Liberty

Perfect wording! We should endeavor to always communicate like this, good sir!

They're are plenty of homes, people are just speculating...buying 2nd and 3rd properties Yes, there's more condos being built in toronto than in the rest of north-america combined IIRC. Prices aren't high because of a lack of supply, it's a sentiment thing.

Some stats here: http://www.nerdwallet.com/blog/credit-card-data/credit-card-transaction-volume-statistics/ http://assets.nerdwallet.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/transaction-volume-2006-2010.jpg http://assets.nerdwallet.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/spend-by-network-2006-20101.jpg

It's really annoying. They're basically just trying to fill whatever boxes are empty in their spreadsheet models, trying to come up with their EPS target for the next quarter... Every time someone asks about long-term strategy, competitive advantages, etc, I almost fall out of my chair..

I also only get cashback cards. Thanks for pointing out the Amazon one. The canadian version has 2% cashback, not 3%, but I buy enough books and other stuff there that it's probably worth getting over time. There's also a 25$ gift certificate when you sign up.

Thank you, much appreciated!

Real value investing histpers only follow Ben Franklin, he's the OG.

It's the first I hear about this no-limit thing. Must be a specific kind of AMEX and not all of them. Couldn't find an answer googling quickly, but this seems to imply that there is a limit: http://about.americanexpress.com/cr/pb5.aspx But my understanding was that AMEX was the one actually lending you the money, while Visa and Mastercard are more payment processors and it's the issuing banks (Bank of America, etc) that take the risk with lending. If that's correct, it makes a lot of sense for AMEX to be a lot more careful about who it lends to.

I didn't realize those were the only two choices. Well, that explains it! :D

You know Buffett is big when he even has Buffett-hipsters who have to publicly complain about people liking him too much ;)

That's the funniest thing about a non-funny subject that I've read in a while :D

Exactly. that's what I was saying here: http://www.cornerofberkshireandfairfax.ca/forum/general-discussion/john-malone-gets-hit-by-the-proverbial-bus/msg188140/#msg188140 But your version is more concise.

Exactly, they target the higher-end customers and put barriers up to keep lower-end ones away (one goes with the other -- harder to target higher-end if they see every schmuck with one). Hence, most of their customers are higher-end and spend more, but they have fewer customers than VISA and Mastercard.

So I was re-reading Buffett's 1991 Notre Dame speech and thought this part was interesting for this discussion:

Buffett makes more than one kind of investment. When he invested in Capital Cities, it was definitely a bet on Murphy, and I'm not sure if he ever invested in Teledyne, but I'm pretty sure that Buffett thought the main thing that made Teledyne likely to overperform was the capital allocation skills of Singleton. Heck, a lot of his insurance stuff is likely a bet on Ajit Jain... The businesses also have to be good - an the Malone businesses are - but sometimes the thing that actually seals the deal and makes you buy is the jockey.

As Alice Schroeder said, Buffett is very literal when he speaks. I think he means it when he says that you don't need to be super smart to be a good investor. That's literally what he means. A good investor. But to be like him? (a lot more than just a good investor) Yeah, you have to be really really smart, basically. Being really really smart doesn't necessarily mean doing complicated things all the time, but smart people know that simple doesn't mean easy. The rest (when they talk about themselves) is just humility, and possibly Buffett underestimating himself because he is so monomaniacal while most other smart people know about more fields (like Munger, who Buffett no doubts admire for knowing about a more varied range of topics than he does).

You scared me with that title (from the forum hub page all that was visible was " Re: John Malone gets hit...") :-\ I suggest you start it with "What if...".

Got my copy. Looking forward to reading it.

The Secrets of Berkshire Hathaway’s Success: An Interview with Charlie Munger http://blogs.wsj.com/moneybeat/2014/09/12/the-secrets-of-berkshire-hathaways-success-an-interview-with-charlie-munger/

The question is, what are those future cash flows? Do you think Tesla will be a "car company that sells to small niche consumers" in 5 or 10 years? What if they have a big energy business? What if they sell technology in partnerships with Toyota, Daimler, VW, etc? What if they keep building more Gigafactories and become the low cost suppliers to the whole car industry + energy storage industry? What if the Model 3 second generation is less than $30k and they sell a million+ units a year? What if Tesla's electric cars can sustain much higher margins than even luxury traditional gas vehicles because of fundamental technological differences? I'm not making predictions, I'm just saying that "valuing on future cash flows" means nothing unless you know what these cash flows are, and I don't think the bears know much more than the bulls. I have no horse in this race. All I know is I would never bet against Elon Musk on anything, ever.

To be clear, that's not what I was saying. I didn't mean that it's literally impossible to find a country anywhere that has a lower tax rate than you do. Just to be competitive with most of the countries that are comparable. Territorial rather than worldwide taxes, fewer loopholes/exemptions (more of a flat tax rate, in other words), and a rate that is closer to Canada, the UK, the Netherlands, etc, would be a good start. I bet that if you do that, any money you lose from the companies that are currently paying the full rate would be more than offset from all those who won't redomicile elsewhere, from trillions in cash that would come back to the US and be invested there (which are now kept away to avoid double-taxation), and from corps paying very low rates being brought up to the new statutory rate. Right now the system has incentives for companies to create jobs and invest elsewhere, domicile elsewhere, and lobby for exemptions/loopholes. Not exactly a fair or effective system. This has nothing to do with paying for infrastructure or whatever. A better system could probably gross more tax revenue and boost overall economic health.

Convenient, that, given that he’d be giving himself and Buffett a massive tax cut. Sometimes the best thing to do is also convenient for you. That doesn't make it wrong. It's not because a pot smoker says the war on drugs should end that it's a bad idea. I think the idea should be looked at on its merit. I think there's a lot of merit to the US having a corporate tax rate that is at least competitive with the rest of the world. You can't have a significantly higher rate with a worldwide taxation regime and then complain when businesses want to move elsewhere, in the same way that businesses moving between different US states isn't morally wrong. I think there's a lot of merit to most US corporations paying a similar rate rather than some businesses paying over 30% and others paying in the teens because of various industry-specific loopholes and tax breaks. That seems a lot fairer than the current system.

Embrace Kindle! Reduce Clutter! Not a bad idea. I read about half/half on iPad vs dead tree. Maybe someday I'll switch entirely, but some books I still prefer on paper. I'm not entirely sure why.

Amazon is taking its sweet time sending me my copy. I'm guessing the publisher is part of Hachette... :-\

http://brooklyninvestor.blogspot.ca/2014/09/buffett-on-market-valuation.html