-
What Is It About Benghazi?
May 15, 2013 | 165 comments
-
The Socialist Dragon Slayer
April 9, 2013 | 42 comments
-
What Did Arafat Get for Killing U.S. Diplomats?
March 1, 2013 | 50 comments
-
Al Gore’s $500 Million Trojan Horse
February 20, 2013 | 109 comments
-
Further Reflections on Benghazi
February 18, 2013 | 73 comments
The Obama Watch
Buffett’s Blown Opportunity
The Sage of Omaha fails to urge Obama to hit the reset button.
When he visited the Oval Office last week, Warren Buffett could have done the nation (and himself as a major investor) a big favor by telling the president that it was time to pull the plug on his failed economic policies. But — sad to say — he passed up the opportunity.
Poll after poll shows deteriorating consumer confidence and a growing belief that major policy initiatives undertaken by the Obama administration have hurt the economy and have set the stage for a long-term loss of growth and national competitiveness. In late May, for instance, a Rasmussen poll of 1,000 likely voters showed a 2-to-1 majority in favor of repealing the just-passed health care bill. That included a stunning 46% of likely voters who “strongly” favored repeal, against just 25% who “strongly” opposed repeal of this landmark legislation. In a recent CBS poll, only 40% of Americans said they approved of Obama’s handling of the economy.
At the same time, major business groups — including the Business Roundtable and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce — have stepped up their criticism of the administration. Ivan Seidenberg, the CEO of Verizon and the chairman of the Roundtable, said that “by reaching into virtually every sector of economic life, government is injecting uncertainty into the marketplace and making it harder to raise capital and create new businesses.” U.S. Chamber of Commerce CEO Tom Donohue drafted an open letter to Obama and Congress urging “immediate action to address the new regulatory stranglehold placed on America’s job creators.”
In his “Recovery Tour” — talking up the allegedly beneficial effects of the $862 billion stimulus package in Holland, Michigan, last week — the president boasted, “We’re leveraging nearly three private dollars for every public dollar. That’s an incredible bang for the buck.” However, the most recent statistics from the Federal Reserve’s Flow of Fund series tell a completely different story. Rather than reinvesting in their businesses, corporations are hoarding cash and fearful of making new commitments. According to Fed statistics, cash and equivalents on nonfarm, nonfinancial corporate balance sheets have risen to a record high of $900 billion — more than double the level of 18 months ago and far above the average over the last decade and a half.
With public support for the president’s economic policies at an all-time low, Buffett did not exactly endorse Obamanomics, but he did give the president a couple of talking points that lend artificial credence to the view that everything that is wrong with today’s economy is rooted in events that occurred before the start of the Obama presidency. And the president wasted no time in taking advantage of that.
According to the president’s account of his hour-long chat with so-called “Sage of Omaha,” Buffett cited the housing market as an example of how the recession had created “a huge overhang of excess capacity” that would take months or years to “mop up.” Obama said that Buffett noted that 1.2 million new homes were built on average per year in the United States over a long period of time, and how that surged to more than 2 million during the property boom and bubble. Here are a couple of snippets from Obama’s interview on NBC News on July 15, the day after Buffett’s visit:
I’ll tell you exactly what Warren Buffett said. He said, “We went through a wrenching recession. And so we have not fully recovered. We’re about 40, 50 percent back. But we’ve still got a long way to go…”
What Warren pointed out was, look, we’re going to get back to 1.2 [i.e. 1.2 million new home starts per year]. But right now we’re soaking up a whole bunch of inventory. So a lot of the challenge is to work our way through this recession.
Perhaps Obama gets some bounce out of speaking in the same kind of business jargon that an MBA would use, while also showing himself to be on a chummy, first-name basis with the legendary investor. Nevertheless, there are several problems with the narrative cited above.
First, it is not the case that an inventory build-up in anything other than housing (the one sector of the economy that was most distorted by wrong-headed government policies) had anything to do with the financial crisis and the severe economic downturn that began in late 2008.
Second, it omits the fact that $862 billion stimulus plan has plainly failed to deliver as promised in keeping unemployment rate at 8% or less. Similarly, there is mounting evidence that Obamacare will be far more costly and cumbersome than advertised.
