BSB

Real religion is not superstition, read Mortimer Adler's "Concerning God, Modern Man, & Religion" at radicalacademy.com. You must have been exposed to some of the bad theology in circulation.

"The 1 in 4 statistic is widely quoted but never substantiated. It implies every night when it likely refers to at one time during the year. It also implies malnourishment/starvation which is not a problem in our society. Obviously no one wants a child to be starving. If a child goes to bed hungry in this country (meaning they did not get any dinner) it is due to the failure of their guardians. There are significant resources (food stamps, school lunch programs, etc.) set up in order to make sure the poor are fed. For example in my city (rural) a family of four with an income of $41,000 or less qualifies for free school breakfast and lunch. Larger families qualify even more easily. A family of 6 with an income below $55,000 qualifies." Tim Erikson You do not "know" what you think you know. For substantiation, read "The Prize of Civilization" by economist Jeffrey Sachs.

As you know, Prem Watsa foresees deflation, based on the malaise that hit Japan two decades ago. Economist Richard Koo ( respected by Watsa) studies this malaise in detail in "The Holy Grail of Macroeconomics". Republicans may want to give it a read. Maybe they don't know what they think they know, about how to address our unemployment problem.

"As a conservative Republican, one who does not consider himself to be of a certain class, but does enjoy the FREEDOM of not relying on Big Brother to feed his family, I do not hate Buffett at all. In fact, I tell my liberal friends about him all the time, when speaking about someone with a great way to invest money. " We all rely on government (in part) to feed our families as noted by Martin Whitman in his most recent shareholder (Third Avenue) letter. Also, Malcolm Gladwell in his book, "Outliers".

1 out of 4 American children go to bed hungry. For more empirical evidence, concerning the NEEDS of American citizens, please read "The Price of Civilization" by respected economist, Jeffrey Sachs.

"At the root of America's economic crisis lies a moral crisis: the decline of civic virtue among America's political & economic elite". Distinguished economist Jeffrey Sachs supports the thinking of Warren Buffett in "The Price of Civilization". I choose to stand on the shoulders of these giants, along with Aristotle, Rawls, Sandel, & theologian Nicholas Wolterstorff in "Justice". Tax rates for the wealthy (>$1 million) are at historical lows (along with adjustments & deductions at historical highs), while the NEEDS (not wants) of millions of Americans are not satisfied. What happened to our great country of justice for all?

For those with an interest in moral philosophy, note that Gandhi said "Wealth without work" is one of the 7 DEADLY SOCIAL Sins. I think Buffett advocates taxing income from wealth at the same rate as income from work. In my humble opinion, this is only fair, & consistent with Gandhi's philosophy. For those interested in Christian theology, consider God's revelation of his social wisdom to the OT prophets, i.e.in peaceful & just societies, ALL citizens will flourish. Faith in God's social wisdom, is reaffirmed by the Gospel of Luke, which characterizes Jesus as a "true prophet", who brings Good News to the poor. According to Nicholas Wolterstorff in "Justice", Buffett & Obama seek economic justice, so that ALL may flourish. This is not "Class Warfare', according to Yale Law Professors, Bruce Ackerman & Anne Alstott, in the Huffington Post. In short, I trust the wisdom of Warren Buffett.

According to 5/7 NYT article, the Justice Dept. is growing increasingly interested in their ongoing investigation of Mr. Cohen's SAC. Difficult to explain extraordinary performance (e.g. B. Madoff), in the absence of "any identifiable special sauce". Mr. Holder, please call Patrick Fitzgerald or Elliott Spitzer.

This is the litigation I discussed under "Fooling Some of the People". I do not believe David Einhorn is involved.

Rabbitisrich is right, Einhorn's comments were published in 2007 (original book date). Einhorn describes 3 companies (Fairfax,Overstock, & Biovail) as "questionable", because they took aggressive actions against their critics e.g. short-sellers. Einhorn may have been right about Biovail, I think it settled w/SEC by paying a fine, & may have been acquired "on the cheap" by another drug company.Overstock is currently an investment of Fairfax & Francis Chou. I think Fairfax's "aggressive action" is the filing of a $6 billion lawsuit against the short-sellers in NJ state court (see Fairfax press release dated 7/26/06). It is my understanding this stock manipulation litigation is ongoing. So Einhorn's intuition concerning Fairfax may have been misguided. I recommend reading the Fairfax pleading. If true, the prominent hedge fund defendants are the "questionable" companies.On 12/1610 Overstock sought to amend its lawsuit (commenced 2/07) against naked short-sellers to assert RICO claims, much like Fairfield. Chou & Watsa must have confidence in the merits of this litigation.

Just due diligence for my Fairfax investment. I heard Einhorn's 11/28/07 presentation on Lehman, so he has my respect.

Why does David Einhorn call Fairfax a "questionable company" at page 355 of his updated book?