Warren Buffett is one of my investment heroes. On 3 May 2025, he held court at the 2025 Berkshire Hathaway AGM (annual general meeting).
For many years, I’ve anticipated the AGM to hear his latest thoughts. This year’s session holds special significance because it may well be his last – during the AGM, he announced that he would be stepping down as CEO of Berkshire Hathaway by the end of this year, ending an amazing 60-year run since becoming the company’s leader in 1965. Greg Abel is slated to be Berkshire Hathaway’s next CEO.
The most recent Berkshire meeting contained great insights from Buffett and other senior Berkshire executives that I wish to share and document. Before I get to them, I would like to thank my friend Thomas Chua for performing a great act of public service. Shortly after the AGM ended, Thomas posted a transcript of the session at his excellent investing website Steady Compounding.
Without further ado, the italicised passages between the two horizontal lines below are my favourite takeaways after I went through Thomas’ transcript.
Buffett thinks his idea on import certificates is different from tariffs and that it’s important to have more balanced trade between countries; he also thinks that trade should not be wielded as a weapon, and that the more prosperous the world becomes, the better the USA would be
Becky Quick: Thanks Warren. This first question comes from Bill Mitchell. I received more questions about this than any other question. He writes, “Warren, in a 2003 Fortune article, you argued for import certificates to limit trade deficits and said these import certificates basically amounted to a tariff, but recently you called tariffs an act of economic war. Has your view on trade barriers changed or do you see import certificates as somehow distinct from tariffs?”
Warren Buffett: Well, the import certificates were distinct, but their goal was to balance imports against exports so that the trade deficit would not grow in an enormous way. It had various provisions to help third world countries catch up a little bit. They were designed to balance trade, and I think you can make very good arguments that balanced trade is good for the world. It makes sense for cocoa to be raised in Ghana and coffee in Colombia and a few other things…
…There’s no question that trade can be an act of war, and I think it’s led to bad things like the attitudes it’s brought out in the United States. We should be looking to trade with the rest of the world. We should do what we do best, and they should do what they do best…
…The main thing is that trade should not be a weapon. The United States has become an incredibly important country starting from nothing 250 years ago – there’s never been anything like it. And it’s a big mistake when you have 7.5 billion people who don’t like you very well and you have 300 million people crowing about how well they’ve done. I don’t think it’s right and I don’t think it’s wise. The more prosperous the rest of the world becomes, it won’t be at our expense – the more prosperous we’ll become and the safer we’ll feel and your children will feel someday.
Buffett did not look at macroeconomic factors in Japan when making the huge investments he did in five Japanese trading houses; Berkshire won’t be selling the Japanese investments for a long, long time, if at all; Berkshire would be happy to invest a lot more in Japan if there was capacity to do so; the fact that Berkshire could borrow in Japanese Yen to hedge the Japanese investments’ currency risk is merely a lucky coincidence
Question: Mr. Buffett and Mr. Munger did a very good and successful investment in Japan in the past five or six years. The recent CPI in Japan is currently above 3%, not far away from its 2% target. Bank of Japan seems very determined in raising rates while Fed, ECB, and other central banks are considering cutting them. Do you think BOJ makes sense to proceed with the rate hike? Will its planned rate hike deter you from further investing in the Japanese stock market or even considering realizing your current profits?
Warren Buffett: Well, I’m going to extend the same goodwill to Japan that you’ve just extended to me. I’ll let the people of Japan determine their best course of action in terms of economics. It’s an incredible story. It’s been about six years now since our Japanese investments. I was just going through a little handbook that probably had two or three thousand Japanese companies in it. One problem I have is that I can’t read that handbook anymore – the print’s too small. But there were these five trading companies selling at ridiculously low prices. So I spent about a year acquiring them. And then we got to know the people better, and everything that Greg and I saw, we liked better as we went along…
…Greg Abel: When you think of the five companies, there’s definitely a couple meetings a year, Warren. The thing we’re building with the five companies is, one, it’s been a very good investment, but we really envision holding the investment for 50 years or forever…
…Warren Bufett: We will not be selling any stock. That will not happen in decades, if then…
…It’s too bad that Berkshire has gotten as big as it is because we love that position and I’d like it to be a lot larger. Even with the five companies being very large in Japan, we’ve got at market in the range of $20 billion invested, but I’d rather have $100 billion than $20 billion…
…The Japanese situation is different because we intend to stay so long with that position and the funding situation is so cheap that we’ve attempted to some degree to match purchases against yen-denominated funding. But that’s not a policy of ours…
…Greg Abel: There’s no question we were fundamentally very comfortable with investing in the five Japanese companies and recognizing we’re investing in yen. The fact we could then borrow in yen was almost just a nice incremental opportunity. But we were very comfortable both with the Japanese companies and with the currency we would ultimately realize in yen.
