Interesting Article on Warren Buffett and his views on gun control

[Hokie_PhD]

I think this is a great article that gives some insight into Warren Buffett and those who want to destroy our 2nd Amendment rights.

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/05/05/warrent-buffett-doubles-down-on-doing-business-with-gun-owners.html

If this isn't the right forum please move. But I think discussing this and how they anti's responded to him offer us some things to discuss and to help us think up ways to respond to them.

Also, I while I disagree with Buffett's personal views, I'm 100% with him on his approach and views on not forcing his on others. Something those who are criticizing him don't get.

So thoughts?

 

[Hasaf]

As he has aged, I find that Warren Buffet has become remarkably principled. That does not mean that I agree with his principles; but it is interesting that he has started to demonstrate his. I certainly agree that it is not proper for large financial firms to use their power to force others to agree, or at least pay lip-service to their principles. Instead to behave benignly as they capture so much public and private power. They certain could turn their poser over society to malice. Mr. Buffet seems to be be trying to avoid that very path.

In find the ending statement:

However, not everyone was so supportive of Buffett's response. "I don't agree with that," said Catherine Keane, a 67-year-old shareholder attending her first annual meeting. "I don't think profit justifies endangering an innocent life."

A bit odd. It may be that they had trouble finding anyone else to take a contrary position; however, I cannot equate the decision to not force Mr. Buffets political positions on the unwilling as equating, "endangering an innocent life."

In all, I am glad to see that Mr. Buffet has grown. I think the World Financial Crisis was a powerful wake up bell to Mr. Buffet in regard to the power of global financial firms to act in ways that do not benefit the people; the same people that charter those very corporations and give them to power that they wield.

 

[AlexanderA]

One share of Berkshire Hathaway Class A stock is $293,700 -- and it doesn't pay dividends. Since this is unreasonable as an investment vehicle, who cares what "The Sage of Omaha" thinks?

 

[Hokie_PhD]

One share of Berkshire Hathaway Class A stock is $293,700 -- and it doesn't pay dividends. Since this is unreasonable as an investment vehicle, who cares what "The Sage of Omaha" thinks?

Because there are a large number of people who care what he thinks and either do what he says or what he does.
So we may or may not agree with him or what he does we need to understand it if it's things that impact us.

I also found this interesting as it showed the intolerance of those who want to remove our 2nd Amendment rights. The comment about endangering an "innocent life" is rhetoric and the nonsense that we fight. It's problematic on so many levels that it makes it hard to fight even though we know that any argument against it is good enough, let alone all of them.

I think I'm at the point that I'm simply going to say ENOUGH. I'm not willing to give up any of my freedom and liberty.

I say this as earlier today that Delaware and a few other Mid Atlantic states are looking into forcing us to have devices in our vehicles that determine how much we drive so that they can tax us to pay for roads. Now, I know it's not a 2nd Amendment issue but it is another example of how all of our freedoms are under attack be it 1st Amendment, 2nd Amendment and now the 4th (aka the right to privacy). Hence why the 2nd is growing in importance as it's the only one that protects the others.

 

[SKILCZ]

Because there are a large number of people who care what he thinks and either do what he says or what he does.
So we may or may not agree with him or what he does we need to understand it if it's things that impact us.

I also found this interesting as it showed the intolerance of those who want to remove our 2nd Amendment rights. The comment about endangering an "innocent life" is rhetoric and the nonsense that we fight. It's problematic on so many levels that it makes it hard to fight even though we know that any argument against it is good enough, let alone all of them.

I think I'm at the point that I'm simply going to say ENOUGH. I'm not willing to give up any of my freedom and liberty.

I say this as earlier today that Delaware and a few other Mid Atlantic states are looking into forcing us to have devices in our vehicles that determine how much we drive so that they can tax us to pay for roads. Now, I know it's not a 2nd Amendment issue but it is another example of how all of our freedoms are under attack be it 1st Amendment, 2nd Amendment and now the 4th (aka the right to privacy). Hence why the 2nd is growing in importance as it's the only one that protects the others.

The modern day left resembles a dictatorship and seeks to suppress all free speech, liberty, and free thought that is not in line with their political ideology. They indoctrinate children from grade school through university and all the while bathe them in leftist media propaganda. Modern-day young adults are insulated from opposing viewpoints in "safe spaces" from infancy through adulthood. If you think the "wrong way," or--even worse, in their eyes--think the "wrong way" for your demographics, then you must be silenced, unfunded, attacked from all angles, and publicly shamed. The only hope for the liberty of ALL Americans, left or right, of any demographic groups, to be free to express their views, be armed, practice a religion of their choosing, etc. rests on the younger people eventually "seeing the light" of liberty and its benefits for ALL.

 

[GEM]

Can we stay on Warren? General Jeremiahs about this and that - off topic.

 

[SharpDog]

Can we stay on Warren? General Jeremiahs about this and that - off topic.

There's a General Jeremiah ?

Just teasing

Anyways, I recently started working for a BH company. We had a company-provided lunch recently to celebrate the retirement of a VP.

They said grace before lunch was served.

I was pleasantly surprised, especially since the dept. I work for is 90% H1-B visa workers (I don't believe they're Christian though, but I never asked, The rest of the company is not H1-B).

Let's let all of that sink in, I'm still processing it.

BTW, they're ALL the nicest folks.