And third, what looked like a recovery seems to be fading and more and more people have come to the firm conclusion that the administration economic policies are doing more harm than good.
This is hardly surprising. Obama did not come to power on a tide of left-wing sentiment. The United States has been, and remains, a right-of-center country. According to Election Day exit polls, only 22% of American voters identified themselves as liberals, compared with 34% of self-described conservatives and a whopping 44% of self-described moderates. While hard-core liberals formed the base, Obama won the election on the strength of his appeal to moderates and independents as a charismatic and self-style “post-partisan” politician.
Only a small minority of voters agrees with the idea that the solution to the nation’s economic difficulties lies in a massive increase in government power through increased taxation, public spending and regulation. There has been a huge reaction against that whole line of thought among moderates and independents who, in any case, were never in favor of a massive “transformation” toward European-style socialism or statism.
With one major piece of legislation after another, the Obama administration has taken a first-things-last-approach — insisting upon rushing massive, poorly understood and hugely expensive programs through the Democratically-controlled Congress, with the idea that it could sell these programs to the people after they were already law. It has done so again with its misnamed “financial reform.”
This is all too clearly not the change that people want or believe in. It’s a shame that Warren Buffett seems not to have said as much. Then again — as a billionaire who will be soon be celebrating his 80th birthday — why should he stop to worry about the rest of us? He’s already got it made.
About the Author
Andrew B. Wilson, a frequent contributor to The American Spectator, writes from St. Louis.
Letter to the Editor View all comments (53) | Leave a comment
More Articles by Andrew B. Wilson
More Articles From The Obama Watch
http://spectator.org/archives/2010/07/23/buffetts-blown-opportunity
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
The Spectacle Blog
Former IRS Commissioner Refused to Say That Targeting Conservative Groups is Wrong
Benjamin Brophy | 2:27PM
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
Shamus| 7.23.10 @ 6:31AM
Buffett seems to think high tax rates are a good thing because they aid in wealth redistribution. This makes very little sense. It's odd that a person who understands the details of financial dealings so well would think high tax rates will help the economy.
Clinton nee Publius | 7.23.10 @ 11:19AM
That's because Warren got where he is today by being part of the elitist club of insiders. They call him the "sage of Omaha", but "insider extreme" might be a better term. Warren sees himself as the natural arbiter of financial matters in the new government that will takeover once our inconvenient democracy is destroyed.
Bill O| 7.23.10 @ 6:25PM
Moreover, Buffet is NOT effected from an INCOME tax increase because 98% of his earnings are taxed at the 15% capital gains rate. He could care less if INCOME taxes were raised to 100%. Now, if one wants to hear Buffet squeal like a pig in protest against taxes, suggest raising capital gains tax to 70%. Of course this will never happen and it should not happen. If Buffet is so big on taxes and how little he pays,why is he not willing to send 90% of his investment income to the feds?
BillW| 7.25.10 @ 6:33AM
That & the Foundations that let them shelter their money, & dole it out to whom they want to see get it, instead of the Government doing the doling out. How about the Tax breaks Yale, Harvard, etc on their Endownents.
There's more money, that will never see a Tax rate over 15%, & that money has the Leaders ears.
These Tax shelters, should be ground zero...
Thoman| 7.23.10 @ 10:22PM
Just because Buffett is a successful investor doesn't mean he know anything about how the general ecomomy works. He makes money whether other people do or not. That's his "job".
cmblake6 | 7.25.10 @ 4:36AM
Exactly, Shamus. Or perhaps he DID, but that narcissistic communist, illegal alien simply wouldn't listen? Ya think? How is it the insanely wealthy forget what it was like at the bottom?
Surfdumb| 7.25.10 @ 2:12PM
Milton Friedman Quotes -Reagan Economic Advisor: " I am in favor of cutting taxes under any circumstances and for any excuse, for any reason, whenever it's possible."
"Concentrated power is not rendered harmless by the good intentions of those who create it."
" Underlying most arguments against the free market is a lack of belief in freedom itself.
The Great Depression, like most other periods of severe unemployment, was produced by government mismanagement rather than by any inherent instability of the private economy.
The only way that has ever been discovered to have a lot of people cooperate together voluntarily is through the free market. And that's why it's so essential to preserving individual freedom."