Just the simple act of reading about companies can lead to great investment opportunities
Warren Buffett: It’s been about six years now since our Japanese investments. I was just going through a little handbook that probably had two or three thousand Japanese companies in it…
…I never dreamt of that when I picked up that handbook. It’s amazing what you can find when you just turn the page. We showed a movie last year about “turn every page,” and I would say that turning every page is one important ingredient to bring to the investment field. Very few people do turn every page, and the ones who turn every page aren’t going to tell you what they’re finding. So you’ve got to do a little of it yourself.
Berkshire’s current huge cash position is the result of Buffett not being able to find sufficiently attractive investment opportunities; Buffett thinks that great investment opportunities appear infrequently
Becky Quick: This next question comes from Advate Prasad in New York. He writes, “Today, Berkshire holds over $300 billion in cash and short-term investments, representing about 27% of total assets, a historically high figure compared to the 13% average over the last 25 years. This has also led Berkshire to effectively own nearly 5% of the entire US Treasury market. Beyond the need for liquidity to meet insurance obligations, is the decision to raise cash primarily a de-risking strategy in response to high market valuations?…
…Warren Buffett: Well, I wouldn’t do anything nearly so noble as to withhold investing myself just so that Greg could look good later on. If he gets any edge of what I leave behind, I’ll resent it. The amount of cash we have – we would spend $100 billion if something is offered that makes sense to us, that we understand, offers good value, and where we don’t worry about losing money. The problem with the investment business is that things don’t come along in an orderly fashion, and they never will. I’ve had about 16,000 trading days in my career. It would be nice if every day you got four opportunities or something like that with equal attractiveness. If I was running a numbers racket, every day would have the same expectancy that I would keep 40% of whatever the handle was, and the only question would be how much we transacted. But we’re not running that kind of business. We’re running a business which is very opportunistic.
Investing in stocks is a much better investment-bet than investing in real estate
Warren Buffett: Well, in respect to real estate, it’s so much harder than stocks in terms of negotiation of deals, time spent, and the involvement of multiple parties in the ownership. Usually when real estate gets in trouble, you find out you’re dealing with more than just the equity holder. There have been times when large amounts of real estate have changed hands at bargain prices, but usually stocks were cheaper and they were a lot easier to do.
Charlie did more real estate. Charlie enjoyed real estate transactions, and he actually did a fair number of them in the last 5 years of his life. But he was playing a game that was interesting to him. I think if you’d asked him to make a choice when he was 21 – either be in stocks exclusively for the rest of his life or real estate for the rest of his life – he would have chosen stocks. There’s just so much more opportunity, at least in the United States, that presents itself in the security market than in real estate…
…When you walk down to the New York Stock Exchange, you can do billions of dollars worth of business, totally anonymous, and you can do it in 5 minutes. The trades are complete when they’re complete. In real estate, when you make a deal with a distressed lender, when you sign the deal, that’s just the beginning. Then people start negotiating more things, and it’s a whole different game with a different type of person who enjoys the game.
Berkshire’s leaders think AI will have a massive impact on the insurance business, but they are not in a hurry to pour money into AI as they think there’s plenty of faddish capital in the space
Ajit Jain: There is no question in my mind that AI is going to be a real game-changer. It’s going to change the way we assess risk, we price risk, we sell risk, and then the way we end up paying claims. Having said that, I certainly also feel that people end up spending enormous amounts of money trying to chase the next fashionable thing…
…Right now the individual insurance operations do dabble in AI and try to figure out the best way to exploit it. But we have not yet made a conscious big-time effort in terms of pouring a lot of money into this opportunity.
