invite response« First « Previous Comments 14 - 53 of 53 Search these comments
curious2
2013 Jan 21, 7:01am
Rentier Crony Crapitalist
The thing is, he wasn't always that way. His early success may have been luck, but the crony capitalism didn't start until much later, maybe TARP.
Rentier Crony Crapitalist
The thing is, he wasn't always that way. His early success may have been luck, but the crony capitalism didn't start until much later, maybe TARP.
marcus
2013 Jan 21, 7:43am
Spoken by a true bigoted hateful racist wind bag! Jeez. What is wrong with you?
I may soon have to put you on ignore. But for now I just want to bring to your attention the fact that the conjunction for "you are" is you're.
Yes, he is a communist and not only that, but a member of nomenklatura. It's a parallel universe!
curious2
2013 Jan 21, 7:58am
Interesting article, though it doesn't allege crony capitalism. It alleges he got away with manipulating the silver market, but it doesn't say how.
The Hunt brothers tried to corner the silver market in the 1970s. They lost billions, and Nelson Bunker Hunt filed bankruptcy. Asked how it felt to lose so much, he famously replied, "A billion dollars isn't what it used to be."
If Warren Buffett did corner part of the silver market, the question would become how did he succeed where others failed?
curious2
2013 Jan 21, 7:59am
I may soon have to put you on ignore.
Don't worry Thedaytoday, he "Ignores" dozens of people. The creepy part is when he opens a separate browser to stalk us while pretending to ignore us. It's not you, it's him.
Is Warren Buffet a communist ?
WB knew how to make money for his investors, but doesnt know what to do with his own billions... so instead of creating a diversified method of donating his billions he throws it all away into wasteful medical research. Lots of money into a narrow industry.
Bill Gates and Warren Buffet aren't very bright when it comes to spending their own wealth. In some ways very poor capitalists.
In contrast.. Howard Hughes Billions continued to be active in investing in our nations economy various industries and employing millions of people after he died... Airlines/Aerospace, Hotels/Casinos , Medical Research, Entertainment/Film, Oil drilling/refinement, Govt projects and other ventures.
curious2
2013 Jan 21, 2:35pm
Warren Buffet....Howard Hughes....
thomaswong, when you get it wrong, you really get it wrong. Warren Buffett (note spelling) is donating most of his money to the Gates Foundation, and some to his own kids' foundations, but most of those donations go towards other things and only a too small fraction goes to medical research.
In contrast, Howard Hughes donated Hughes Aircraft to the Howard Hughes Medical Institute. He died childless and intestate, and his estate passed to cousins.
Is Warren Buffet a communist ?
WB knew how to make money for his investors, but doesnt know what to do with his own billions... so instead of creating a diversified method of donating his billions he throws it all away into wasteful medical research. Lots of money into a narrow industry.
Bill Gates and Warren Buffet aren't very bright when it comes to spending their own wealth. In some ways very poor capitalists.
In contrast.. Howard Hughes Billions continued to be active in investing in our nations economy various industries and employing millions of people after he died... Airlines/Aerospace, Hotels/Casinos , Medical Research, Entertainment/Film, Oil drilling/refinement, Govt projects and other ventures.
Please enlighten us on the good that you're going to do with your billions.
thomaswong, when you get it wrong, you really get it wrong. Warren Buffett (note spelling) is donating most of his money to the Gates Foundation
like i said warren buffett and bill gates (foundation) are not that brilliant with their own money. That kind of money could fuel many new multiple industries which in turn fuel economic growth for many more.
Of course the libs dont believe in trickle down economics... but they do happen and can be successful...
Please enlighten us on the good that you're going to do with your billions.
Gates wealth are around $66B.. Buffett would be additonal 44B or so.. Give jackass like you new jobs creating new industries... create new companies, build new facilities including mfg, employ workers, provide for on the job training etc etc etc.
Show a man how to fish !
Cool, when do you start investing your billions? Obviously you're an expert on how to spend billions of dollars.