"The most important single central fact about a free market is that no exchange takes place unless both parties benefit." ---This is what the leftists never get-prefering to use Force to Redistribute Your Wealth as They See Fit, and we pay a Huge Premium for their great wisdom and sense of 'fairness' in the spending our money 'for the collective good'. The grace commission showed that “The first 2/3 of the income tax is either wasted or lost. Of the remaining 1/3, every dime of IRS income tax goes to private lenders for interest only on the exponentially escalating national debt. Fred Durland summarizing a finding from the 1984 Private Sector Survey on Cost Control (Grace Commission) - we need a new Grace Commission, it's been 28 years since we nailed down the real costs of redistributing our wealth.
Alas, our 'Utes' never hear of men like Milton Friedman, just Keynesian hacks like Krugman. Socialists (like Hitler) loved Keynesian policies because it invariably results in more and more centralized gov't control over the economy, Keynes was, and is, the fabian socialists best friend.
“Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.” Winston Churchill
Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 7.23.10 @ 6:42AM
Warren Buffet claims the rest of us should pay higher taxes all the while kissing up to multiple politicians. Never forget that Warren Buffet is for the economy because Warren Buffet is for Warren Buffet. I'm not implying that he's greedy but his image of a laid back grandpa does not do him justice.
Your article implies that he came away empty handed from the White House and that doesn't appear to be true.
Warren Buffet is a major Goldman Sachs investor. After Buffet's visit to the White House Goldman Sachs gets off the hook for 550 million dollars, basically 4 days revenue.
The Goldman Sachs trading in mortgage derivatives probably cost the taxpayers over 2 trillion dollars because they were one of the biggest players in the market.
Their fine, while a record, did not do justice to the situation. The fine should have been a trillion.
In effect Warren Buffet's visit to the White House save Goldman Sachs billions.
Don't forget that while Buffet was complaining about the fact our tax system appeared unfair he was doing everything he could to reduce his taxes.
Warren Buffet owns 26% of Berkshire Hathaway, and sits on tons of cash. That cash could be distributed in dividends of which he would be one of the biggest recipients. However, he won't do that because he would be hit with a massive tax liability.
In November of 2009 Warren Buffet and Goldman Sachs made a bid to buy 3 billion in tax credits from Fannie Mae. The credits were worthless to Fannie Mae, but they could have off set billions in income for Buffet and Goldman Sachs for pennies on the dollar.
Buffet and Berkshire Hathaway have invested in low income housing credits starting in the 80's so he and Berkshire Hathaway have benefited from this scheme for decades.
So don't believe that Warren Buffet walked away empty handed. He's one of the elite power brokers playing the game, all the while walking away with his pockets full, at your expense.
http://online.wsj.com/article/.....26851.html
R Martin| 7.23.10 @ 8:40AM
"The Goldman Sachs trading in mortgage derivatives probably cost the taxpayers over 2 trillion dollars because they were one of the biggest players in the market. "
That statement is utter nonsense. In a blatant political move the SEC charged Goldman over ONE transaction in which it alleged Goldman did not provide highly skilled, professional investors full details about how the instrument in question came to be structured. Those investors knew someone was short on the other side of the deal, because it was a synthetic CDO, and there had to be a short side. Recognizing the wisdom of the "you can't fight city hall" axiom, Goldman settled the case while denying it mislead anyone.
If you are really concerned about taxpayer losses you shoud focus on the real culprits. The credit market—at least as regards housing—was distorted by government policy, not by a sudden and mysterious escalation in “greed" by Goldman or any other Wall Street bank. The trends that shook the world economy came out of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, out of the Federal Housing Administration, and out of their “regulator,” the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.
Government has effectively shifted blame from itself to the private sector for the economic mess we're in, and those who believe such bald-faced demagoguery deserve the government they get.
Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 7.23.10 @ 9:37AM
Actually, it's not utter nonsense. The losses at Fannie and Freddie are expected to be over 2 trillion and Goldman Sachs and Warren Buffet have a 30 year relationship with the low income housing credit market.
You can't separate the effects that these collusionary forces caused to the economy.
The government created the CRA and slick investors like Warren Buffet and financial institutions like Goldman Sachs availed themselves of the opportunities afforded by these tax credits.
If you note I didn't say there were liable for the effects of what they did. However for you to say they didn't accelerate the effects by aiding the government in it's little deceit is in itself utter nonsense.
