JRH

Well, he only referenced dividends for Focused Income, which has an “income” mandate. No such reference on FAIRX, which does not. I think this was just a proofreading/editing decision as a way to reference current yield for that fund (notice a similar reference for the Allocation Fund in a later paragraph).

Have you considered the possibility that literally everything he writes is unfalsifiable hyperbole?

Definitely isn't March 2019 - look at total assets listed at the bottom of the report vs. prior months.

My worst year relative to the benchmark was the year after my kid was born. I was stupid enough not to realize EITHER: 1) how much less time I was giving to important decisions, and 2) how poor my mental state and focus were when making decisions. I was like a drunk who doesn't know he can't drive. That one year negated several years of outperformance and just about capitulated me onto the indexing path.

He actually sold ~3/4 of his MBI position prior to the BAC settlement. You can't really tell from the filings themselves, but if you look at the price of FAAFX around that time, it only jumped about 1/4 what you would've expected from the last reported holdings (MBI was something crazy, like 35% of the fund according to the last filing before the settlement occurred). Bruce has really had just terrible timing selling holdings the last few years (not throwing stones as I'm no expert myself).

https://www.ibtimes.com/omaha-nebraska-most-dangerous-place-america-be-black-1548466 The more nuanced statistical truth is obscured by the headline (as usual), but... I think it's worthwhile for visitors to avoid North Omaha, unless they know what it's like and are making an informed decision to stay there. Just my $0.02.

Depends on what you're looking for. Benson is trendy (e.g., nightlife). Blackstone (~3 blocks west of Kiewit Plaza) is also trendy, but more "young professional" than Benson. Downtown is expensive and convenient to the convention center (FWIW, I live here and never go Downtown). Geographically, the east/west corridor within a couple miles north/south of Dodge will be the safer part of town - though admittedly that's a big generalization (north of Cuming / south of Pacific between downtown and 480 are somewhat sketchy). Other factors?

It's even better than that, though. You can only lose half a cup of coffee (I could probably do with less, anyway), but upthread he said that if the investment works out you'll be able to buy a house with the proceeds! Talk about asymmetric! ::)

I think the facts are incomplete here. Sokol held shares already, but he bought more after taking the idea to Buffett and their subsequent discussion of why the business would be a good fit for Berkshire.

Some basic things: 1) There should be one thread per company 2) The thread title should be "[ticker] - [company name]", e.g., "CBI - Chicago Bridge & Iron" - this admittedly isn't followed 100% of the time, but that's no excuse not to. One thread per company promotes the idea of minimizing redundancy, such as "introducing" the company three times. I think there's nothing wrong with you providing updates in a single thread, even if nobody else is participating, so long as they really do contain new information.

Berkowitz has said previously (and I paraphrase), "It's pretty simple. Either HERA doesn't grant them the power to do whatever they want unchecked, or HERA is unconstitutional." So, I'd have to assume the next step is to challenge the constitutionality of HERA.

I have a small position, and am sitting here going back and forth, trying to decide which of the following is true (assuming Mnuchin wants the enterprises privately owned): 1) The lawsuits were leverage for Preferred/Common stockholders to get X+Y amount of the re-privatized enterprises, instead of X amount. Therefore, this meaningfully reduced their value. 2) The lawsuits don't really matter because of the mechanisms of re-privatization: maximizing gov't warrant price still entails maximizing common stock price, and re-starting common dividends still entails preferred dividends. REALLY simplified, obviously, but I need some means by which to model a decision.

I feel like I had to do some serious "de-programming" of myself in my 20s, but now I am 100% of this mold, as well. I didn't increase my willpower to resist buying things I want, so much as I came to realize just how few things are ultimately worth the money - the value is either illusory to begin with, or it is offset by less direct and more insidious things that you don't notice at the time of purchase. Realizing that has reduced the number of things I want so significantly that I don't need much willpower at all. (sorry for being off-topic... I'm about 25% owned real estate but would like that to be closer to 50% - balance is mostly esoteric global value plays)

I have these references (starting on page 9) printed out and pinned up all around where I work... I read a few at a time, and the repetition eventually catches me at the right time that I can relate it to something "real world", which seems to make it stick in my memory better: https://www.scribd.com/doc/30548590/Cognitive-Biases-A-Visual-Study-Guide

Has anyone linked to Scott Adams' (creator of Dilbert) blog yet in this thread? http://blog.dilbert.com/post/126589300371/clown-genius Note that post is from last August - he has been blogging consistently about Trump ever since. His big-picture predictions have been really good, and his 'model' (if you want to call it that) sure seems right to me. I mean, I've been convinced it's the right model. I think Merkhet alluded to 'emotional manipulation' earlier. Scott Adams calls Trump a 'master persuader'.