Tenpoundbass
2013 Jan 21, 10:42pm
Warren Buffett (note spelling) is donating most of his money to the Gates Foundation, and some to his own kids' foundations, but most of those donations go towards other things and only a too small fraction goes to medical research.
Just because some well intentioned philanthropist, donates gobs of money to an organization that has high administrative costs, does not mean he did the most good with that money. Howard unlike Warren, was the man in charge of all of his ventures. He didn't throw his checkbook out there and hoped for the best. These times are the WORST of times to be donating money to a charity. Most all Charities have a guy at the top pulling in large corporation CEO salaries. Money is wasted or squandered because they are not for profit. So they have to spend the money they take in. Most of that money goes to paying salaries. Only a small fraction actually goes to a small starving child in Ethiopia.
If Warren buffet wanted to impress me, he should buy up large swaths of property in our inner city projects and slums, tear them down and build luxury highrises where he would then let people there live rent free.
curious2
2013 Jan 21, 11:30pm
If Warren buffet wanted to impress me, he should buy up large swaths of property in our inner city projects and slums, tear them down and build luxury highrises where he would then let people there live rent free.
That would impress me also. But still I would have suggested medical research or other research, e.g. the world really needs a better battery. Then we could say, "This technology that helps everyone is here because this philanthropist made it possible." I am not very impressed with people who think "charity" means giving $$$ to brutal kleptocracies in Africa. Haiti gets more foreign aid per capita than any other country in the world, every year, decade after decade, yet the children are literally eating dirt to stave off the pain of hunger. People who throw money at those places, and feel good about it, don't really understand those places. Charity begins at home, and there are many worthwhile projects in America that need funding, so I do wish that American philanthropists would devote more of their attention to this country which is what enabled them to get rich in the first place.
tatupu70
2013 Jan 21, 11:47pm
These times are the WORST of times to be donating money to a charity. Most all
Charities have a guy at the top pulling in large corporation CEO salaries. Money
is wasted or squandered because they are not for profit. So they have to spend
the money they take in. Most of that money goes to paying salaries. Only a small
fraction actually goes to a small starving child in Ethiopia.
Do you even read the BS that you post? Is your position that the Gates foundation was set up by Bill Gates to enrich himself? Really?
Only on pat.net does someone who:
1. lives a ridiculously humble lifestyle (no expensive house, no expensive care, in Omaha, NE)
2. Promises to give almost his entire fortune to charity
3. Fights to raise taxes on himself and other billionaires to try to reduce wealth disparity
get riduculed as a crony capitalist. I'm sure he's not perfect, but Jesus Christ.
He's not giving his all his money to the "right" charity??? That's the best you've got?? How about you just say thank you, I wish I could give that much to charity.
FuckTheMainstreamMedia
2013 Jan 22, 12:01am
Andrew Carnegie and John Rockefeller gave all their money away too, but were gigantic A-holes who stomped mud holes in their competition while they were alive.
Just cause Buffett gives away his money at the end of life doesn't mean he wasn an unethical ass in the business world.
Tenpoundbass
2013 Jan 22, 12:09am
He's not giving his all his money to the "right" charity??? That's the best you've got?? How about you just say thank you, I wish I could give that much to charity
He gave it Bill Gates so he can add Whale sound effects to go with the colored lights in his $1,000,000 swimming pool.
tatupu70
2013 Jan 22, 12:11am
Just cause Buffett gives away his money at the end of life doesn't mean he
wasn an unethical ass in the business world.
Sure--I think he can be safely judged by his behavior.
tatupu70
2013 Jan 22, 12:13am
He gave it Bill Gates so he can add Whale sound effects to go with the
colored lights in his $1,000,000 swimming pool.
OK--as long as you are giving up any pretence of actually trying to make a point.
Tenpoundbass
2013 Jan 22, 12:18am
No I'm just putting it in perspective, while we're talking about two guys that each have more money than the Roman Catholic Church and State of Israel combined, are now giving money to charities. At the same time they are getting older and their Mortality is nagging them, that there, just might be GOD and all that.
