Blugolds

This strikes close to home. As a landlord in a city that prides itself on being "progressive" the new laws that they are implementing and/or attempting to implement is enough to make a guy pull a Michael Douglas in Falling Down. Not quite as bad as Portland or Seattle, but they're on their way... Examples: 1.) In an attempt to increase available affordable housing for everyone, I am no longer allowed to screen tenants via what I would consider "normal" criteria. Essentially the first person to fill out the application must be offered the available unit. The ordinance blocks landlords from screening for credit scores, insufficient credit history and certain criminal and rental histories You are unable to conduct any other financial transactions in this world without credit score/history...including things as simple as a cellphone, but if an individual wants to rent a unit from you, which is basically their largest monthly expenditure...no need...Whats that? You have a score of 550, bankruptcy, kicked out of last 4 places you lived in 4 years because you couldnt pay rent, felon? COME ON IN! Gimmie a break... But wait there's more! 2.) OTP (Opportunity to Purchase) and this is the one that really, really is hard to swallow. If you decide that you want to cut some properties, consolidate, maybe 1031 exchange or even demo a property, you will have to notify renters of your intent and provide them opportunity to purchase. So you have these people that may or may not barely be able to afford the rent, you have to notify them of your intent to sell and provide them "adequate" time to secure financing if they are interested etc. There is a timeline on all of this so nothing is quick, its a long drawn out process that will inevitably bog down transactions and can end up costing someone a deal when time is of the essence. I've nearly lost deals because of a lazy loan agent, so now not only may you potentially have to battle the slow cluster F of the bank, its also your 550 credit score tenant that thinks they might want to be an owner... It gets worse... If the renter is not interested...you then have to submit your intent to the CITY! And this is the real "sweet" part...you have to do ALL of the legwork for them...condition report, current rent vs market rent, estimated value of the property, opportunity to increase rents etc and THEY HAVE FIRST CRACK AT IT. I mean what a racket right? Hey, if I could have a pile of properties coming across my desk every day and I could glance at them and all the heavy lifting was done for me, all the potential for value add, and could quickly determine what my return would be I would be ecstatic! What a dream! What RE investor wouldnt want that! Interestingly enough there was nothing pertaining to how they determine fair market value and what the city would pay...thats the real question, Can you ask whatever you want for the property or is the gestapo gonna give you an offer you cant refuse regardless of what it will bring on the open market. All of this under the guise of providing more affordable housing and a pathway to ownership. The big bad landlords. They forget that there are a significant amount of those of us with only a handful of properties, what I would consider mom and pop landlords. And guess what, if I cant screen tenants Im gonna increase rents to do it for me, increase rents to discourage those that apply based only on affordability and then "negotiate" rent breaks after showing the unit. I have never discriminated against a renter for any reason, some of my best renters have been those that could have been discriminated against illegally. There is no lens that I look at a renter through outside of are they reasonably capable of paying rent, do they seem reasonably responsible etc..very basic...but to take that away from the landlord to me is an injustice and if you are expected to offer the unit to first person that applies (who could be a deadbeat) it does a disservice to those responsible parties that didnt get their application in as fast as the deadbeat and are looking for a decent place to call home. There is no benefit to getting approved by being responsible. Combine all the aforementioned "perks" of being a landlord in this city with the fact that once you get these potential "dream" tenants in and start having issues, it is nearly impossible to get them out. Once I even offered to break mid lease, return deposit and give a credit to get them out, just to be done with them, I was gonna lose money anyway, and it was cheaper to cut loses and get a new quality tenant in rather than riding that lease out. Its a nightmare and has honestly had us considering if we even want to continue doing business in this city. I am empathetic to the lack of affordable housing honestly I am, I grew up in subsidized housing and there are plenty of people that have had a hiccup preventing them from buying, Ive rented to those types before and it has been fine..life happens. The majority of tenants I have now are young professional hipsters due to our property locations in the city. IMO to tie the hands and bend over ALL landlords is not right at best and at worst actually does more to contribute to the exact problem they are attempting to alleviate when landlords increase rents. They are basically forcing me to use high rent as the only screening process. I dont care about politics and there are extremes on both sides, this is what I would consider an extreme and a failure to consider 2nd and 3rd order effects of policy. Zero accountability for potential tenants but total accountability for the big bad landlords who just want a decent tenant.

