handycap5

I have really found this book interesting and recommend it to others. I am "reading" it via audio book and it is easy enough to follow. The book was written before October 7th. But I think it has a lot of explanatory power for what we have seen over the last year. Frankly, I feel my time has been a lot better spent understanding the long-term historical context then the play-by-play of the moment. For instance, I had forgotten that it was Stalin via the Czechs that armed the future Israelis in 1948 when the US and the UK would not. The other big surprise for me was how much I learned about domestic American history, particularly political history. The "Israel lens" is perfect tool to tease apart a lot of long-term American political trends. I particularly found interesting how the issue of Israel was a critical domestic talisman that helped cement an awkward Republican Sunbelt coalition. Enjoy! https://www.amazon.com/Arc-Covenant-United-States-Israel/dp/0375414045 For many decades now, a supposed mystery has lurked at the heart of American foreign policy: Why has the United States supported Israel so staunchly and for so long, especially when doing so seems to come at a high cost in blood, treasure and world opinion? Attempts to solve this mystery — a puzzle that particularly confuses foreigners, isolationists and some realist foreign-policy scholars — have given rise to a lot of ugly conspiracy theories over the years, as well as a great many books. So it takes a certain chutzpah to wade back into the fray, given both how fraught the topic is and how far down the list of Washington’s priorities Israel has seemingly fallen. Yet that’s just where Walter Russell Mead — a scholar, author and Wall Street Journal columnist — goes in his new book, “The Arc of a Covenant.” Not one to shy from a challenge, Mead raises the problem in his opening pages, when he writes: “The reader of any book is entitled to ask why it had to be written at all and, if the book absolutely had to exist, why it couldn’t have been shorter. That is particularly true when it comes to books about the U.S.- Israel relationship. There are few subjects in American foreign policy that get as much attention. … Enough books on this subject have been published to fill a respectable library; do we really need another one?” The fairest way to judge a work of scholarship or art is on its own terms. So that makes the key question for this review: Does Mead’s book pass his own test? The answer is yes, and emphatically so. To explain why, let’s start with a brief summary of some of the many things “The Arc of a Covenant” does in its 600-plus pages. Beginning with the premise that recent U.S. Middle East policies have largely failed, and largely because American discussions of those policies have been “emotionally dense but intellectually thin,” Mead seeks to highlight and correct the many myths and misapprehensions that have misled the public and professionals in the past. Convinced that U.S. policymakers would do better if only they better understood the region and its place in the American psyche (the words “understand,” “misunderstand” and their various cognates appear around 150 times in the text), Mead sets the record straight by presenting a long and nuanced alternative history of U.S.-Israel relations. Image But because Israel is so deeply embedded in America’s collective consciousness — as Mead puts it, the Jewish state is “a speck on the map of the world” that nonetheless “occupies a continent in the American mind” — and because U.S. debates about Israel often serve as proxies for larger “debates over American identity, the direction of world politics and the place that the United States should aspire to occupy in world history,” the book soon strays well beyond the confines of diplomatic history. Mead contends that we can understand past decisions only by understanding the context in which they were made, so he expands his narrative far outside this one corner of international relations. The result is less a history of U.S.-Israel policy than a sweeping and masterfully told history of U.S. foreign policy in general, as seen through the lens of the U.S.-Israel relationship. This capacious approach leads Mead into myriad digressions on topics ranging from the history of European emigration; to how the Industrial Revolution affected the Ottoman, Russian and Austrian empires; to how, in the middle of the last century, the American pastor Billy Graham broke with Protestant fundamentalism to create a new and pragmatic evangelical synthesis. Given the book’s hefty size, it’s only fair to ask whether these asides feel extraneous. Few do. Mead is so fluent on such a broad range of topics — from history to religion to policy to politics — that I learned something new from each of his detours. And he’s such a good craftsman — the prose is among the best I’ve encountered in 25 years of reviewing foreign-policy books — that when he does occasionally stray beyond the strictly necessary, it’s hard to object. Does the book really need an account of President Benjamin Harrison’s struggles to quit smoking? Probably not. But reason not the need; the inclusion of such colorful details only makes the book more vivid and enriching. Despite all the information that “The Arc of a Covenant” packs in, moreover, it never loses sight of a key argument, which is an extended attack on the “rancid urban legend” known as the Israel Lobby theory. If you’re not familiar with the phrase, it’s code for the argument — most famously put forward by the scholars John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt in their 2007 book — that America’s ongoing support for Israel makes so little strategic sense that it can only be explained by the irresistible pressure applied by the Jewish-owned media, by Jewish lobbyists, by Jewish policy wonks and by their fellow travelers on the Christian right. Of course, this theory is wrong. But the theory and its advocates — whom Mead calls “Vulcanists” for a clever reason too complicated to explain here — are still dangerous. Jew-hatred is currently surging globally, and though it’s surely not what Walt and Mearsheimer intended, Mead contends that their work has “electrified antisemites around the world” by seeming to lend “the authority of well-known academics” to this calumny. Because of the high stakes involved, Mead returns to the topic again and again throughout the book, comprehensively demolishing the libel through a sophisticated set of arguments that disprove the Vulcanists’ “Jewcentric” view of American and world affairs. He shows, among other things, the many ways (some obvious, some not) that U.S. support for Israel over the last 40 years has actually benefited America; that many pro-Israel politicians, like Donald Trump, have been loathed by the vast majority of American Jews; that Jewish-owned newspapers like this one have not always been slavishly supportive of Israeli policies; and that U.S. policy has not, in fact, always been pro-Israel: The United States didn’t start significantly arming the Jewish state until the Kennedy administration, and not until 1987 did an American president (Ronald Reagan) declare Israel a “major non-NATO ally.” Indeed, when Washington did finally start backing Jerusalem, it was because the latter had become a regional superpower without U.S. help — and America needed Israel, not the other way around. Meanwhile, even as Mead concedes that a pro-Israel lobby does exist inside the United States, he shows that it’s only one of many interest groups, and that, thanks to the structure of U.S. democracy, such lobbies succeed only when they have broad public backing. In other words, powerful lobbies depend on public opinion for their power; they don’t create that opinion. And the American public happens to be very pro-Israel — for a long list of organic reasons that have nothing to do with AIPAC, George Soros or the Sulzbergers. Ordinary Americans don’t think there’s anything strange about their country’s support for Israel; such skepticism is reserved for some coastal elites and peripheral intellectuals. Mead’s best argument against the Israel Lobby myth, though, lies in his thorough explication of the complex and sometimes surprising geopolitical, social and electoral forces that actually determine U.S. policy toward Israel. The book is at its best when showing, for example, that President Harry Truman’s grudging and limited support for Israel’s creation had little to do with Jewish pressure and everything to do with Truman’s desperate determination to keep his Democratic coalition together as he sought to shift U.S. foreign policy away from Franklin Roosevelt’s wartime pro-Soviet approach and toward confrontation with Moscow (which was still quite popular in many left-wing precincts of America). Truman, moreover, wasn’t even Israel’s primary supporter during this period: Joseph Stalin deserves far more credit for ensuring Israel came into existence and for arming it once it did. “The Arc of a Covenant” has another merit worth mentioning here: Despite its polemical power, Mead manages to keep the book’s tone high-minded and generous; when discussing his, or Israel’s, adversaries, he always strives to give everyone the benefit of the doubt. Well, almost always. No book is perfect, and “The Arc of a Covenant” is no exception. For some reason, Mead’s generosity of spirit fails him when he gets to the Obama administration, which he scornfully describes as naïve and inept — criticisms he largely spares both George W. Bush and (most mysteriously) Donald Trump, despite both presidents’ equal or greater failures. Another quibble: The book would benefit from clearer sourcing, especially when making controversial claims — such as that Trump’s Israel policy was all part of a premeditated, deliberately crafted and highly perceptive master plan. (Skim the summaries of Jared Kushner’s new book and you’ll quickly appreciate the implausibility of this claim.) Finally, at the book’s end I found myself wishing, if not for policy recommendations, then at least for predictions about where Mead thinks the U.S.-Israel relationship is headed. He’s so good at laying out the real but often-overlooked forces that shape this alliance, while puncturing the mythological ones, that I’d love to get his take on its future prospects — especially at this moment, when global politics and U.S. foreign policy are being scrambled in so many baffling ways. But I suppose that will have to wait for Mead’s next book. The good news is that, judging from the quality of this one, it’s bound to be brilliant too.

