>Greatness does not come about through accumulating great amounts of money, great amounts of publicity or great power in government. When you help someone in any of thousands of ways, you help the world. Kindness is costless but also priceless. Whether you are religious or not, it’s hard to beat The Golden Rule as a guide to behavior.
>I write this as one who has been thoughtless countless times and made many mistakes but also became very lucky in learning from some wonderful friends how to behave better (still a long way from perfect, however). Keep in mind that the cleaning lady is as much a human being as the Chairman.
>I wish all who read this a very happy Thanksgiving. Yes, even the jerks; it’s never too late to change. Remember to thank America for maximizing your opportunities. But it is – inevitably – capricious and sometimes venal in distributing its rewards.
>Choose your heroes very carefully and then emulate them. You will never be perfect, but you can always be better.
Warren Buffett is a great investor but nobody in finance buys his folksy image. Everybody knows he's an animal.
I heard from folks in the room that the way 3G and Buffett came in to do layoffs at Tim Hortons was one of the most cold blooded things they've ever seen.
It's funny - having followed Buffett for a while I was going to dispute the everyone knows he's an animal bit but wasn't sure of the definition of an animal in that context so googled it and google's AI came back referencing your HN post(!):
>The specific phrase was noted in a recent online discussion related to Warren Buffett, where a user commented, "Warren Buffett is a great investor but nobody in finance buys his folksy image. Everybody knows he's an animal," to suggest he is a ruthless, cold-blooded businessman, likely in reference to aggressive business tactics like mass layoffs.
Anyway I don't think he's a ruthless cold-blooded type, although he is educated and very hard working. Also sometimes layoffs happen in business.
Warren Buffet is the definition of oligarchy. Dude runs a rail and insurance monopoly while buying large top stocks for yield. He maintains a persona of this traditional and nice family dude who is old and wise. But this is the US, and people are ranked/valued by how rich they are regardless of how it is acquired.
Still, he avoided political scrutiny (say comparing to Musk or Bezos) by maintaining this image. That was wise.
Buffet is a bigamist. By all intents and purposes he lived with two wives. The legal status was not that of bigamy, to be clear. He married his other wife after his first wife died.
The personal section here is not exactly false, but is a great example of how one should not trust Wikipedia outright. A careful reading of it shows his lifelong relationships/marriage with two women at the same time.
Look, I'm not going to yuck his yum. Do whatever you want man. But the homely aww shucks image is very intentional. And very much against his actual life choices. Homespun he ain't.
He's donated, already, the equivalent of 200+ billions USD (give or take 420M class B shares).
Say what you want, but the list of billionaires who have donated such large amounts of money while still alive (or dead) is small.
Cherry picking events like layoffs, without truly knowing how much was he involved (Berkshire directors notoriously enjoy lots of autonomy) or if the layoffs made sense, etc, seems a stretch when we're drowned with sociopath world-ruling-ambitious CEOs, from Musk to Altman, through Thiele.
You really fighting on the wrong side of the hill, Buffett has advocated for higher taxes for ages. He's neve made it a secret and he's always said that he pays a lower effective tax rate than his secretary.
In any case, what am I looking at here? There's no tax dodging. He gets paid 100Mish per year and pays taxes on those amounts.
You don't get taxes on your stock appreciation until you sell.
Benchmarking against a single person doesn't make sense. Consider how philanthropic someone is vs. how philanthropic they could be with their means. This list helps give perspective.
It is logically consistent to play the game by the rules that exist, and simultaneously advocate for changing the rules. There is no reason to fall on the sword alone.
To whom? To "charities" owned by other billionaires such as Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and those owned by his children.
I don't want billionaires to donate anything, I don't want them to use their money to shape the world to their liking. I want them to pay their fair share of taxes and a functional government that properly allocates those extra funds instead of funding the bare minimum.
We shouldn't tax production but what people take, like land, or polluting our environment, or monopoly privileges granted by government.