Fannie and Freddie ultimately hid much of their risk by engaging in these deals where Warren Buffet and financial institutions like Goldman Sachs purchased the tax credits and then used those tax credits to hide their income. In effect, taxpayers got screwed twice.
No, it isn't utter nonsense to claim the damage to the public was in excess of two trillion. The bills are still coming in and to dismiss it as utter nonsense is utter nonsense.
You're focused on what Goldman Sachs was fined for in relation to short sales. The truth is Goldman Sachs and other sophisticated traders including Warren Buffet probably saw this housing debacle coming years ago but continued to mislead investors as to the worth of various financial instruments.
I agree with you 100% that the government has tried to shift blame here but in fact there is blame to go around.
Read the article in the WSJ. It spells out the scheme and the scam precisely.
BK| 7.24.10 @ 6:27PM
Bill, I think you are a bit off here. The problem is not that GS or Warren Buffet have invested in the tax credits, it is that the tax credits were available in the first place. That is just one of the problems that manifested itself with the CRA. The point is that the federal government decided to make itself a "player" in the low income housing market, instead of letting the market decide which projects it wanted to fund and how to do it. GS and Buffet are just doing things that are perfectly legal. The government distorted the markets with it's ridiculous policies and these companies made a profit off that. Again, perfectly legal. What we need to do is elect representatives to the government who actually have business experience and an understanding of how the American economy actually works, not any more Obama types who haven't a clue because they have not managed anything nor spent time in the business world.
Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 7.25.10 @ 7:39PM
You hit the nail on the head but I don't understand how you could read what was written and so completely misunderstand it.
R Martin| 7.23.10 @ 10:14AM
I will not engage in repartee with Mr. Bill on this subject, as he and I clearly have different views on the subject. I trust the markets (which sometimes get it wrong), he does not. However, I will add this: William Buckley is famously quoted as saying he would rather be goverened by the first 400 names in the Boston phone directory than by the faculty at Harvard University. (I'd have selected the Cheyenne, WY directory, but that's a different matter.) Borrowing from Mr. Buckley, I would MUCH rather be goverened by the executive management of Goldman Sachs and the first 400 names alphabetically of their managing directors than by the currently constituted U.S. Congress.
Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 7.23.10 @ 11:21AM
In fact, you don't trust the markets. This wasn't a free market but a clever scheme which came out of the CRA in which the private sector saw a chance to a buck by misleading investors, and Goldman Sachs has no credibility whatsoever as free marketers. They are not. They made billions off of government tax credits.
GailM| 7.23.10 @ 2:00PM
I have to go with R Martin in this debate. The CRA was a government lever to force banks to make weak credit loans. Tax credits are a legitimate part of the government administered tax code. Trading credits is a government approved practice. Using credits to shield income is a common and government approved practice. Even individuals use tax credits (if you live in one state and work in another, you use credits to avoid double taxation for state tax purposes). It's not a scheme in any respect. Even the WSJ article cited by Mr. Hussein O'Stalin credits Goldman's purchase of tax credits with helping the low income housing market. Goldman's and Mr. Buffett's actions seem entirely above board.
Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 7.23.10 @ 3:00PM
If y0o believe what you say, then you can't be right. These two groups through the CRA caused the housing debacle. That didn't help anyone and left the taxpayers holding the bag for close to 4 trillion by some estimates. In fact millions are losing their homes thanks to the usage of some of these financial instruments which were spawned by these schemes. The use of tax credits is perfectly legal. That wasn't the point.
The point is that Warren Buffet is similar to a welfare mom in the sense he has made billions off the failure, not the success of low income housing. Perhaps you missed that part.
The credits they planned to buy from Fannie in November of 2009 were due to the massive failure of housing not the success.
And it's all centered on central economic planning, not free markets.
JimP| 7.23.10 @ 7:02PM
I with you, Bill. You have it correct. Saying Buffett and GS were engaging in a 'free market' in this instance is like saying T. Boone Pickens' windmill plan to save America was a 'free market' business venture. Yeah it was free market except for the endless government subsidies needed to keep it afloat that would enrich Ole T-Bone. Both instances did, or would have, enrich these folks at tax payer expense (in the end in the case of Buffett and GS). And just because these schemes were legal don't make 'em right.
jack| 7.23.10 @ 7:09AM
Warren Buffet supports Democrats and their ideas for one reason,protection. He knows Republicans will not try to loot or destroy him,but he understands Democrats will. This is how he buys protection.