Buffett prefers Ajit Jain to any kind of sophisticated AI systems when pricing insurance risks
Warren Buffett: I wouldn’t trade everything that’s developed in AI in the next 10 years for Ajit. If you gave me a choice of having a hundred billion dollars available to participate in the property casualty insurance business for the next 10 years and a choice of getting the top AI product from whoever’s developing it or having Ajit making the decisions, I would take Ajit anytime – and I’m not kidding about that.
Despite the political upheaval happening in the USA right now, Buffett still thinks the long-term future of the country is incredibly bright; in Buffett’s eyes, the USA has been through plenty of tumultuous periods and emerged stronger
Warren Buffett: America has been undergoing significant and revolutionary change ever since it was developed. I mentioned that we started out as an agricultural society with high promises that we didn’t deliver on very well. We said all men were created equal, and then we wrote a constitution that counted blacks as three-fifths of a person. In Article 2, you’ll find male pronouns used 20 times and no female pronouns. So it took until 1920, with the 19th amendment, to finally give women the vote that we had promised back in 1776.
We’re always in the process of change, and we’ll always find all kinds of things to criticize in the country. But the luckiest day in my life is the day I was born, because I was born in the United States. At that time, about 3% of all births in the world were taking place in the United States. I was just lucky, and I was lucky to be born white, among other things…
…We’ve gone through all kinds of things – great recessions, world wars, the development of the atomic bomb that we never dreamt of when I was born. So I would not get discouraged about the fact that we haven’t solved every problem that’s come along. If I were being born today, I would just keep negotiating in the womb until they said I could be in the United States.
It’s important to be patient while waiting for opportunities, but equally important to pounce when the opportunity appears
Warren Buffett: The trick when you get in business with somebody who wants to sell you something for $6 million that’s got $2 million of cash, a couple million of real estate, and is making $2 million a year, is you don’t want to be patient at that moment. You want to be patient in waiting to get the occasional call. My phone will ring sometime with something that wakes me up. You just never know when it’ll happen. That’s what makes it fun. So patience is a combination of patience and a willingness to do something that afternoon if it comes to you.
It does not pay to invest in a way that depends on the appearance of a greater fool
Warren Buffett: If people are making more money because they’re borrowing money or participating in securities that are pieces of junk but they hope to find a bigger sucker later on, you have to forget that.
Buffett does not think it’s important to manage currency risk with Berkshire’s international investments, but he avoids investments denominated in currencies that are at risk of depreciating wildly
Warren Buffett: We’ve owned lots of securities in foreign currencies. We do nothing in terms of its impact on quarterly and annual earnings. We don’t do anything based on its impact on quarterly and annual earnings. There’s never been a board meeting I can remember where I’ve said, “If we do this, our annual earnings will be this, therefore we ought to do it.” The number will turn out to be what it’ll be. What counts is where we are five or 10 or 20 years from now…
…Obviously, we wouldn’t want to own anything in a currency that we thought was really going to hell.
Buffett is worried about the tendency for governments to want to devalue their currencies, the USA included, but there’s nothing much that can be done about it; Buffett thinks the USA is running a fiscal deficit that is unsustainable over a long period of time; Buffett thinks a 3% fiscal deficit appears sustainable
Warren Buffett: That’s the big thing we worry about with the United States currency. The tendency of a government to want to debase its currency over time – there’s no system that beats that. You can pick dictators, you can pick representatives, you can do anything, but there will be a push toward weaker currencies. I mentioned very briefly in the annual report that fiscal policy is what scares me in the United States because of the way it’s made, and all the motivations are toward doing things that can cause trouble with money. But that’s not limited to the United States – it’s all over the world, and in some places, it gets out of control regularly. They devalue at rates that are breathtaking, and that’s continued…
…So currency value is a scary thing, and we don’t have any great system for beating that…
…We’re operating at a fiscal deficit now that is unsustainable over a very long period of time. We don’t know whether that means two years or 20 years because there’s never been a country like the United States. But as Herbert Stein, the famous economist, said, “If something can’t go on forever, it will end.” We are doing something that is unsustainable, and it has the aspect to it that it gets uncontrollable to a certain point….