 

[627PCFan]

I heard ."I don't agree but they (gunowners) money is good enough for me"

 

[theotherwaldo]

Mr. Buffett knows the goals of his true enemies.
Today they want to take away the guns that they think that you shouldn't have.
Tomorrow they will want to take away your "excess" money, land and resources... and so much for Berkshire Hathaway.

 

[ontarget]

Whatever his motives are, I'm glad to hear that he doesn't want to "pile on" with the rest of the financial powerhouses against us.

 

[CoalTrain49]

I don't follow BH or Warren Buffet. He does seem to have a knack for buying stock in the right companies though.

What I find interesting is the idea of companies playing politics and people supporting their politics. I don't subscribe to that. For me it's like not buying a rifle that I want because it wasn't made in this country. I own several Howa rifles that were made in Japan, so what. If Remington could build the same rifle at the same price I would have one, but they can't. They can barely stay in business.

In the case of BH, if stock holders don't like the fact that they own a percentage of Ruger then they are free to sell BH stock and by something else. Warren understands what he does. He makes money for himself and other people by buying stock in companies that he thinks will perform well. He's not a bad guy and neither is his company BH.

In an interview on "Squawk Box," the billionaire investor said health-care spending is a "tapeworm on the economic system." He said the private sector can do more to lower health-care costs than the government can.

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/02/26/buf...ger-than-shaving-a-few-percent-off-costs.html

 

[ATLDave]

I find it ironic that, at this particular moment in history, the left-leaning populace is in love with the idea of corporate overlords dictating access to individual rights. Blows my mind, frankly. All because the media has that populace so whipped up over the evils of GUNZ that they cannot see where it goes from here... small numbers of global investors and bankers deciding, by fiat, which industries should be allowed to exist. Youtube and a handful of other carriers of content being allowed to pick and choose what thoughts and speech are acceptable. Government is scary, but at least you get a vote. The left is frustrated by their inability to get everything they want via government action, so when the corporate overlords offer to deliver a small bit of what they're seeking, they are very eager to allow them to exercise the kind of plutocratic societal control that used to be the main concern of the left!

 

[bassjam]

Warren Buffet is an interesting guy. He leans to the left on many issues, but at the end of the day he's all about making money and has no problem turning a blind eye to things he doesn't agree with as long as it will increase his wealth.

He’s been very outspoken in the past about his beliefs that the wealthy should pay more in taxes, yet when tax season comes around he still uses every law and loophole to his advantage to pay the least amount of taxes possible.

It seems he's no different with guns. He's not going to risk losing a few bucks just to make a political statement.

What I find fascinating about all of this, is that he's beyond wealthy. He could have retired long ago and still continued to be one of the richest men alive, and he doesn't seem that big on owning material things. Yet he still goes to work every day, chasing those dollars.

 

[Swifty Morgan]

When I was in law school taking my trusts and estates class, my prof (a weak Republican) told us the public policy reasons that were used to justify the death tax. One was that there was a danger that an extremely wealthy person might have too much power over the rest of us. By ripping off people's estates, the government minimized the number of individuals who rivaled its power.

I thought this was a stupid justification (and a cover for envy and class warfare), but now we are seeing large corporations that work to strip us of our civil rights through anti-gun coercion. So the concern about private entities having too much power has been vindicated to some extent.

I'm still against the death tax, but as power becomes more consolidated in the hands of a few bullying corporations, I am starting to think we need some sort of check on corporate power, beyond anti-trust laws.

Buffett is smart not to get too big for his britches. When you have dozens of billions of dollars, you have to be careful not to scare or anger the people who make you rich.

 

[Machine Shop Dude]

Pretty much its a rich against the poor, think Nazi and French revolution, and the most important serfdom. The poor meaning you and every other person not in their circle pose no true threat in their "natural" unarmed state. If one owns a gun it is not the threat of violence that they are concerned with its the ideology it represents and the means it empowers the common man to resist.

 

[roval]

One share of Berkshire Hathaway Class A stock is $293,700 -- and it doesn't pay dividends. Since this is unreasonable as an investment vehicle, who cares what "The Sage of Omaha" thinks?

so long as he can deploy for every dollar of retained earnings to return more than a dollar value in intrinsic value he will continue to hold off on dividends.. Class a shares can easily be converted to b shares and smaller amounts sold off for cash. the increase in share values by retaining the earnings and allocating them leads to less taxes for rhe shareholders(most of whom are less interested in dividends as compared to an overall increase in value of their shares) as well.(as mentioned they can liquidate some of their positions to generate cash as the shares increase in value due to the retention and reallocation of the earnings rather than just giving it out as dividends) they previously put this to a vote and overwhelmingly shareholders voted to hold off on dividends.

I'll get off my soapbox now but to each his own.

i agree with his statement that he is not the nanny of his roughly million sharehders and that it is not up to BH to enforce his beliefs.

 

[somethingbenign]

He is local to me. Apparently he drives and nice but older car and isn't known to be flamboyant with his wealth. Most here respect him for that. Every year the shareholders come in for a week for their annual meeting. Act like they are big cheese and are rude to all the locals. A group went so far as to insist my wife owed them "some local action" for some reason or another. We don't respect the shareholders. To keep it firearm related the show of force at the meeting is terrific and really puts into to perspective the lengths people will go to to protect a wealth generator.

 

[Robert]

Y'all seem to want to talk more about how the company does business than about guns. And since this is not a financial forum, we are done.