james22

Well, yeah. Not preached to.

Yeah:

Disney?? They aren't far from losing half the country.

To expand, I'm really guessing the next couple years looks something like the 2000-2002 Value/Sector rotation. So SV, Energy, Financials, Industrials, and International rather than US LG/Tech. Have a bet on Gold too.

AAPL @ $125.07?

The war in Ukraine seems permanent. Neither side appears capable of destroying the opposing force or articulating what it would take to reach a peace agreement. The Russians are speaking to Belarus, India and anyone else they might find, but no one can help enough on the battlefield or in the munitions factory to turn the tide. The Ukrainians are speaking to the United States, NATO and anyone else who will listen so that they will continue to receive weapons – perhaps even some new ones. But Ukraine hasn’t broken Russia yet, concerned as it is with preventing the collapse of the country, and doing so may prove difficult. On the battlefield, there is movement on both sides, but movement doesn’t carry with it the taste of victory. When, then, do wars end if the leadership will not concede? History shows there are several answers to that question. 1. A war ends when one side lacks the material to continue. Germany’s campaign in World War II ended when it was unable to produce and field the weapons needed to fend off the Allied powers. 2. A war ends when one side’s morale is exhausted – when soldiers and civilians are simply unwilling to bear the burden of war, even if victory is possible. This was the case for the United States in the Vietnam War. 3. A war ends when there is no hope of a radical increase in military power, and when foreign intervention is impossible. In WWII, Britain persevered knowing it could not defeat Germany but reasonably expecting an American intervention. 4. A war ends when the consequences of defeat seem tolerable to civilians. In World War II, the Italian public saw Allied occupation as a preferable alternative. (Conversely, nations will continue to fight when the cost of defeat is catastrophic.) ... But so long as Ukraine fears a defeat by Russia, capitulation is practically impossible. The same cannot be said of Russia. https://geopoliticalfutures.com/the-state-of-play-in-ukraine/

1/2/3/4 plates by end of the year (at 180lbs, age 60).

Small Value

Looking for a fragging.

Essentially even.

Maybe I misunderstood your argument. I'm just thinking plain vanilla 3rd grade division and multiplication > Ivy League geniuses.

Probably.

Yes. Edited to clarify: What do I know? I'd be happy if Buffett did so because he thought her the right person for the job. I know little other than he seems to respect her (and he'd know if he took advantage of her in their dealings) and that even Icahn believes she is 'as good at operations as horrible at M&A' (high praise).

So why energy? The prospects for energy changed radically with the events in the early days of 2022. Buffett had written in his 2020 Shareholder Letter about the difficulties in building a grid to deliver wind and solar energy from remote sources to the cities where most energy was needed. Back in 2006 Berkshire Hathaway Energy had been among the first to undertake this task of building a grid, deferring all cash return until 2030 when the $18 billion project was scheduled to be completed. In short, Buffett understood the energy problem from both perspectives and knew that the solution was not going to achieved nearly as quickly as enthusiastic activists had assumed. The withdrawal of Russian energy in the course of the war in Ukraine put this into focus for the rest of the world. Their estimates for transition to green energy had been far too optimistic. ... What Buffett saw was the simple fact that OXY and CVX were gushing cash flow. It was clearly enough for OXY to clean up its balance sheet and begin with small dividends and buybacks which could be sustained even if oil and gas prices declined. Moreover, CVX and OXY were integrated energy companies which would be supported by downstream profits from refining and marketing. The one major risk was political but it was well known. OXY and CVX didn't have to operate brilliantly to work out as investments. They just had to perform fairly well under fairly decent conditions for their returns to continue rising. https://seekingalpha.com/article/4566832-berkshire-hathaway-buffett-year-2022-setting-things-order I'd like to see BRK to buy OXY (and the 8% outstanding BHE) and put Hollub in charge.

2021: No miners in Texas, record cold, grid destabilized, 246 recorded deaths 2022: Miners in Texas, record cold, grid stabilized, no recorded deaths This is the headline everyone should be shouting: #Bitcoin miners stabilize the grid and save lives. https://notthebee.com/article/this-mad-lad-claims-bitcoin-farming-saved-the-texas-energy-grid-during-this-latest-cold-snap-and-i-thought-he-was-crazy-but-now-i-believe-him-

A better mousetrap only matters to those with mice.

Deserve's got nothing to do with it.

If something cannot go on forever, it will stop (Stein): https://legalinsurrection.com/2022/12/europe-cools-toward-esg-in-light-of-energy-realities/

Boring.

https://hotair.com/david-strom/2022/12/14/my-take-fusion-breakthrough-a-total-dud-n517800

So prepare to defend it.

The Ukrainians are expected to need six to eight weeks of training in Europe to begin operating the system, and a full 10 months to reach full operating capability. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/ukraine-patriot-missiles-pentagon-russia-missile-defense/ Missed is the assumption of a long war.

Gotcha. No doubt.

You'd think, but was pretty surprised when visiting Tbilisi several years ago when a girl I met said I'd love the Russian girls who visited Georgia. As she'd just shared that her brother had fought against the Russians when they invaded ten years earlier. When I asked her about it, she said no one held individuals responsible for their government's actions.