for an indefinite amount of time, deny them access to representation, then deport them to a random country, all without evidence or accountability...I don't see how that is at all OK. I don't care which person-in-power is doing it...Bush, Obama, Trump etc. What's to stop anyone from calling a tipline and claiming your neighbor is an illegal immigrant? Having some ICE buddies pull up in the middle of the night, throw them in an unmarked van and poof they're gone. It's not just possible, it's already happened. Zero accountability and zero oversight. If you want to solve the illegal immigration problem, compromising the very principles of the nation you are trying to "protect" is not the way to do it.