I agree and literally said the same thing a couple days ago...if the old golden arches are starting to get above $10 for a "value" meal, then you're better off going to a bar or regular restaurant and getting a burger basket for $2-3 more. McDonalds only advantage is speed (and often they dont even have that via a drive through) because they cant compete on taste and quality. I do think they have the best fries, but the rest is garbage IMO. I like a Whopper, but admittedly I havent had one in years and years...I do occasionally stop at Wendys and grab something off their cheap menu, a double stack or whatever they call it, its actually pretty good, tastes close to something you would make at home, fresh lettuce and tomato and a decent value. $2 for a hash brown blows my mind, I wouldnt eat one if they gave it to me for free, its a soggy pressed heartburn puck.

With all due respect, I think this is a very narrow minded answer. I think its easy to target the single mother because that is what you are able to see regularly, in the aisle at the store, on the streets.."THEY" are the problem. And its easy to generalize, "they" are all the same! Lazy, uneducated, on drugs, deadbeats...have deadbeat kids right? You dont see the meetings with the legal teams and army of accountants finding loopholes etc. If someone "takes" $5 out of your wallet ...or you enter a store and the cashier knowingly "owes" you $100 change but only gives you $50 back ...is it really much different? Are both not immoral? Lets say there is even a law that says the cashier can shortchange you? (And not every store, not the mom and pop's, just those doing over $XMM or $XB a year in sales). I guess I dont differentiate. I am the product of a single mother, low income, college educated, she worked 3 jobs for low pay and a combined 14hrs a day between all three positions, one of which was as a librarian. I remember the subsidized housing full of other single mothers/kids, cops there often, the shitty silver cans of baked beans with a pig silhouette on the can, the block of garbage processed cheese food (Velveeta knock off). I can still see her pulling out the stamp book and tearing out the sheets at the cashier (back before the cards) I remember being at a gov office as a kid and they had a bin in the entry way full of food, walking over to it and back to my mom excitedly saying, "hey! there's free food over there!" and her telling me "No, honey that is for people worse than us". That blew my mind at that age, there were people worse than us? I remember when we did not qualify for those programs any more, and although our standard of living didnt change much, she was proud to be on our own and was finally able to find a job decent enough to only need 1. To say reading was encouraged is an understatement. Many days as a kid were spent in a library while my mother was working "go pick out some books and read them in the corner" to save childcare costs. That fostered a love for reading and learning, eventually later in life, my interests led me to the writings of Warren Buffett, Lynch, Bogle, Fisher and it made all the difference. You are correct, I am no Thomas Sowell or Chaim Grade, but I've managed to stay out of prison (so far) and have done all right. I dated a girl who was a HS social worker, no kids, full time, graduate degree, awards for the work she did, school district paid her insultingly low, she lived very simply because she loved the work and felt she had found her calling, but qualified for programs if she would have applied. Not all those beneficiaries of the "system" are lazy or on drugs, to be fair perhaps I am an outlier, the statistics are clear, I probably should have ended up closer to the description you provided. Sometimes people just get dealt shitty cards, and not everyone has the same tools in their toolbox. To some extent everyone is a product of their environment, for some that leads to prison, for some that leads to C-suite positions with stock options. The majority of us are somewhere in between. To complete the analogy above, I would be mad if someone took $5 from my wallet, lets say the majority first ask me and I give it to them because they really do need it, its only $5 after all...but the cashier of the billion dollar company, not giving me $50 back because their lobbyists have influenced the tax code and they're legally allowed to F* me by a different set of rules...somehow rubs me a little more. Especially when I have to give back exact change or face prison time. .