Siegfried X| 7.23.10 @ 7:39AM
Buffett is a flaming liberal. Always has been and always will be. His father was a Republican Congressman, and Warren Buffett never grew out of his teen aged rebellion against his dad.
martin j smith| 7.23.10 @ 7:57AM
Buffette: is a crony capitalist. he know of where he bread is buttered.
Dai Alanye | 7.23.10 @ 7:58AM
Buffett has complained that he pays less in taxes than his secretary. This was, of course, an attempt to justify Obama's "tax the rich" policy.
If we were to change the Federal emphasis from a tax on income to a tax on wealth we could help both Buffett and his secretary with that little problem.
Siegfried X| 7.23.10 @ 8:18AM
"as a billionaire who will be soon be celebrating his 80th birthday -- why should he stop to worry about the rest of us? He's already got it made. "
That's the whole point. Buffett is worth almost $50 billion. He could have given his money to charity decades ago, instead of trying to get the government to force others to give their money away. But instead Buffett kept his money and the security that comes with it, and won't give to charity until he dies. A classic case of saying one thing and doing another.
For those of us who don't have billions, giving away money in more taxes means taking away from our families, and risking our financial security. Only billionaires like Buffett have enough money to handle any medical crisis, like cancer or long term disablement and nursing home needs.
Louis Jenkins| 7.23.10 @ 8:33AM
Buffet is like an old dream that keeps hovering and haunting the US taxpayer or Obama. Money talks, and I dare say he speaks copiously during his hauntings. "Ohhhhhhbama. Tax the middle the class til they drop. Don't tax me, I'm toooo rich and powwwwwerful." And so on. One day he will realize the tenacity of his stance, and flee the country. After all, that's what the uberrich does. Can't wait!
Mattled| 7.23.10 @ 8:40AM
A couple of years ago CNBC did a lengthy interview and someone e-mailed in a good question:
if you believe in the Government so much, why don't you give all your money to it?
He hemmed and hawed about not wanting to create another "Buffet" like himself and that his money would be better spent by charity.
What an a**.
Sure----let everyone else pay higher taxes, but me? No I won't give anymore than I have because I don't believe the Government will do a better job than a private charity.
HYPOCRITE.
hardcard| 7.23.10 @ 9:09AM
buffet is the bag-man. i smell a soros.
Gill O’Teen ✝✡$| 7.23.10 @ 9:52AM
I have to give credit where credit is due. I have finally figured out where all obummer’s ‘saved and created’ jobs are. The other day, I read a Drudge article that the dudd-fwank financial retard bill will force precious metal dealers to add 2 accountants to their staffs in order to comply with the new transaction reporting regulations which stipulate that every ‘business’ transaction not less than $600 must be reported to tax-cheat timmy via an IRS form 1099. Yesterday gold was trading at $1,184.93 an ounce. While not impossible, it is uncommon to buy less than $600 of gold per transaction, so it is expected that transaction reporting compliance will hit this industry particular hard. I could not determine exactly how many gold dealers there are in the U.S., but did learn that there are about 24.7 million small businesses in OUR Country. If only 10% of that number add just one bean counter to the payroll, beavisbud will have ‘saved or created’ almost 2,400,000 jobs right there. That there will more than likely be corresponding lost jobs does in no way diminish the value of this propaganda ploy, as this discussion is all about jobs ‘saved or created’ period. Jobs lost is only worthy of his divine gaze whenever he wants to impose increased debt upon us in order to buy the votes of the jobless with lifetime unemployment compensation.
Speaking of lifetime unemployment compensation, according to the numbers I copy daily from the National Debt Clock [http://www.usdebtclock.org], since June 4, 2 Yo, the U.S. Work Force has declined by 2,067,141. Over the same time, we have added 377,598 persons to the population count. In short, for every new person, there is a corresponding loss of slightly more that 5.47 jobs. I would think this alone would scare the poop out of the smartest man in Omaha. After all, I would think that at some point just maybe one or two of the newbies might want to go to work, since if nobody’s working, who will fund those lifetime unemployment checks? The rubber companies?