…I wouldn’t want the job of trying to correct what’s going on in revenue and expenditures of the United States with roughly a 7% gap when probably a 3% gap is sustainable…
…We’ve got a lot of problems always as a country, but this is one we bring on ourselves. We have a revenue stream, a capital-producing stream, a brains-producing machine like the world has never seen. And if you picked a way to screw it up, it would involve the currency. That’s happened a lot of places.
Buffett thinks the key factors for a developing economy to attract investors are having a solid currency, and being business-friendly
Audience member: What advice would you give to government and business leaders of emerging markets like Mongolia to attract institutional investors like yourself?
Warren Buffett: If you’re looking for advice to give the government over there, it’s to develop a reputation for having a solid currency over time. We don’t really want to go into any country where we think there’s a significant probability of runaway inflation. That’s too hard to figure…
…If the country develops a reputation for being business-friendly and currency-conscious, that bodes very well for the residents of that country, particularly if it has some natural assets that it can build around.
Private equity firms are flooding the life insurance market, but they are doing so by taking on lots of leverage and credit risk
Ajit Jain: There’s no question the private equity firms have come into the space, and we are no longer competitive in the space. We used to do a fair amount in this space, but in the last 3-4 years, I don’t think we’ve done a single deal.
You should separate this whole segment into two parts: the property casualty end of the business and the life end of the business. The private equity firms you mentioned are all very active in the life end of the business, not the property casualty end.
You are right in identifying the risks these private equity firms are taking on both in terms of leverage and credit risk. While the economy is doing great and credit spreads are low, these firms have taken the assets from very conservative investments to ones where they get a lot more return. As long as the economy is good and credit spreads are low, they will make money – they’ll make a lot of money because of leverage.
However, there is always the danger that at some point the regulators might get cranky and say they’re taking too much risk on behalf of their policyholders, and that could end in tears. We do not like the risk-reward that these situations offer, and therefore we put up the white flag and said we can’t compete in this segment right now.
Buffett thinks Berkshire’s insurance operation is effectively unreplicable
Warren Buffett: I think there are people that want to copy Berkshire’s model, but usually they don’t want to copy it by also copying the model of the CEO having all of his money in the company forever. They have a different equation – they’re interested in something else. That’s capitalism, but they have a whole different situation and probably a somewhat different fiduciary feeling about what they’re doing. Sometimes it works and sometimes it doesn’t work. If it doesn’t work, they go on to other things. If what we do at Berkshire doesn’t work, I spend the end of my life regretting what I’ve created. So it’s just a whole different personal equation.
There is no property casualty company that can basically replicate Berkshire. That wasn’t the case at the start – at the start we just had National Indemnity a few miles from here, and anybody could have duplicated what we had. But that was before Ajit came with us in 1986, and at that point the other fellows should have given up.
Buffett thinks recent market volatility is not noteworthy at all; it’s nearly certain that significant downward moves in stocks will happen sometime in the next 20 years
Warren Buffett: What has happened in the last 30-45 days, 100 days, whatever this period has been, is really nothing. There have been three times since we acquired Berkshire that Berkshire has gone down 50% in a fairly short period of time – three different times. Nothing was fundamentally wrong with the company at any time. This is not a huge move. The Dow Jones average was at 381 in September of 1929 and got down to 42. That’s going from 100 to 11. This has not been a dramatic bear market or anything of the sort. I’ve had about 17,000 or 18,000 trading days. There have been plenty of periods that are dramatically different than this…
…You will see a period in the next 20 years that will be a “hair curler” compared to anything you’ve seen before. That just happens periodically. The world makes big mistakes, and surprises happen in dramatic ways. The more sophisticated the system gets, the more the surprises can come out of left field. That’s part of the stock market, and that’s what makes it a good place to focus your efforts if you’ve got the proper temperament for it and a terrible place to get involved if you get frightened by markets that decline and get excited when stock markets go up.