This doesnt really surprise me, if anything I would say that a "double" is relatively mild compared to other things I am seeing. I am in the process of getting a vacation home ready to sell as well as completing some projects at another vacation home I own. I purchased the majority of materials for the projects before the pandemic as that was the bulk of the work, but I still purchase a limited amount now as they both near completion. Prices on the majority of building materials are 3x or more. And I am buying at the major supplier with the absolute best prices...local lumber/suppliers are even higher than the majors. Examples of what I paid 18 mo ago vs today: 250' roll of romex 12/2 electrical wire $45 → $155 2"x4"x8' framing lumber $2 → $7.39 (down from a high of $9) 4'x8' sheet of 7/16 OSB $9.99 → $34 3" Scheudle 40 PVC pipe DWV $9 → $33 Those are pretty significant increases...some are claiming that there are multiple factors coming into play to increase building material prices not solely inflation, weather, increased demand, natural disaster down south, worker shortages, supply chain issues etc, all certainly could play a roll. We have a family friend that is currently having a new home built. $200k over budget already and it is not yet complete, due to increase in material cost and some labor price increases, not job scope growth..just that the subs have increased their prices as well as making an increased percentage on materials that have also increased. ie. subs tack say 10% on materials for a new deck etc. That 10% on $1000 worth of materials vs now $3000 in materials. Keep in mind that the General on the job generally takes a mark up also as a percentage of the total project cost...so the snowball starts compounding, increased material costs = increased sub percentage = increased general percentage. Since the bulk of my projects are complete, these increased prices will only mean an extra $2-3k on my bill, I obviously dont like it but I wont lose any sleep...but if you had just broke ground or are mid way through a 5k sq ft home and hiring everything out...now we're talking real money. Combine this with the probability of the fed beginning to raise rates. Our friends will be fine, they can afford it, but how many Americans are in the process of having a home built, are tremendously over budget on the project and had approval for a set number to be financed. If you have a construction loan, you are not locked in yet. So hypothetically you plan to have a home built for say $500k....it is now $700k, not yet complete and the sub 3% rate you thought you would lock in at now is increasing potentially, that could make your expected vs actual monthly liability significantly more. Just an interesting thought. Also if a homeowner was approved by the bank for say $500k and now has to go back to the bank for an additional couple hundred grand, how does the bank feel about it? Is it easy to increase your ask by 30-50% ? Like I said it doesnt really pertain to our friends, but hearing about this made me wonder how many others are in a similar situation with less financial "flexibility".

Correct, area specific as I said. In my area the studio on the low end $1300 and on the high end, over $1600. Even if you found a “cheap” studio and save a couple hundred a month, maybe an extra $2k/year in your pocket, does that go that far? I honestly don’t know anywhere that $15/hr is a fantastic wage, and I’m not being argumentative, an extra value meal at McDonalds is $12. It all comes down to viewpoint, there are those that game the system on both ends of the spectrum, isn’t much of this human nature? If someone quits a job to stay under the poverty threshold for assistance, is that much different than someone playing the game to lower their tax burden? Carried Interest loophole anyone? Both are technically legal, one is considered “smart use of the tax code” and the other a moral/ethical question? I guess I consider both to be different ways to play the same game. To be clear I don’t like either, but I think its easier to focus on the single mother with multiple kids by different fathers, smoking her menthols and sitting at home watching tick took all day on her new phone for $100k/year than the upper echelon on Wall Street playing the game with much larger numbers that is actually costing the avg joe more by them paying less. Some people work, some people play the game. There will always be those who are deadbeats and figure what’s the point, you cant change that. I pay more in taxes in a year than the majority of those I know personally gross on their W2. Sure those gaming the system sitting at home rub me the wrong way, but my point is that it should EQUALLY rub you the wrong way that there are also those doing IMO the same thing on the top end. Warren Buffett has acknowledged this. Does this article make you more or less perturbed than the single mother with 2 kids on gov benefits that could work: https://www.nytimes.com/2021/12/28/business/tax-break-qualified-small-business-stock.html

I’m not saying there aren’t decent paying jobs out there. I would argue that the MINIMUM liveable wage is now $20/hr. As in I think that would provide the absolute minimum quality of life in my area with no splurges. Let’s assume in my area monthly expenses for a single guy/gal conservatively estimated as follows: $1600 Rent (gets you two bedroom in older duplex, thats what I rent mine for) $200 utilities $400 Groceries (no eating out, $100/week and thats eating pretty simply, $100 barely gets you a bag of groceries) $50 car insurance $150 some kind of transportation, cheap college car, maintenance, parking, bus pass, tolls etc $200 fuel for vehicle, 1 tank a week around $40-$50 —————- $2600/mo total x 12mo = $31,200 Net a year EXPENSES to live what I would call very very modestly. Nothing extra. $40,000 gross -$4072 FED -2480 FICA -580 Medicare -2041 State —————— $30,826 NET So with the aforementioned assumptions we see that even at ~$20/Hr above we are at a deficit. This does not account for any savings for retirement, investments etc. Doing some research I was surprised to see that 46.5% in the United States earn less than $30k/yr. Obviously location plays a part in this..ex. SanFran vs BF Alabama…Midwest vs coasts The Economic Policy Institute (EPI) estimates that CEO compensation has grown 1,322% since 1978, while typical worker compensation has risen just 18%. In 2020, CEOs of the top 350 firms in the U.S. made $24.2 million, on average — 351 times more than a typical worker. I have no dog in this fight, its just what I see and some facts pulled via quick google search. Which is why I was agreeing with Stahleyp about political extremes on both sides. That’s the divide. Sure there are some held up on Abortion/God/Guns…but really the biggest contributing factor to the divide is $$$ IMO. It’s no wonder the numbers are so low when you look at stats published by the brokers Fidelity etc and avg numbers saved for retirement for respective ages, Social Security becomes the primary source of income for the majority in retirement because it’s tough to put anything away with those low numbers. And why avg CC balances/debt is so high, they have to charge it because there isn’t much left for anything extra. I see the same things, local gas stations offering $18/hr, 5 GUYS sign out front offering $20/hr to fry burgers…but why aren’t these positions being filled? Why is literally EVERYWHERE you look posting help wanted signs? Why do they have to offer that much? Why are the stats showing such low numbers? Is the argument that 50% of the population is just lazy? Is that easy answer realistic? Or is it something else?