Which all coincidentally tax billionaires a lot to the point there might not be billionaire, but it's not the 'fair share' that people thought of. It's not asking the rich people to pay more because they make more, but because they owned non-reproducible privileges or because they imposed a cost on our shared environment such as CO2 emission.
Don't tax what people produce, but what they took.
The tax revenue collected would be then be invested by government to boost the economy or else return to the people via the Citizen's Dividend.
> Billionaires are simply people who play the money game best.
False in the general case - with inherited wealth, someone who starts with a lot but grows more slowly will beat a fast grower who started with nothing, at least on short time scales.
In other words, you can build a better OS than Windows today, and have better business sense than Bill Gates, but it'll still take you years to catch up to him wealth wise if you're starting at zero.
> I’m not the best basketball player, but I can admire the game of the best players without being jealous of them.
I agree with that - with any art/practice (business, programming, music, sports, etc), it's always inspiring to see the best play.
However, I'd argue that in our current business culture, many players will
1) do things I'm not comfortable doing morally - the sports equivalent of Maradonna's Mano de Dios [0] - so I'm not really comfortable using them as role models (I just tell myself I can do better by playing fair). Examples include Elon Musk and Peter Thiel, so-called libertarians with entire business that consist of "use your friends in government to get juicy government contracts and grow rich off that sweet, sweet taxpayer money" (SpaceX, Palantir), Jobs, Zuckerberg and Gates ripping off their friends and co-founders, products that are intentionally addictive (cigarette companies), etc.
2) not actually be that good but just be in a good position - many rich people are honestly just lucky. Yes, you have the serial entrepreneurs that make _several_ billion dollar fortunes like Jim Clark, you have the wise investors like Warren Buffet, but you also have people like Adam Neumann [1]or any New York real estate tycoon who got started with a small million-dollar loan from their millionaire parents/Saudi oil princes who just got lucky.
In particular, I firmly believe I've got more money-making talent than a random Saudi oil prince, even if my bank account doesn't reflect that.
Or to use the sports metaphor, I believe I'm a better player than a lot of people currently in the big leagues, even if it's taking a while for the rest of the world to realize that :)
> Examples include Elon Musk and Peter Thiel, so-called libertarians with entire business that consist of "use your friends in government to get juicy government contracts and grow rich off that sweet, sweet taxpayer money" (SpaceX, Palantir)
Not true regarding SpaceX, they were just cheaper and better than the competitors. They had to sue the government to even be able to compete against Boeing/Lockheed for military contracts. Who had more friends in the government in the 2010s, SpaceX or Boeing/Lockheed? In 2014, NASA awarded two contracts to develop spacecrafts for transporting astronauts to the ISS (at the time, American astronauts flew to the ISS only on Russian Soyuz). SpaceX received $2.6B (for Dragon), Boeing received $4.2B (for Starliner). Since that time, SpaceX has made 11 operational flights with astronauts to the ISS, while Boeing has made 0 (they're still working on it). It's not friends in the government, it's delivering services faster and for a lower price.
Yeah, I know about that, but I was specifically talking about SpaceX winning contracts by simply being a better option than other competitors, not because of any "friends in the government". Musk wasn't even a billionaire yet, and I doubt he had government friends at the time who did him any personal favors. And in the end the government got what it wanted, Tesla did make a lot of electric cars and repaid the loan much earlier than required. While the current government that Musk helped get elected ended all subsidies for electric cars.
yeah true, we shouldn't negate how superior spaceX was compared to competitors.
however what made him a billionaire was gvt contracts. I guess all i'm tryna say if you wanna be a fat cat (rich) gvt contracts is a lucrative way to do it.
Who do you think is responsible for such a dysfunctional government? Is it your average working class person earning about $65k/year or is it billionaires that can throw unfathomable amounts of money at any topic of their interest without it even making a dent in their pocket?
To take a recent example, the median income in New York City is about $79k/year (before taxes), while Bill Ackman alone essentially threw away 21.5x that in his failed attempt to influence the mayoral election.
Gee golly, really!? Thanks for letting me know, I had no idea!
