Another Numbnuts Wants The Limelight!

[Parsad]

Here's another guy trying to make a name for himself.  They're coming out of the woodworks!

 

http://blogs.reuters.com/rolfe-winkler/2009/08/04/buffetts-betrayal/

 

- He doesn't mention that Goldman and American Express have already repaid their TARP. 

- Wells took the damn money because they wanted to support the program.  They could easily pay it back, but the government's own stress tests (which negate credit quality of mortgages or credit card holders) don't allow it. 

- Berkshire only owns $34M of BAC stock, which accounts for the bulk of the TARP funds numbnuts refers to...probably a Lou Simpson investment...not sure how rich Berkshire shareholders will get from that investment.

- Berkshire also only owns about $37M of STI...again a Lou Simpson call most likely.

 

Cheers! 

[scorpioncapital]

Here's another guy trying to make a name for himself.  They're coming out of the woodworks!

 

 

There are some very valid points in the article. Although the criticism of Buffet is somewhat off target. It is true that all of corporate America has been a beneficiary of TARP and other bailouts. And yes it is probably true that without them both Berkshire's (and this is the key point, everybody else's holdings) might have ended up being depressed for a very long time. So yes, Berkshire benefited, but so did you and I. Do I really believe my other stock holdings would be where they are today without these actions? No way, they'd be in the dumps at the March lows maybe for several more YEARS.

[omagh]

It's interesting to contrast Buffett's patience to Bill Miller's haste.  Miller fully expected that the government would assist the marketplace with backstops when he dug deep on FRE and others.  Yes, Buffett is benefiting from TARP indirectly through BRK's holdings, but that's while following rule number one "Don't lose money".

 

-O

 

Here's another guy trying to make a name for himself.  They're coming out of the woodworks!

 

There are some very valid points in the article. Although the criticism of Buffet is somewhat off target. It is true that all of corporate America has been a beneficiary of TARP and other bailouts. And yes it is probably true that without them both Berkshire's (and this is the key point, everybody else's holdings) might have ended up being depressed for a very long time. So yes, Berkshire benefited, but so did you and I. Do I really believe my other stock holdings would be where they are today without these actions? No way, they'd be in the dumps at the March lows maybe for several more YEARS.

[Parsad]

I don't think the author actually makes valid points on the subject matter.  It isn't just Buffett benefitting from the government's largesse.  Without the bailout, the average consumer's savings accounts, GIC's, mutual funds, investment accounts, etc. would have all been at significant risk.  It was a systemic risk that would have affected everyone from the very rich to the very poor.  Even Prem would have suffered some losses on investments and they were well-prepared for armageddon.  Cheers!

[Rabbitisrich]

Frankly, it's not worth getting upset about. This process of diminishing Buffett has allowed value investors to flourish. If the public did not periodically diminish Buffett's reputation, by now the competition would be fierce.