|
11/3/2009 4:14:12 PM
|
natipal
Posts 468
|
I put down here, because I suppose it could turn into a political discussion. So.
Is this good or bad? I have no idea.
|
|
11/3/2009 5:25:21 PM
|
madoc
Posts 400
|
Natipal,
Define "good."
"Good" for who? Good for Warren Buffet? Most assuredly. Mr. Buffet has not gotten to where he is today by doing things bad for him. "Good" for anyone else? Well, maybe. It also depends on what his ultimate intent is. Buy it cheap because its parts are worth more than its sum? Buy it now because its pension fund is worth more than it is? I dunno.
Madoc
|
|
11/6/2009 3:25:33 AM
|
natipal
Posts 468
|
For whoever you want to speak on behalf of! Yourself, your friend next door, your little sister, your best friend's cousin's 2nd aunt removed's father's boss's niece's girlfriend's mother, heck, even the pope in Rome. Anybody. You know it's wide open.
Me personally, I grew up in Iowa where we always saw the C&NW trains come through town; in other towns it would be the Rock Island, Illinois Central, whatever. They always fascinated me. Then one day UP bought C&NW. From purely a train modeller's (ok, on Trainz software) perspective, I like diversity. But you know, business is business, you's gots to do what's you's gots to do. I suppose it is better than letting the gummint get ahold of it. Evidently Warren Buffet is good with money. I hope he's good for the company.
In other words, I hope it doesn't turn out to be another monopolistic move. I kind of doubt it. There are fewer true Railroad lines than there used to be, even though they keep some of the train colors and logos and shit, it doesn't mean squat if they are all owned by the same company. You know, competition, all that. Of course, sometimes the RR's make bad decisions and go in the tank. I don't know if that was the case with B&NR or not.
Anyway, NEXT!
|
|
11/6/2009 9:33:34 AM
|
Tom Purdom
Posts 604
|
I haven't looked at this too closely, but Buffet says he bought it because he think it's a good business move for him. He is confident the American economy will recover from it's current difficulties and continue to grow; transportation always increases when the the economy grows; and he believes trains have a solid future since they're the most economical and energy efficient way to move lots of goods.
He is making a bet on the United States and he feels that's a perfectly sound thing to do since bets on the United States have been paying off for over two centuries, through all kinds of downturns.
He's just doing what lots of people have been doing, on a smaller scale, for the last couple of years.
|
|
11/6/2009 9:34:38 AM
|
Tom Purdom
Posts 604
|
And the last two centuries.
|
|
11/6/2009 10:23:19 AM
|
Bill Moonroe
Posts 3308
|
However, natipal, if you start seeing former Burlington Northern trains now painted with the name, "The Wabash Cannonball", you know things have just taken a turn for the worse.
--
|
|
11/6/2009 1:25:51 PM
|
RandyBeck
Posts 1383
|
Natipal is correct putting it here: This is a political discussion.
FutureOfCapitalism wrote:
When Warren Buffett criticized President Bush's tax cuts while plumping for the presidential campaigns of Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, he garnered prominent, adulatory headlines such as "Buffett blasts system that lets him pay less tax than secretary," (The Times of London) and "Warren Buffett: The Rich Need to Pay More Taxes" (ABC News). Consider that as the context for two pieces of information: First, the observation, amid a column in today's Wall Street Journal, about Berkshire Hathaway's cash mountain:
Mr. Buffett would rather not resort to the simplest way of solving this problem -- paying excess cash out to shareholders in the form of a dividend. Since he owns roughly 26% of Berkshire's shares, a cash dividend would saddle Mr. Buffett with one of the largest personal-income tax bills in American history. That's not the kind of thing at which he likes to excel. Mr. Buffett's reluctance to pay a dividend leaves him with little choice but to buy big companies outright.
Second, the news (again, from the Wall Street Journal) that Mr. Buffett's Berkshire Hathaway is joining in a bid to buy $3 billion in tax credits from Fannie Mae. Reports the Journal: "The credits are virtually worthless to Fannie Mae and require the company to take losses each quarter as their value declines. Companies such as Berkshire Hathaway and Goldman Sachs could use them to offset federal tax expenses."
Neither Journal article places the news in the context of Mr. Buffett's stated support for higher taxes.
...
In other words, he's a tax hypocrite.
--
"It is this or that -- all the universe or nothing. Which shall it be, Passworthy? Which shall it be?"
|
|
11/6/2009 6:46:48 PM
|
natipal
Posts 468
|
Randy Beck, I always used to think it was smart to own the whole of your business without having to pay stock dividends. That way you don't have design by committee. YOU... are the boss. I even thought this way when I was a kid. Stockholders rightfully take their share, but sometimes wrongfully, rape the company of their profits.
|
|
pages:
1 |
|---|