I agree, I dont have the answers, I know enough to know that its not an easy answer. What I do see is that the middle class is getting squeezed and everyone feels it, but they struggle to put their finger on what they are feeling and that frustration ends up getting directed toward "them" on the other side of the aisle. Either side of the aisle. I dont identify with the right or left, I liken it to arguing about who the best WWF wrestler is...all just characters. I recently watched this documentary that I felt did a pretty decent job summarizing, its worth a watch and free.

This cracked me up…and its irritating…not the fact that some kids stuck some money in a YOLO stock and hit big…thats just dumb luck, there are people every day that go down to the casino and bet red/black at the wheel…its the plethora of YouTube channels ie XYZ FINANCE all proclaiming to have the inside tip, and evidently they are all technical experts..I’ve never heard so many people that couldn’t read a basic balance sheet talking about investing in MEME stonks and crypto…from the waitress at the cafe to the neighbor kid next door and everyone in between…they all KNOW what their talking about…ask them in conversation what they thought about the I-bond yield at 7% and they Bert stare you..ask them any basic question and no clue. If/when we ever get more volatility (tongue in cheek) there are gonna be a TON of people in for a ride. I have heard that things were similar during the dot com era, but I don’t remember it, or at least it wasnt the discussion among my cohorts..it would be interesting to know the percentage increase of folks in the markets today, dot com we didn’t have robinhood trading from everyone’s cellphones, reddit, social media (A girl I went to HS with that works at GreatClips posting stock tips on her FB srs ) this all ads to the irrational exuberance.

Wonder what his CB is now? What would Charlie do if he took a position in a name and share price was cut in half 6 months after…he doesn’t hate the name but conviction has changed a bit…does he exit the position and take the loss, sit tight and do nothing ( we know he is good at that) , or buy more to lower his cost basis so its easier to exit without such a big loss? My thinking is that if he thought BABA was a loser he would just take the loss and exit, but that was a pretty big loss, so just wondering if anyone has entertained the idea that there might be a slightly different strategy here? Is there any other historical parallels to the BABA situation that can show what he might do?

Agreed, mine was closer to a prison cell (hopefully the closest I’ll ever get!) I think they look pretty nice and I get the thought behind the design, really the room are primarily for sleeping, I also agree the primary experience is interacting with your cohorts, not spending time in your dorm room. Secondly, for myself and everyone I associated with…it was 1 year in the dorms…you can do anything for one year…after that everyone moved off campus. Although I went to a smaller school for undergrad, this dorm BLOWS AWAY the living conditions of everyone after the dorms..we all went to cheap houses one block off campus, different flooring in every room, ancient cabinets and appliances..when you’re that age you don’t care, it was mainly how close you were to a house full of girls and who’s your roommates were, they could have had dirt floors for all we care, spent most of our time in the front or back yard anyway. Additionally Ive seen reviews from some students who have lived in Munger designs and they liked them. So there are two sides to everything…How much criticism is because Charlie donated a bunch of money with the stipulation that he gets to call the shots…maybe a little bit of jealousy? Makes him a target? Never gonna please everyone and the university has the choice to not accept the money and build what they want…

