crs223

Here are the fed holdings of MBS going back 10 years. 2022 roll off barely registers.

WEB does not think BRK is particularly cheap right now (relative to intrinsic value). Greg Abel is willing to buy though. In the table below, the last column shows pct of all outstanding shares repurchased in a given month.

I “trust” BRK also. The 13F is like Christmas morning for me… “what have these trustworthy guys bought me?!!” Is there any chance BRK will buy shares of BAM or FFH? If no… why not?

Could it be: the practical value of "having more money than you need" is to remove the assholes from your life. I wonder what all these assholes do when they get a lot of money!

If I “didn’t need the money” I’d continue to work my job. Some parts I’d even pay to do. For example working with some particularly talented people and working on some particularly important projects. More relatable example: I’d work for Buffett for free if i didnt need the money. If I “had $100M” I would stop working and redirect my life to some other purpose e.g. local philanthropy.

I imagine I feel the same about my job as an astronaut does. I would do most of it for free (if I did not need money)... but of course nobody wants to do HR training, or deal with a cranky person. But it's not just the "work" part. I live in the best city in the country (that I've found so far), I ride my bike to work, play basketball during lunch, set my own hours, and I'm an owner. I just stumbled into the job when I got out of college -- lucky sperm club as Buffett would call it. But now that I know what to look for, I'm gonna try to steer my kids to seek out a great job.

How it plays out: 1. Fed jawbones about fighting inflation and raises the fed funds rate. 2. If/when a financial market breaks* (e.g. corporate bond market) the federal reserve will intervene with a pioneering new program** 3. If a social regime breaks (e.g. students unhappy), congress will intervene with a pioneering new program*** 4. Nobel prizes for the pioneering programs * financial break = fair market price for “systemically important”instrument is “too low” ** fed pioneering program = print money buy up assets that are allegedly too cheap *** congress pioneering program = borrow money and give it to the panicked group/industries

I was not trying to say that. At my place older technical non-managers are valued and needed. They don’t get pushed out in favor of younger folks. And they don’t leave. (except retirement) In my business our labor/hours are billed to the customer. So we in general want to keep our expensive older guys working full time; provided the customer likes the work. And my overall point was just to say that “old labor” is valued… maybe just in certain “profit models” though. So if you don’t feel valued or are feeling uneasy… and you are skilled… you might be able to find a better place to work. I work in electrical engineering.

Ive been at the same job for over 20 years and I think I’ll be here forever. I absolutely love my job. i lucked out. how horrible it would be to work for 30 years doing something you don’t love. Highlights of my job: - I love the technical work - Great coworkers - Company pays all medical expenses, maxes out HSA whether or not you want it ($7k) and maxes out your 401k whether or not you want it (up to fed limit of $60k) -The best part: employee owned — we all own the place… and we all work together to minimize costs, make decisions, etc

I work for a 200 employee engineering company. Mostly electrical engineers. Over half of our retirees are/were non-managers. I hate to lose our technical staff to retirement… how cruel that people get to retire when they have the most wisdom and experience. I believe the non-managers are happier than the managers. Lower stress, often taking time off for surfing/biking/etc.

I think we have both. US strength relative to China is capitalism (although China has plenty of entrepreneurs). Chinese strength relative to US is in discipline/education — although i am totally unqualified to have an opinion on this as I don’t know anything about china except what my biases sources tel me. Both strengths are “fundamental” and “compound”.

My fourth grader has never had homework. Had a parent-teacher conference yesterday. teacher gave me a six page handout on doing math with “feelings”. (wasn’t as bad as i’m making it sound — basically the idea is to estimate to get close then fine-tune — but the message is clear: de-emphasize the rote algorithm) We’ll see how this works out in 20 years. Wonder if they still do homework over in China. I’ll spare you all my thoughts on the lack of discipline from parents nowadays. Anyhow… this is the source of my China angst. I worry we are wussifying the next generation.

US's most fundamental problem is political polarization? I'd say a more fundamental problem for the US is declining work ethic, which compounds. But maybe every generation says that. Maybe decline in rule of law (at least in CA). I'll watch the China Decline video... I wonder how they explain this:

What would you say is Chinas most fundamental problem? And the US?

Winston Churchill allegedly said “you can always trust the United States to do the right thing… after all other options have been exhausted”

Assuming this is true… I have to say I am impressed with the USA. I assumed we were too consumed with preferred pronouns and other “intangibles” to resist China. Im particularly scared about education in US vs China — e.g. SAT not required for college entry. China unleashed COVID, fentanyl, and IP theft for decades — all we did was send a harassment squad to Taiwan for a lousy photo op.

Phew — for a while I thought people were believing some nonsense. I just misread/misunderstood.

Bear or bull. Long term or short term. Investing or astrophysics. Many or most. Doesn’t matter. This is nonsense: “because most people agree, it probably won’t happen”

Even for short term it’s useless: Most people believe the SPY will not drop 50% tomorrow. My point: “when most people agree, it probably won't happen” is simply not true — nor is it false. It’s “fake evidence” used to “fake support” the speaker’s hypothesis. The hypothesis and speaker may still be correct despite use of “fake evidence”.

Most people also believe the market is going to be higher 25 years from now. I don't think it’s true that “when most people agree, it probably won’t happen”.

The latest episode of Odd Lots discusses this. China doesn’t have an effective vaccine. I think the estimate was 10 million would die if they just let COVID run its course. Evidentially China is not willing to allow that many to die. Another option is to buy the pfizer vaccine. Apparently this too is unpalatable.

Here is how I explain this to my children: Something (“treasuries”) is so expensive… that at its natural price nobody would ever buy it. Someone (“federal reserve”) buys it using printed money. If ever comes the day where the printing+buying stops… or god forbid even sells… then the world as we know it will end. And the folks who came up with this scheme get nobel prizes.

The Fed’s mandate is to foster maximum employment and stable prices. The Fed will look at jobs and rent.

Did Volker get one too?

Trains are already “electrified”. They use diesel to run a generator to power the electric motors. Electric motors have full torque at zero MPH. Imagine putting a clutch on a train! But battery powered trains? Those batteries are so heavy — how many pounds of batteries would you need to move a train 1,000 miles? Seems to me if you wanted to eliminate the diesel, easiest way would be to string power lines above the tracks.