Cool, when do you start investing your billions? Obviously you're an expert on how to spend billions of dollars.
you can hire VCs to do that as well.. either way your fueling growth into the economy
instead of creating dead wealth... true capitalist know how to do this.
Im not worried about my soul in the afterlife. Bill Gates and Warren are...
Cool, when do you start investing your billions? Obviously you're an expert on how to spend billions of dollars.
you can hire VCs to do that as well.. either way your fueling growth into the economy
No, I can't, because I don't have billions of dollars. Apparently you do, so I'm still wondering how you're going to invest your billions.
instead of creating dead wealth... true capitalist know how to do this.
Ok.
Im not worried about my soul in the afterlife. Bill Gates and Warren are...
Bill Gates and Warren Buffett are agnostic and atheist, respectively, so I doubt it. They're both pretty open about why they're doing what they're doing: They can't take it with them, their kids don't need that much money, and nobody else is doing it.
Bill Gates and Warren Buffett are agnostic and atheist, respectively, so I doubt it.
they worship themselves...
They seem like people who are trying to do something good. I don't understand why morons need to shit on that. There's nothing wrong with wanting to cure malaria.
Please enlighten us on the good that you're going to do with your billions.
I'd keep all of it invested in productive companies, which in turn raises the standard of living for everyone, provides high paying jobs, etc...
You can't have capitalism without the capital.
tatupu70
2013 Jan 22, 8:31pm
You can't have capitalism without the capital.
And capital sits idle when there is no demand.
They seem like people who are trying to do something good. I don't understand why morons need to shit on that. There's nothing wrong with wanting to cure malaria.
If it is possible to manage any non-profit business in a semi-efficient way, these guys are right for the job.
However, there is finite resources in this world. The profit/loss feedback mechanism within a free market has proven to be the most efficient way to allocate our worlds resources, by far.
Charities are almost always wasteful, and often self-indulgent power trips for those who are powerful enough to start them.
That is why people shit on gates and buffet.
lostand confused
2013 Jan 22, 8:53pm
you can hire VCs to do that as well.. either way your fueling growth into the
economy
instead of creating dead wealth... true capitalist know how to do
this.
Im not worried about my soul in the afterlife. Bill Gates and Warren
are...
So now it is not enough to tax rich people, the rest of us get to tell them how to spend their after tax income too?? He could roll up all his money and smoke 100 dollar bills for all I care.
A true capitalist enjoys his wealth as he/she sees fit. They already made their fortunes and are spending it the way they want. That is all that matters in a free country.
tatupu70
2013 Jan 22, 9:11pm
Charities are almost always wasteful, and often self-indulgent power trips
for those who are powerful enough to start them.
That is why people shit on gates and buffet.
So, your argument is that because some charities are unreputable, Gates and Buffett shouldn't give their money away? Pretty weak.
If you have something showing that the Gates Foundation is wasteful, then we can talk.
tatupu70
2013 Jan 22, 9:13pm
That is why people shit on gates and buffet.
And no, people shit on Gates and Buffett for many reasons--mostly political, IMO--but giving their money to charity can't be the main reason.
However, there is finite resources in this world. The profit/loss feedback mechanism within a free market has proven to be the most efficient way to allocate our worlds resources, by far.
Says the guy who grows up without having to worry about dying from malaria or starving to death. Or being killed in a civil war. Or being mutilated by a military dictatorship.
These guys have forgotten more about making money and being successful than you'll ever know. The gates foundation is addressing problems that capitalism has completely failed at for over 70 years.
CBOEtrader
2013 Jan 23, 3:07am
BTW, mrobmoore is me guys. As you can see from my 6 comments, I don't use it to flame or influence discussions-- simply had myself logged in from that account on my cell.
Anyways...
That is why people shit on gates and buffet.
And no, people shit on Gates and Buffett for many reasons--mostly political, IMO--but giving their money to charity can't be the main reason.
Of course. I was answering a question regarding specifically why people shit on their charity aspirations.
So, your argument is that because some charities are unreputable, Gates and Buffett shouldn't give their money away? Pretty weak.