Cant expect her to live on the measly $223,500 salary...I mean her husband Paulie manages a San Francisco based investment firm, no sense in letting those skills go to waste. Im actually kinda jealous, talk about a POWER COUPLE...Nanc takes care of the laws and loopholes and Paulie spreads the chips.. To be fair, this happens in multiple forms on both sides of the aisle..it shouldnt even surprise anyone anymore. Politicians feathering their own nests while Joe Plumber socks away his pocket change for retirement, those in the upper echelon tell him he's just gonna have to work harder! Dig ditches till he's 72 and Skip the Lattes, you know, pick himself up by the bootstraps with the work ethic this country was founded on.... Should be term limits at every stage of the game and limited options for them to park money...VTI,VOO etc.

Agreed, just watched it and as a western aficionado I enjoyed it.

Same, I like the idea and would certainly take advantage of it...but in my situation I would only be able to park $10k this year and $10k in January so at most $20k...and even if we assume that I would get the 7% the next time it re-rates...it isnt enough to move the needle much so I dont know if I will do it. Right now Im leaning no...now if I was in a situation where I could park 6 figures into i-bonds then yeah, I'd get excited. Right now setting up the account, waiting at least 12-mo and potentially taking penalty then what I would get net taxes etc...its nothing that gets me excited really. Maybe I make a grand net on $20k for tying it up for a year? Thats a month or two worth of groceries...Combine that with the fact that IMO 2022 has potential for things to come to a head one way or another and there could be more buying opportunities in the market and I like the optionality of cash without having to wait the 12mo..I have plenty of other cash to deploy but I've never really been one to have an "emergency" fund, I honestly cant think of any scenarios where I would need more than what I have sitting around in a checking/savings account or by moving money around, access to capital is generally pretty easy, if I had other obligations maybe the cliché 6-12 mo expenses would be more prudent but for me personally I have never been in a situation where I need it, if I did, might be a good place to park it, assuming you didnt "need" it within 12mo.

Wow, these are great posts. Surprisingly I have never made a “fat finger” entry while trading. In my day job I work at a computer, sitting in front of 11 computer screens that I am solely responsible for. A “fat finger” has the potential to make national news. There are safety’s in place…but it still gets the heart pumping occasionally and it has happened and I have been guilty. The interesting thing is that when I have made an entry error, I immediately know it, but it has already set off a chain of events that have to be immediately mitigated to avoid an unintended result, generally this can take several hours to return to “normal”. Reading this experiences from others regarding trading I can visualize that feeling applied to trading, and weirdly enough I had never thought about that, I do double and triple check my trades before entering. Anyone who choses individual equities has a “sold too early” story, with the benefit of hindsight etc. I, as I’m sure everyone else on this board, have“lost” more money by exiting early than on any individual name I have ever sold at a loss. I think the biggest mistakes I have made in trading have to do with low margin businesses. Businesses that are tough to begin with, and regardless of management your returns will never be much more than the industry standard. Two that come to mind are construction contractors and retail…..both can be hard and margins can be low…combine that with the fact that eventually there will be poor management running the thing and its a recipe for a horrible situation. Doesn’t mean there isn’t opportunity at some point, just in general.

Thanks for the write-up, this book has been in my Amazon cart for a while, I'll likely have it shipped.

Politics forum is still active...have to go to the home page and select FORUM and then you have the option of the Investment Forum or Politics Forum. I havent looked at the Politics Forum since it was moved. I was glad it moved. A couple of mentions of CCP/VIE in the BABA thread is very mild compared to how politics had infiltrated normal threads previously.