I could've also mentioned Ackman personally calling Trump in 2020 to beg him to shut down the economy for a month and my argument would be just the same: I don't want billionaires using their money to shape the world to their liking.
Not surprised, but the best solution is not to let billionaires control, tax free, major parts of society instead. The best solution is building a more functional democracy which is in charge of redistribution.
Politicians are more ethical than billionaires. They’re even more ethical when billionaires can’t buy them by spending an exorbitant amount “supporting” a candidate.
No matter where you are on the political spectrum, you almost certainly believe that at least some billionaires carry a disproportionate responsibility for that dysfunction. Whatever they are, Elon Musk, Bill Gates, Donald Trump, George Soros or indeed Warren Buffett aren't just passive observers of government.
The government already has way more money every year to spend. It wastes a lot of it.
A world where all surpluses are distributed by a committee of politicians and their buddies would a be a terrible one.
> To "charities" owned by other billionaires such as Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation
Which are responsible among other things for the quasi-total eradication of polio from this planet, provided vaccines for billions (literally) people across the globe in poor countries and have been major contributors in malaria and hiv treatment, prevention and research.
Also, they provided funds to millions of small rural farmers in third world countries to improve productivity and yields.
When I traveled Madagascar, plenty of villages had water and waste infrastructure built with the aid of that foundation too.
By the way, their balance sheets are public, and audited every year.
I'm baffled by the low-level conspirationism encountered on HN, it feels more and more like reading boomer's facebook everyday.
> Keep in mind that the cleaning lady is as much a human being as the Chairman.
Considering the Warren Buffett wisdom-industrial complex this might be the best place to share these nuggets. And I know his heart is in the right place, but the fact that you need to spell this kind of thing out is somehow extremely depressing.
The fact that he spelled it out does not imply that it needed to be said. There is no idea in that letter, that is not personal history, that hasn't been said before.
"Keep in mind that the cleaning lady is as much a human being as the Chairman."
Keep also in mind that the cleaning lady and the receptionist usually know way way more about the insides of a company than an entire board of directors and managers ever will.
It is also extremely beneficial to your own health to be nice and friendly to the people who clean, prepare your food and aid your medical well being. They will remember. They will decide how to help you when you absolutely need it.
//Keep also in mind that the cleaning lady and the receptionist usually know way way more about the insides of a company than an entire board of directors and managers ever will.
In Buffet's time maybe. Nowadays the sanitation staff more likely to be a contractor from some form of MSP on an exploitative contract with a 3-6 month lifespan. All the more reason to be nice, but don't expect an 'Inside Baseball' level of insight. That sort of thing is generally the realm of Executive Assistants in contemporary offices.
Oh i was not referring to corporate or investments strategies here. I was talking about what is actually going on inside the building and who hates who. Always assume the highest-ups hate everything and each other, it is all fake, ever.
But that’s what people do - they would wine and dine some low level employees to get inside info.
You want to know when how much shit new GTA developers take by managers pressing them on deadlines - guy doesn’t have to spell it out he just needs to nag a bit here and there while having a beer.
Then you can know if they are not pressing them all goes smooth and they really will release when they want - if they are pressed much most likely product is in shambles and they most likely will not hit any targets or promises.
You should absolutely be a good human to people, but I don't think it is at all true to say "the cleaning lady and the receptionist usually know way way more about the insides of a company"
Truth is they generally don't and they also don't care. Why would they? They literally are not paid enough to care.
>I write this as one who has been thoughtless countless times and made many mistakes but also became very lucky in learning from some wonderful friends how to behave better (still a long way from perfect, however). Keep in mind that the cleaning lady is as much a human being as the Chairman.
>I wish all who read this a very happy Thanksgiving. Yes, even the jerks; it’s never too late to change. Remember to thank America for maximizing your opportunities. But it is – inevitably – capricious and sometimes venal in distributing its rewards.
>Choose your heroes very carefully and then emulate them. You will never be perfect, but you can always be better.
God speed, dearest Oracle of Omaha.