Loans outstanding went to $92 billion compared to $102 billion last year. It is worth noting that 1) the large public builders are often near net cash, 2) generating ample cash flow, 3) increasingly use options, land banking arrangements reduce the capital tied up in the production of homes. If there is an adverse impact on the FDIC loan volume statistics the FT cited, it would disproportionately fall on the non-public and smaller builders. But the advent of land banking, etc. may reduce the need for bank financing in the entire industry. So the statistics might reflect financing mix change as opposed to something more fundamental. Do others have any insight on this?

I recommend Walter Russell Mead's book The Arc of a Covenant on an exhaustive history of the European-American-Israeli foreign relations.

There is a reasonably lively thread under the DHI ticker on this website that I think can often be applied to other homebuilders as well. In my experience, 2003-2006 was a truly unique occurrence in the US housing industry. I might say "it was different that time" and now its just a more normal business in a sometimes cyclic industry with favorable medium-term supply-demand dynamics, scale advantages, etc.

I read it and liked the book. But I also think Peter's podcast style (relaxed, verbose, prone to digressions) made the book hard to follow in its totality. Has anyone found a good succinct summary of the book and the "what to do's" from it? Frankly, I would have liked the "self-help cliff notes" as an appendix.

Found that Bloomberg has a function called "redline" when you access an SEC filing under the function "CF." And Bamsec does a job if you click on "compare" when reviewing a filing. Both are pretty functional. Question answered. Problem solved.