Gill O’Teen ✝✡$
gill.Oteen07041776@gmail.com
"Somebody once said that in looking for people to hire, you look for three qualities: integrity, intelligence, and energy. And if you don’t have the first, the other two will kill you. You think about it; it’s true. If you hire somebody without [integrity], you really want them to be dumb and lazy." - Warren Buffett (really?)
Only 912 days to go.
Gill O’Teen ✝✡$| 7.23.10 @ 10:42AM
Oops! I erred, the monstrosity I cited above is not a provision of the latest red-fwank travesty, but from obummercare illegislation. I caught my error as the original story was mentioned by Glenn Beck at about 10:20 AM today. Fortunately, I copied the original story to my archive and the appropriate lines are reformatted here to better fit this space. It was found on ABC News from a Drudge Report link [http://abcnews.go.com/Business/gold-coin-dealers-decry-tax-law/story?id=11211611] and titled “Gold Coin Sellers Angered by New Tax Law - Amendment Slipped Into Health Care Legislation Would Track, Tax Coin and Bullion Transactions” By Rich Blake and dated July 21, 2010:
“Those already outraged by the president's health care legislation now have a new bone of contention -- a scarcely (n)oticed tack-on provision to the law that puts gold coin buyers and sellers under closer government scrutiny. The issue is rising to the fore just as gold coin dealers are attracting attention over sales tactics. Section 9006 of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act will amend the Internal Revenue Code to expand the scope of Form 1099. Currently, 1099 forms are used to track and report the miscellaneous income associated with services rendered by independent contractors or self-employed individuals. Starting Jan. 1, 2012, Form 1099s will become a means of reporting to the Internal Revenue Service the purchases of all goods and services by small businesses and self-employed people that exceed $600 during a calendar year.”
Gill O’Teen ✝✡$
gill.Oteen07041776@gmail.com
“A wise and frugal government, which shall leave men free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned - this is the sum of good government.” - Thomas Jefferson
Only 912 days to go.
Gill O’Teen ✝✡$| 7.23.10 @ 6:42PM
Based on the National Debt Clock [http://www.usdebtclock.org] numbers collected today about 4:15 PM ET, after the New York Stock Exchange closed, we lost another 10,127 workers, gained another 7,986 residents, added an additional 10,039 folks to the Food Stamps Roll and the Debt:GDP Ratio stands at a rather chilling 91.5357186%.
Gill O’Teen ✝✡$
gill.Oteen07041776@gmail.com
“I can calculate the movement of the stars, but not the madness of men.” - Sir Isaac Newton (cited by Warren Buffet)
Only 912 days to go.
mike ames| 7.23.10 @ 10:28AM
Buffet and Soros; two capatalists now intent on devouring the hand that fed them. I consider them the most depraved of all men and certainly not American in any matter of substance. Marxist through and through. A pox on both thier ungrateful houses. Beware the rich man that prefers socialism; he intedts to run the whole damn thing while never living under its oppression!!
Siegfried X| 7.23.10 @ 10:51AM
There is another Buffett double-standard. He has said many times that he won't give much money to his own children because he believes they should earn it for themselves. Yet when it comes to taxes and other people's money, he wants the government to take our money away and redistribute it in socialist fashion. He's a free-market capitalist with his own money, and a socialist with everyone else's.
Most of us would rather spend our money the exact opposite of Buffett: on our family first. First take care of our children, and elderly and sick relatives. Then if money is left over it could be donated to charity. Buffett's way and Obama's way is to take away the money from our own families so it can be passed out to win votes for them.
John II| 7.23.10 @ 10:09PM
"He's a free-market capitalist with his own money, and a socialist with everyone else's."
Spot on. He's also a Lefty in his shallow political philosophy: millions and millions given, not to Christian or Jewish relief agencies or to serious educational enterprises, but to crank Hillary-like causes such as population control (read: abortion for the darkies) and climate change fanatics of the mild-man National Geographic inspiration.
When you come right down to it, he's an idiot-savant: a genius in financial ventures, and a moral and intellectual midget in almost every other respect.
If you want to know what Mr. Buffett is about, read C.S. Lewis's "That Hideous Strength," which was written in 1945, when Buffett was only 15. But then, Lewis was being prophetic.