I share this same sentiment. Additionally I think the big thing for me is the inability to know specifically how contributed dollars are being used. There has been quite a bit of outcry over the years regarding how contributed dollars are used....i.e .03 on the dollar actually make it to the starving kids in Ethiopia (facetious example). I know the CEO of Goodwill came under some scrutiny. I've never been one to think that Alumni contributions are worth while (personally) because it never seems to reduce student/professor ratios, increase quality of the education and I dont care if my name was on a building, to me that seems to cheapen the idea of giving in a way. Is my donation really to further the common good, or is it hubris and Im really after the "John A. Doe HALL" recognition. To each their own. The way that I am charitable while still alive, is to give to family members who genuinely need it ie. taking care of an unexpected bill, or groceries (dealt shitty cards) no-interest short term loans to friends, random anonymous acts of kindness for people in need. I spend the money, I see the benefit, Im in charge. This is simpler with 4 figure amounts....7 figure amounts after Im gone would need help obviously. There are tremendous opportunities for charity all around us. It doesnt have to be a big name charity...is there a little old lady next door that needs her lawn mowed/drive shoveled that you can pay someone to take care of for her for the year? Perhaps something around the house that you can pay for and fix/repair or pay someone else to? I had a girlfriend once who went to help orphans in Jamaica. It was organized via her church group. Now dont get me wrong...good for them. But I couldnt help but ask some questions that didnt go over well. In order to go, it cost her around $3k...to fund this she set up a donation account for friends and family to contribute (and it ended up being fully funded for her). So this church group of mid 20's (at that time) head down to Jamaica IN JANUARY and come back with a bunch of pictures for their social media playing with kids on the beach. It was basically a PR stunt for them and a "free" vacation under the guise of a spectacular charitable act via the church and orphanage. My questions were...what about the orphan kids in Iowa? Why pick Jamaica in January when its -40F here? Why do they charge you $3k for 7 days, I had just gotten back from a week long trip to Italy I did on a shoestring for around $1k. And to be fair, I wasnt volunteering, who am I to ask questions? But I couldnt help but think that the money wasnt being used in the best way possible....why not just send the orphanage $3k...surely that would help them more than sending down a 20 something Midwestern girl to play with kids on the beach and eat seafood... To be fair, I felt the same way when I saw the masses at St Peter's in Rome...the shear opulence of that building and the surroundings, gold leaf everywhere etc admittedly made me think a bit, when next to the starving/homeless in the streets. (This is not a religious hate statement, just an observation) For now I give in the ways I best see fit, and with smaller amounts I feel Im the best one to designate how that is distributed. The traits that have allowed me to be in the position to help are also the ones that make me apprehensive to allow others to dictate how those dollars are allocated. I (hopefully) have time to consider the best way to distribute funds when Im "done" with them. Something that would appeal to me would be to set something up wherein the amount is managed and the principle would remain and potentially grow, thus stretching the contribution out further than a one time payment. If I remember correctly that is how J Paul Getty structured his will and it has grown considerably. (Disclaimer: Obviously those sums are magnitudes larger than anything coming from me, but I like the idea of continued benefit for many over a long period) These are IMO deep philosophical questions that can only be answered by each individual

Same +1, constant "too many connections" messages and when it has been operating, its very very slow to load. Edited to add: Ironically, the post to say that there are problems...took almost a minute to post

I see it as partially a self fulfilling prophecy..you get enough of the common crowd to jump in and some euphoria to pump up the price...much like the meme stocks..and then the big boys start to notice...but we arent talking about small numbers here....obviously the crypto market is huge...so the big boys step in to make their money off the little guys, all the kids living in their parents basement, the guy next door who heard from a friend...the hair stylist that saw something in the news..blood in the water attracts sharks... The big boys step in and set up funds tailored to crypto, offer packages, guidance etc and that adds to the "credibility" of the product...perceived credibility gets more people get on board thinking that its the right move because so-and-so big fund/manager/investor has a portion of their portfolio in crypto. If there was a market trading beanie babies (remember that craze?) it wouldnt get the buy in from the big players...but if that market grew to billions...or trillions..there is no doubt that you would start to see funds getting on board in some way to make a buck...to continue the Gretzky analogy...these "intelligent people putting trust and money behind BTC and crypto" are IMO just skating to where the puck is. I saw the other day that Kevin O'leary is involved in crypto and offering a fund tracking/investing in it...and his pitch? His fund only owns coins that are....wait for it...ETHICALLY MINED!! I almost laughed out loud...he says investors are concerned with the way their coins are mined...China etc. To me that was just too much, people have no problems buying their day to day or luxury products made by kids in sweat shops in Bangladesh or China....but by god..the crypto bits in my digital wallet will be ethically mined..