In 2014, Todd Combs brought up the usefulness of "delta reports," which I believe are simply line-item comparisons of SEC filings. http://www.cnbc.com/id/101461797 In 2022, Todd Combs further emphasized the usefulness of these reports. https://investmentmanagementinsights.substack.com/p/graham-and-dodd-annual-breakfast So my question for the board is, what is the 1) simplest and 2) easiest way to access such comparisons of SEC filings. Is Bloomberg the best option and how does one do this? I have heard that Bamsec may also be a useful tool. I would like to avoid labor-intensive or complicated methods, such as using third-party software to compare downloaded files, such as doing a comparison in Word or using BeyondCompare from Scooter Software. Would someone who does this regularly provide advice? Thanks so much. Handy.

I am not familiar with NEAM and their relationship to Berkshire. It appears that it is 75% owned by General Re. Are the funds they manage similarly invested for Berkshire? Could you provide any more infor or direct me to where I could learn more? Thank you.

Chris Bloomstran on a recent interview put the normalized earnings power at $40 billion. Any idea of where he gets that figure?

Shane Parrish did a very interesting interview with Atul which I recommend. Also, since you mentioned the Hippocratic Oath, I can't help but think of Milton Friedman's criticism of the same (search for Oath here: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1684832/posts). I suspect the greater opportunity and greater challenge will be changing human behavior and organizations, not mining data. But maybe the latter can aid the former.

They have had some marketing setbacks. https://www.cnbc.com/2016/08/15/hedge-funder-in-hot-water-sahm-adrangi-arrested-for-dui-cocaine-possession-in-hamptons.html

I would second the request for posting (for posterity). Thanks a lot.

Could someone familiar with the St. Louis Fed website post a link to the specific report? Would be appreciated...

Highly recommend this book. One tidbit I found fascinating. When Buffett built his huge American Express position, the holders of the stock at that time did not have limited liability AND he didn't tell his partnership investors he bought it for them until year-end. Incredible self-confidence. Maybe in the grey in terms of investor communication (many of his investors at that time were not "sophisticated."), but of course it worked out.

I have an problem - just in time for earnings season! I keep a list of stocks I own in Google Finance, which on their website had past and future events for the US-listed companies. I could then "subscribe" to these events on a continual basis by adding the link to the events of my portfolio to Google Calendar. Unfortunately, Google looks like they have deprecated this feature, as the "detail pages" of my stocks no longer have upcoming events. This was the primary utility for me of using Google Calendar vs my other options, such as Outlook - so I am not happy Larry. Curses! Does anyone know of a way to easily import upcoming earnings calls, etc. into Google Calendar or Outlook?

I find it interesting that his tax cab driver example being antifragile is looking more dubious. Not critical of him or the analogy, just amazed how fast the world changes...

If anyone finds a transcript of the interview, would you please share it with the group? thanks, handy.

I recommend going to trump's website and reading the proposed policies. It is inherently a political document and not a true policy document (i.e. not a lot of math). But I was surprised how: 1) it largely conformed to standard republican pro-growth policies, and 2) it will be very stimulative in the coming years.

this is the best chart I have found on marginal tax rate for investors and those with ordinary income: https://www.jcfny.org/effective-top-marginal-income-tax-rates/ for investors, the best thinking I have found are 2 research reports which go under the name: "is your alpha big enough to cover its taxes?" the newer report also has "revisited" in the title. I recommend them to all taxable investors...

the genghis khan podcast series by hardcore history may be more accessible for those who prefer to listen rather than read...

Intelligent Investor is pretty different. Think more Security Analysis, though 1/10th as long. This is more like a You to Could Be a Stock Market Genius, folksy in style with cases. Opportunity cost depends on what you want to get out of it. This is not philosophising on investing, its examples of one successful investor's thinking on specific decisions.

The book says close to 19% pa.

Ed Wachenheim is probably the best value investor you have never heard of. He has generated returns over 25 years that are among the best of which I am aware. He has a new book that is primarily case studies of specific investments (railroads, financials, homebuilders, industrials), not much broad brush stroke investing philosophy. Think Margin of Safety or Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits, not Making of an American Capitalist. Nitty gritty (and numerical) thinking on specific investments is not for everyone - but for practitioners in this game - I think this is a highly useful read. And the book is wonderfully concise. I recommend it to you. http://www.amazon.com/Common-Stocks-Sense-Strategies-Particularly/dp/1119259606

i just calculated the total return from 12.31.29 to 12.31.54 and Bloomberg tells me it is 2.0% annualized. So pretty bad for a while....

my impression of the wholly-owned businesses (with several notable exceptions) is that they are generally average businesses run by above average managers, sometimes founders. over time, the founders or above average managers have to be replaced, and these replacements will tend to be average in my opinion. at the meeting several years ago, i was amazed how old the "scrolling heads" were on the "thank you" video. most owners i know of BRK have it as a "put away" stock - this ongoing change is glacial and hard to quantify, but would be among the factors i would consider.