Besides, Professor Obama's smarmy endorsement of "Warren" is, of itself, sufficient evidence to measure where the Sage of Omaha is coming from.
Tim*| 7.23.10 @ 1:03PM
Charlie Munger :
" If you don't allow for self-serving bias in the conduct of others, you are, again, a fool."
dw| 7.23.10 @ 1:25PM
Wow we wow we... Are we fighting an up hill battle or what? Between Sorry Soros and B S Buffet, Obama is being led by the nose. And it all goes against us peons. Is it a balancing act of "Can't let them be to successful but let them have just enough to keep them quiet"? It seems like once a politician enters the elite league they are let in on that secret. Are all the moves on the left and right pre coordinated to that outcome and there really is no alternatives. I mean, I know we are manipulated every day but is it really a choreographed dance in which we are the floor?
LET THEM EAT CAKE!!
sinanju| 7.23.10 @ 1:37PM
I am only a poor, unfrozen caveman. Your world frightens and disorients me. The part about the Fannie and Freddie moveable tax credits and the Goldman Sachs payoff was interesting and educational, but I would be remiss if I failed to point out the fact that Buffet doubtlessly enjoys playing the economic sage on the front pages and he is not about to tell The One anything that he knows The One does not want to hear.
You can't buy publicity like this, even for a billion bucks and Warren is lapping it up.
Bill O| 7.23.10 @ 6:47PM
First, what people need to understand is most of the wealthy do not pay significant INCOME taxes. The vast majority of their money is from profits on investments, etc; thereby, taxed at the 15% capital gains rate.
Second, they want high INCOME taxes (not high captial gains taxes) for power. Lower and middle class people move into higher income brackets usually through the use of their discretionary income. When taxes are low, the middle and lower class have more discretionary money to invest and save. However, if lower class and middle class have little discretionary money to investand save, they remain in the lower/middle class; thereby, keeping them out of the upper class club. -- Can't have all those middle class ignorant folks getting rich now...
Take away the middle/lower class's discretionary income; insure the middle/lower class forever remain middle/lower class
Tim*| 7.23.10 @ 8:34PM
The Berkshire-Buffet Bailout .
" When we've written here in the past about the government's aid to Mr. Buffett, one of the world's richest men, we've mentioned the high-speed rail stimulus money to the Burlington Northern and Santa Fe Railroad, and, in relation to his other holdings:
The taxpayer put $25 billion into Wells Fargo, $6.6 billion into U.S. Bancorp, and $3.38 billion into American Express through the Troubled Asset Relief Program. Berkshire invested $5 billion in Goldman Sachs on September 24, 2008; on October 28, 2008, Goldman agreed to take $10 billion in TARP money. Berkshire invested $3 billion in General Electric on October 1, 2008; on November 12, 2008, GE Capital announced it had received approval from the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation's Temporary Liquidity Guaranty Program to issue up to $139 billion in debt backed by a government guaranty. Granted, Mr. Buffett claims Wells Fargo was forced to take the TARP money (a claim reinforced by other accounts) and that the TARP money hurt his interests by diluting him.
But until now we hadn't noticed or mentioned the $751.5 million, still unpaid, in aid to M&T. It's hard to articulate just how outrageous this is. Why should you or I be taxed to bail Warren Buffett out of a bad investment? If Mr. Buffett wants to borrow money from the Chinese to capitalize his bank, let him do it himself (I bet either Goldman Sachs or GE Capital would be happy to help arrange the deal), rather than through the U.S. Treasury Department"
http://seekingalpha.com/articl.....urce=yahoo
Yosemeti Sam| 7.24.10 @ 2:23AM
" ... He's already got it made."
You betcha - via his secretarial pool!
You betcha - via his stable of legal hound dogs!
You betcha - via his unsatiated lust for pyramid-building.
Success? It's all in the resultant collectively-administered contractual paper-work-
scaffolding amenable to opportunistic locking in of capitalistic zero-sum acquisitions
of preyed upon puzzle-piece businesses.
Whereupon 'empathetic' consolidation of redundant employee pools may be practiced.
The fish - food chain, anybody?
Honorable mention goes to his structured pyramided gopher coffee-getters! Keeping his employees high - um, sharp!