I made no comment about reputation. I am specifically saying it is near impossible to run an efficient organization without a profit/loss feedback system. Therefore, charities, almost by definition, reduce the size of our world's economic output and lower the worldwide standard of living.
Says the guy who grows up without having to worry about dying from malaria or starving to death. Or being killed in a civil war. Or being mutilated by a military dictatorship.
What does this have to do with the discussion?
These guys have forgotten more about making money and being successful than you'll ever know.
Probably, yes. Your point?
The gates foundation is addressing problems that capitalism has completely failed at for over 70 years.
You confuse the terms free-market with capitalism. They are very different concepts.
The poor 3rd world chaps you refer to in your first paragraph have very little access to a free-market economic system. The most well-off populations of the world have greater access to economic free-markets.
The free-market literally saves lives.
Has it occurred to you that we benefit from the free market here BECAUSE we exploit the non free market in poor countries?
All that matters here is results. If a free market only benefits 20% of the population, it isn't working well enough. That's where people like gates come in.
tatupu70
2013 Jan 23, 3:46am
I am specifically saying it is near impossible to run an efficient organization
without a profit/loss feedback system. Therefore, charities, almost by
definition, reduce the size of our world's economic output and lower the
worldwide standard of living.
Yes and no. Charities should be subject to the same feedback loop as businesses--if they waste donations and are poorly run, then people will stop giving. Directly analagous to people voting with their pocketbook. It's not a pure profit/loss in the strictest sense, but it is free market at work.
If information flow is poor, then that feedback loop might break down, but that's a problem with all free markets.
CBOEtrader
2013 Jan 23, 3:53am
Has it occurred to you that we benefit from the free market here BECAUSE we exploit the non free market in poor countries?
You talk about the free market as if its some sort of political boogey man. Again, do you have a point? No system has ever been a purely free market, and the world will always have problems.
"If a free market only benefits 20% of the population, it isn't working well enough." Straw man. The free market part of our economy does help the masses.
curious2
2013 Jan 23, 3:57am
In defense of the Gates Foundation, if they succeed in eradicating polio, it will be a great victory for humanity. Unfortunately they did encounter a setback recently.
Sometimes charitable foundations and governments can succeed where the market would not. Medical research towards cheaper solutions (e.g. vaccines) and campaigns to eradicate diseases (guinea worm) can bring huge benefit, but aren't usually profitable. Also the British NHS does a better job for less money than the American system, which will actually get even more expensive (and worse) with Obamacare. Look at the history of New York: the free market brought profitable ferry service across the East River and the Hudson River, then government brought bridges and tunnels, which helped the whole region.
CBOEtrader
2013 Jan 23, 4:09am
Government is a tool to do together, things we can't do better individually. National defense is most likely one of those things. Road building may be another. Perhaps researching cures for rare diseases is yet another.
Look at the history of New York: the free market brought profitable ferry service across the East River and the Hudson River, then government brought bridges and tunnels, which helped the whole region.
1) What about the wasteful administrative costs and roads to nowhere that governments have built? 2) How much value would have been foregone to let the free market find its own solution to this opportunity?
Even in your cherry picked government example, I'd bet #2 is less costly to society that #1.
curious2
2013 Jan 23, 4:40am
1) What about the wasteful administrative costs and roads to nowhere that governments have built? 2) How much value would have been foregone to let the free market find its own solution to this opportunity?
#1 is a significant cost, particularly where federal subsidies are involved, but at least at the local level bridges seem to be among the things that governments do well. Even at the federal level, #1 didn't become such a problem until comparatively recently. The SF Bay Bridge might never have happened without the support of President Hoover; most people said it wasn't feasible, but as an engineer he insisted it was, and the bridge toll paid for the whole project.
« First « Previous Comments 14 - 53 of 53 Search these comments
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/buffett-us-debt-on-its-own-not-a-problem-2013-01-20?link=MW_story_popular
Note: that's not 50K per household, it's 50K per person.
Later he says:
Vote: Is Buffet a communist ?