Berkshire’s leaders think the biggest change autonomous vehicles will bring to the automotive insurance industry is substitution of operator error policies by product liability policies; Berkshire’s leaders also think that the cost per repair in the event of an accident will rise significantly; the total cost of providing insurance for autonomous vehicles is still unclear; from the 1950s to today, cars have gotten 6x safer but auto insurance has become 50x pricier
Ajit Jain: There’s no question that insurance for automobiles is going to change dramatically once self-driving cars become a reality. The big change will be what you identified. Most of the insurance that is sold and bought revolves around operator errors – how often they happen, how severe they are, and therefore what premium we ought to charge. To the extent these new self-driving cars are safer and involved in fewer accidents, that insurance will be less required. Instead, it’ll be substituted by product liability. So we at GEICO and elsewhere are certainly trying to get ready for that switch, where we move from providing insurance for operator errors to being more ready to provide protection for product errors and errors and omissions in the construction of these automobiles…
…We talked about the shift to product liability and protection for accidents that take place because of an error in product design or supply. In addition to that shift, I think what we’ll see is a major shift where the number of accidents will drop dramatically because of automatic driving. But on the other hand, the cost per repair every time there’s an accident will go up very significantly because of the amount of technology in the car. How those two variables interact with each other in terms of the total cost of providing insurance, I think, is still an open issue…
…Warren Buffett: When I walked into GEICO’s office in 1951, the average price of a policy was around $40 a year. Now it’s easy to get up to $2,000 depending on location and other factors. During that same time, the number of people killed in auto accidents has fallen from roughly six per 100 million miles driven to a little over one. So the car has become incredibly safer, and it costs 50 times as much to buy an insurance policy.
There’s a tax now when American companies conduct share buybacks
Warren Buffett: I don’t think people generally know that, but there is a tax that was introduced a year or so ago where we pay 1%. That not only hurts us because we pay more for it than you do – it’s a better deal for you than for us – but it actually hurts some of our investee companies quite substantially. Tim Cook has done a wonderful job running Apple, but he spent about $100 billion in a year repurchasing shares, and there’s a 1% charge attached to that now. So that’s a billion dollars a year that he pays when he buys Apple stock compared to what you pay.
Buffett is very careful with the risks that come with derivative contracts on a company’s balance sheet
Greg Abel: I’ll maybe go back to the very first meeting with Warren because it still stands out in my mind. Warren was thinking about acquiring Mid-America Energy Holdings Company at that time, and we had the opportunity with my partners to go over there on a Saturday morning. We were discussing the business and Warren had the financial statements in front of him. Like anybody, I was sort of expecting a few questions on how the business was performing, but Warren locked in immediately to what was on the balance sheet and the fact we had some derivative contracts, the “weapons of mass destruction.”
In the utility business, we do have derivatives because they’re used to match certain positions. They’re never matched perfectly, but we have them and they’re required in the regulated business. I remember Warren going to it immediately and asking about the composition and what was the underlying risk, wanting to thoroughly understand. It wasn’t that big of a position, but it was absolutely one of the risks he was concerned about as he was acquiring Mid-America, especially in light of Enron and everything that had gone on.
The followup to that was a year or 18 months later. There was an energy crisis in the US around electricity and natural gas, and various companies were making significant sums of money. Warren’s follow-up question to me was, “How much money are we making during this energy crisis? Are we making a lot? Do we have speculative positions in place?” The answer was we weren’t making any more than we would have been six months ago because all those derivatives were truly to support our business and weren’t speculative. That focus on understanding the business and the risks around it still stands out in my mind.
Buffett spends more time analysing a company’s balance sheet than other financial statements
Warren Buffett: I spend more time looking at balance sheets than I do income statements. Wall Street doesn’t pay much attention to balance sheets, but I like to look at balance sheets over an 8 or 10 year period before I even look at the income account because there are certain things it’s harder to hide or play games with on the balance sheet than with the income statement.