LOL.
martin j smith| 7.24.10 @ 11:16AM
wouldn't it be a hoot if there were demonstrations by class warfare groups at the Buffett's or the Soros's or the Clinton's or you name dit. What really strikes me as the height of chustzpuh is these people have the nerve to inveigle class warfare into the game while they!!!!!!!!! are laughing all the way to the bank. I thinik it is time to see howthey feel about being exposed as " The Rich". I would add such notables as Pelosi, Reid and BHO himself-and there are lots of others whose salaries are well over 200,00-250,000 dollars per year.
billy-bob| 7.24.10 @ 7:59PM
Same old conservative swill. Spending on public good bad, but omit to mention all the waste in funding the military + financial industrial complexes.
Michael L. Hauschild| 7.25.10 @ 10:24AM
The absolute rational for the Obama Administration to repeal the Bush tax cuts is not because they need the money, needing money is no problem to those who own the printing presses. It is instead the maintaining of the “Bush’s Fault” mantra. If the tax brackets stand the progressives will have no one to blame but themselves for the huge tax increases that we all will suffer in January.
Pat Fields | 7.25.10 @ 12:48PM
Both the occupier of the Oval Office and Warren Buffet are puppets of the Banksters and their Plantation Scrip scam, instituted to generate constantly increasing interest-service revenue at the expense of productive capacity.
Now, it's no secret that the Fed's banknote has depreciated 97% since inception, so their real residual worth is 10 grams of copper (three 1913 cents).
Rather than to stop the exponential explosion of interest-service destroying economies worldwide, by 'hardening' those banknotes (and their digital counterparts) at that 10 gram copper expression, these self-serving 'useful idiots' do whatever futile Rube Goldberging imaginable to run out the game to the bitter end of complete collapse.
That collapse is inevitable because the system of virtual 'money' is systemically self destructive, Cash is created at interest and the interest itself requires more cash creation ... ad infinitum! Once started, this cash-interest co-generation is unstoppable until the interest service engulfs all surplus productive capacity ... including the basic consumption necessary for our populations.
Wise up folks! Their sacred paper 'money' Maw is literally eating us out of house and home!
Gerald Stephens| 7.25.10 @ 2:47PM
There is an animal species that of necessity must be culled from the farm, a) variety: communist pig, and b) variety: capitalist pig. They are sometimes difficult to recognize from regular pigs.
Thus the following visual references: a) v. obama,
b) v. buffet. Both are sensitive to early November frosts.
martin j smith| 7.25.10 @ 5:06PM
I think in the propaganda war Warren Buffett qualifies as a Rich Democrat Lefty. There is a strong need to start strong countering the points about Republicans favoring the RICH--now that is RICH isn't it. There are many Rich Socialist Democrats who should be spotlighted as among the wealthy. A really good example is Michael
Bloomberg--oh he is a Democrat--he has money more than he knows what to do with.
So, how can you expect this guy to talk like a Conservative or a Republican ? He is a wealthy Socialist. Spotlight it.
Kenneth| 7.25.10 @ 6:13PM
Warren Buffett is the ultimate rent-seeker; a businessman who seeks gain by manipulating the political environment. That's not capitalism, it's cronyism. Like many other of his mega-rich ilk, he jumped on the Obama bandwagon early, anticipating that a naive, corrupt President, together with a deeply corrupt Democrat Congress would be a bonanza. He's despicable.
Lisa| 7.25.10 @ 9:31PM
Couldn't have said it better myself.
Richard Baker| 7.26.10 @ 10:07AM
Buffett may be a tremendous investor but his cognition otherwise is lacking. Lots of money does not equate to smart.
kingsmill| 7.26.10 @ 4:29PM
Buffett is too busy promoting his New Eugenics platform (abortion and the contraceptive mentality) to bother about something as mundane as the economy. Warren has births to prevent and pregnancies to terminate!
weddingdress | 7.1.11 @ 1:09AM
Warren Buffett is the ultimate rent-seeker; a businessman who seeks gain by manipulating the political environment. That's not capitalism, it's cronyism. Like many other of his mega-rich ilk, he jumped on the Obama bandwagon early, anticipating that a naive, corrupt President, together with a deeply corrupt Democrat Congress would be a bonanza. He's despicable.