Liberty

Ha! I doubt I need a book. What needs to be done is very simple and could fit in one sentence. It's the execution I have trouble with. ;) Hmm how about a support group for those with too much cash? I'm sitting at about 50% cash :-P Send it my way and I'll take care of that for you ;)

Sorry if it's a repost, but I found this by Dalio: http://www.bwater.com/Uploads/FileManager/Principles/Bridgewater-Associates-Ray-Dalio-Principles.pdf

year mean this ? http://www.amazon.com/Security-Analysis-Foreword-Buffett-Editions/dp/0071592539/ref=sr_1_2?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1348198003&sr=1-2&keywords=security+analysis+second+edition+2008 If you're thinking of getting that one, keep this in mind (I'm just cut & pasting an amazon review): "This is a re-issue of the 2nd edition in more modern form. There's no need to talk about the content and importance of this book to value-investor. But some reminder concerning this edition: 1) It is an abridged edition of the original 2nd edition (published in 1940). A total of 10 chapters have been deleted. 2) The Appendix Notes was also deleted. That's why the publisher could keep the pages at around 700+ something. 3) In compensation for the missing chapters, the publisher has attached a CD which contained the pdf format of the original 2nd edition (with 52 complete chapters as well as the Notes). I think that's really the most valuable part of this edition. That why I commented that it's a more convenient version of the 2nd edition."

I have the second edition (1940). Seemed like the 'best' one (or at least it sounded like that to me at the time) back when I researched which one I should buy, but I guess I should check out the others at some point.

I wish more financially successful people gave more money to scientific endeavors. That's definitely a great thing he did. So he deserves kudos for that.

These labels are meaningless to me. I'm whatever I am -- in practice, lefties think I'm a righty and righties think I'm a lefty. Whatever, keep 'em confused :)

Ha! I doubt I need a book. What needs to be done is very simple and could fit in one sentence. It's the execution I have trouble with. ;)

We should form a support group for the cashless... 12 steps to build up a cash cushion and all that ;)

They were real rivals who played dirty with him and did their best to keep him from the job; lots of people wouldn't have taken them onboard regardless of their talents. And there are also republicans like Gates, LaHood, etc.. who probably didn't even vote for him. My point remains that I haven't seen anything that makes me believe he isn't ready to compromise to work with the other side, but if the other side won't compromise, he can't just say "all right, you win, we'll do it exactly your way", hence the stalemate. But that's just my impression. I don't care that much about politics; it's mostly a waste of time since there's nothing I can do about it.

Hasn't Obama named most of his biggest rivals to important functions in his administration, as well as many republicans? I think he would work well with all kinds if given the chance. But for 'working with others' to work, the others also have to want to work with you at least a little. I don't think the US has got that in the current congress, mostly because republicans are all afraid to give one inch for fear of being taken out by the tea party. Not that congress democrats are super cooperative either, but if we're talking about just Obama, I never got the impression that he wouldn't compromise to get things done (but it's not a game you can play by yourself).

http://business.financialpost.com/2012/09/18/buffett-and-gatess-giving-pledge-ranks-expand-with-11-new-families/ Good news!

I don't think there's much debate to be had that both approaches can work (though it would be nice to see if the very diversified people got most of their returns from their bigger positions -- ie. I think someone like Peter Lynch had tons and tons of stocks, but some were basically just tracking positions while others represented a large fraction of his portfolio -- thats a different approach than having 100 stocks that are weighted at 1% each). The real question should be: Which approach has the most chances of improving your results? I think it depends on your temperament and your skill as an investor/how well you do your homework (which isn't the same -- if you're really good but you spend 2 hours a week on investing... well). I would guess that overall, there are probably more good investors who are hurt by diversification than vice versa, and that there are more poor investors who are hurt by concentration than vice versa.

We have a thread about the Halo Effect here: http://www.cornerofberkshireandfairfax.ca/forum/books/the-halo-effect-phil-rosenzweig/ I'm sure the Collins book is well-written and well argued, it's just that foundational premise of it is deeply flawed, as explained in the halo effect, so pretty much everything built on top of it is highly suspect.

Yeah, I'm particularly interested in 3D printing as a way to make the extracellular matrix for replacement organs that can then be seeded with your own stem cells. Then you've got an organ perfectly matched to you, no chances of it being rejected, like new!

Thanks for posting, that was a good profile and interesting glance at the life of a U.S. president. One thing I didn't really like is how Lewis kinda of implied (or maybe I just misread something) that the navigator was closer to Obama than he actually was. I mean, it's cool that this guy's story was told, but I felt a bit manipulated at the end.

[amazonsearch]Bre-X: Gold Today, Gone Tomorrow[/amazonsearch] Started this one. Wanted to know more about this historic scandal.

Finished it, and on the whole, it was better than I expected. More for entrepreneurs than investors, but a lot still applies, or at least is interesting to read about if you like that sort of thing.

Congrats NormR, that's great!

Currently, 50% of capital gains are taxed at your marginal rate, yes.

The Fed chief is nominated by the sitting president - in this case, Bernanke's term ends in Jan 2014. He was actually initially nominated by GW Bush, and Obama re-nominated him. Alan Greenspan actually served for 18 years prior to Bernanke, but the punditry speculates that Bernanke would be replaced with a R/R administration. That's true. I guess I was thinking more about addressing entitlements and dealing with the budget/taxes/etc...

That would make sense. Here in Canada we don't have that long-term/short-term capital gain stuff, so it's not something that comes to mind easily, even though I knew it applied in the US. Thanks for reminding me of it Sullivcd.

Maybe I'm just dense - sorry for asking you to explain stuff twice in a row - but what do you mean here "I've been selling it out as my positions turn long. Next long lots are November and December."?

Isn't the whole debate on "what woud obama/romney do?" a bit off, though, since the president has only limited powers when it comes to that stuff and congress has more impact in that area?

Gotcha. Out of curiosity, selling because it worked, or because it didn't?

+2