NE is the obvious answer to many questions. Do some research on NE and it becomes very very clear that the cost per kW is so much cheaper than even the second place source, that it is essentially a no-brainer and has you asking yourself why this isnt our primary source of energy. (I know, I know...Enter the NIMBY crew) I have no doubt that Buffett et al are capable of pulling this off and I like that the Feds have skin in the game. Frankly, if they cant do it, nobody can. These are newer, smaller reactors, built cheaper and faster, different design, location, scale, and most importantly better management but there is a small part of me that is gun shy after watching the whole Westinghouse/Toshiba/Shaw/CBI debacle. What a huge embarrassing failure. Nuclear projects are in my book synonymous with delays, labor challenges, regulation nightmares, cost over runs and a plethora of other challenges etc... Refresher: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-toshiba-accounting-westinghouse-nucle/how-two-cutting-edge-u-s-nuclear-projects-bankrupted-westinghouse-idUSKBN17Y0CQ https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesconca/2017/03/31/westinghouse-bankruptcy-shakes-the-nuclear-world/?sh=6e0b1c6a2688 I hope that this goes smoothly and BHE has not given reason to expect otherwise, they are industry leaders and will continue to be I suspect once this proof of concept is operational. If these are expanded/replicated in the future it represents tremendous, tremendous opportunity.

https://amp.usatoday.com/amp/8634699002 Billionaires Warren Buffett and Bill Gates have chosen a remote town in Wyoming to build a new small nuclear power plant intended to help replace the coal-fired plants dotting the state. CLIFF NOTES: -Pending federal and local approval, TerraPower will build the $4 billion, 345-megawatt facility at the Naughton Power Plant in Kemmerer, Wyoming, about 130 miles northeast of Salt Lake City, the company announced Tuesday. -The relatively small "Natrium" reactor is similar to those used in some U.S. Navy submarines, and is designed to be faster and cheaper to build, and safer to run, than traditional large-scale reactors. The project has broad support from Wyoming's conservative political leaders and from the Biden administration. -Federal matching funding for the reactor was included in the $1.2 trillion Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act signed by President Joe Biden on Monday. -Although similar reactor systems have been built before, the Natrium project is considered to be a test by the federal government, which is footing up to half of the price tag. Because the Natrium plant is smaller and uses modern technology, its backers say it could be built faster and cheaper than a traditional large-scale nuclear power plant, primarily because it uses less expensive concrete to contain the reactor. Gates and Buffet said that once successfully demonstrated, the plant could be quickly expanded or replicated elsewhere.

I agree with all of this based off a small data set via discussions with my cohorts. The majority ARE financially illiterate. Most would not even be able to tell you what an expense ratio is, let alone what seems outrageous. Indeed there are many who have made a business out of "skimming" the till in the form of ER. transaction fees etc. How many funds do you see that structure their compensation like Buffet in his early years? They do not think of themselves as partners. I am reminded of the movie Goodfellas...and how these funds with high annual ER regardless of fund performance must think...We didnt beat the benchmark? Market crashed? Global Pandemic? F* you...pay me! I had a coworker that showed me some paperwork that a non-fiduciary investment "professional" pitched to him...the ER/fees were insane...and this guy happens to have quite a bit of money, but zero understanding of the big picture. Even mediocre returns would have him set up for the rest of his life...he already is...so I immediately noticed the high "skim" and said are you prepared to pay over $20k/yr for every million you have for this guy to watch your portfolio for you? Maybe make a couple trades, but likely just stick the money into a fund that gives him the best spiff? You realize you will be paying over twice the United States average annual income to have them "bring you under their umbrella" and "help" you manage your money?....if that wasnt enough for him to visualize I broke it down by the month... You should have seen the look on his face... The crazy thing to me, is as Sharper stated above...the majority sleep well at night thinking they are in good hands, we're "investing"! And never realize they are quietly being robbed by a bunch of financial leaches. Look at the rise of the meme stocks and how much capital flowed into those based on the pitch...comparably the pitch for high fee funds is actually pretty mild. At least with the funds you get someone to talk to and an advisor to call when you see your port lose half in a correction/crash and a nice fancy print out sent to the house once a year, maybe a Christmas card, thats more than a lot of the bag holders in Peloton/AMC etc. My god if I had a dollar for every new "investing expert" who bought meme stocks that couldn't lose and asked me if I was in them and then gave me a chuckle/smirk like I was an idiot when I made a Munger inspired response. Haven't heard much from them lately though... The real deal is that the majority of people dont even know what the funds do, and anywhere you have ignorance you'll find those who make a business out of taking advantage of that, this increases exponentially the larger the sums involved. They dont know how to buy an ETF, or what that means vs a fund. Think of it like other things in life...you have a light switch in the house that needs to be replaced...everyone could go on Youtube and watch a video and figure out how to do it, fix it in 10 minutes and be good, but they're ether too lazy, or just dont care...so they call an electrician to come to the house and pay him his minimum $150 fee for 15 min worth of work and never think twice...same thing...just dealing with larger sums, combine that with the fact that most people think they "need" professional help in this regard as some kind of assurance that they are doing the right thing and there you go.

I've had this discussion with coworkers who buy physical gold and it doesnt seem to click with them...or me, maybe Im thinking of it wrong. They go to the "dealer" and buy bars of gold...paying over spot price for the privilege, then hold it for whatever their period is...then go to sell it and sell below spot price. The middle man takes his cut....much like RE buyer/seller commissions. Obviously different if buying equities tied to gold, miners etc. But the physical stuff has always been a hard pill for me to swallow, then again I have never used a RE agent as a seller either. Imagine if this was the method for all other investments, go to sell shares in a company and you are taking a 1-2% or more hit every time you buy or sell, with real sums of money that can add up. Interestingly enough, the coworkers that buy physical gold also do not think about it in mathematical returns as it pertains to an investment. For instance if They bought/sold a gold bar for $10 say, and the facilitator of the transaction took a buck, it wouldn't occur to them that they are paying 10% for that ability (just an example) or if you go to the ATM and pull out $20 and they charge you 4 bucks, they just paid a 20% "fee" on that money. Obviously sometimes you just pay the $3-4 for the convenience of getting soe quick cash...but if you are doing this regularly it can add up. Also in the above example if you withdraw $100 your percentage drops from 20 → 4%, my point is, its been my experience that the guys I know buying physical gold are buying it because it goes well in their safe with their gun collection, and its "just a good idea to buy gold" speculation, not investment as I would define it. When I was young I had a friend who's father bought tons of physical gold as invesments (his only investments) because he didnt trust stocks etc, no regard for possible returns or comparing it to other alternatives...just BUY GOLD!! I dont think the majority of posters in an investment forum think of things the same way, but I wonder in the bigger picture are the majority of physical gold buyers sharing the view of my coworkers? Or are there more that think the way we do?

LOOOOOONG time lurker, first time poster.. My investment philosophy and trajectory is/was very similar to yours. Also like yours, it has matured and evolved over time as confidence increased as well as portfolio totals. The old "the markets can remain irrational longer than you can remain solvent" played a part in my decisions. I was blessed with the delayed gratification gene for sure...but I still struggle with the Munger like stoicism to sit for a decade on a position until my thesis plays out...it can be tough, and especially so during this run for the last 5 years or so when so many valuations seem illogical to me. The absence of trading fees has also allowed me to “tip toe” into positions. Determine my preferred percentage for a position and then split up trenches to DCA in should my timing be a little off, that used to bite me, it means sometimes my first trench is the lowest CB and sometimes its the highest, but it beats my past practice and it works for me. This is actually quite ridiculous when I think about it. If I was spending $5/trade on a $5k trench and even if I made 3-4 trenches to full position, it really was insignificant, but I have never really been a “trader” I suppose if someone was making multiple trades each day it would obviously add up. But for some reason it was a mental hold back for me sometimes. Continuing, I have enjoyed this forum because it has probably helped me look at things through a different lens, more than all the books etc I have read. Reading discussions and thesis, the way of thinking has helped me immensely. I’ll provide an example, the last COST dip I thought seemed interesting, although I thought it still seemed expensive, there was a poster on here (sorry for not providing credit, I don’t remember exactly) that said COST has always seemed expensive, and that they really are best in class, employees are happy and that they are an excellent business. I was already very familiar with them from Mr. Munger, but it was like a slap in my face…someone else reiterating what I was thinking but it was motivation to SWING YOU BUM! That was nearly $200 in share price ago…(no comment on current valuation) but its a name I am willing to hold for decades. A name that previously I would have never bought due to my perceived valuation metric. This forum has increased my circle of competence, (not that it was that big to begin with) and I’m grateful for that. The vast majority of my portfolio is in BRK and the remaining in IVV with the occasional foray into individual names. I’m certainly not as experienced as many on this forum but hope to be able to at least provide some input into areas I know and continue to learn. I have noticed that some of the “newer” posters ( I should talk right?) seem to be a bit more argumentative/challenging to OG posters and I hope that does not continue and the forum continues to be a place for constructive discussion, there are plenty of social media outlets (FB/SA/ST) for them to argue if they so choose, hoping Para will continue to mod to preserve the quality of the forum as I’m sure he will.