Buffett thinks America’s electric grid needs a massive overhaul and it can only be done in via a partnership between the private sector and the government – unfortunately, nobody has figured out the partnership model yet
Warren Buffett: t’s very obvious that the country needs an incredible improvement, rethinking, redirection to some extent in the electric grid. We’ve outgrown what would be the model that America should have. In a sense, it’s a problem something akin to the interstate highway system where you needed the power of the government really to get things done because it doesn’t work so well when you get 48 or 50 jurisdictions that each has their own way of thinking about things…
…There are certain really major investment situations where we have capital like nobody else has in the private system. We have particular knowhow in the whole generation and transmission arena. The country is going to need it. But we have to figure out a way that makes sense from the standpoint of the government, from the standpoint of the public, and from the standpoint of Berkshire, and we haven’t figured that out yet. It’s a clear and present use of hundreds of billions of dollars. You have people that set up funds and they’re getting paid for just assembling stuff, but that’s not the way to handle it. The way to handle it is to have some kind of government-private industry cooperation similar to what you do in a war.
The risk of wildfires to electric utilities is not going to go away, and in fact, will increase over time
Greg Abel: The reality is the risk around wildfires – do the wildfires occur – they’re not going away, and we know that. The risk probably goes up each year.
Berkshire’s leaders think it’s important for utilities to de-energise when wildfires occur to minimise societal damage; Berkshire is the only utility operator so far that’s willing to de-energise; but de-energising also has its drawbacks; Berkshire may not be able to solve the conundrum of de-energising
Greg Abel: the one thing we hadn’t tackled – this is very relevant to the significant event we had back in 2020 in PacifiCorp – is we didn’t de-energize the system as the fire was approaching. Our employees and the whole management team have been trained all their lives to keep the lights on, and the last thing they want to do is turn those lights off and have a system de-energized. After those events and as we looked at how we’re going to move forward in managing the assets and reducing risk, we recognized as a team that we have to de-energize those assets. Now as we get fires encroaching at a certain number of miles, we de-energize because we do not want to contribute to the fire nor harm any of our consumers or contribute to a death. We had to take our team to managing a different risk now. It’s not around keeping the lights on, it’s around protecting the general public and ensuring the fire does not spread further. We’re probably the one utility or across our utilities that does that today, and we strongly believe in that approach.
Becky Quick: Doesn’t that open you up to other risk if you shut down your system, a hospital gets shut down, somebody dies?
Greg Abel: That’s something we do deal with a lot because we have power outages that occur by accident. When we look at critical infrastructure, that’s an excellent point and we’re constantly re-evaluating it. We do receive a lot of feedback from our customer groups as to how to manage that…
…Warren Buffett: There’s some problems that can’t be solved, and we shouldn’t be in the business of taking investors’ money and tackling things that we don’t know the solution for. You can present the arguments, but it’s a political decision when you are dealing with states or the federal government. If you’re in something where you’re going to lose, the big thing to do is quit.
Buffett thinks the value of electric utility companies have fallen a lot over the past two years because of societal trends and his enthusiasm for investing in electric utilities has waned considerably
Becky Quick: Ricardo Bri, a longtime shareholder based in Panama, says that he was very happy to see Berkshire acquire 100% of BHE. It was done in two steps: one in late 2022 – 1% was purchased from Greg Abel for $870 million implying a valuation of BHE of $87 billion, and then in 2024 the remaining 8% was purchased from the family of Walter Scott Jr. for $3.9 billion implying a valuation of $48.8 billion for the enterprise. That second larger transaction represented a 44% reduction in valuation in just two years. Ricardo writes that PacifiCorp liabilities seem too small to explain this. Therefore, what factors contributed to the difference in value for BHE between those two moments in time?
Warren Buffett: Well, we don’t know how much we’ll lose out of PacifiCorp and decisions that are made, but we also know that certain of the attitudes demonstrated by that particular example have analogues throughout the utility system. There are a lot of states that so far have been very good to operate in, and there are some now that are rat poison, as Charlie would say, to operate in. That knowledge was accentuated when we saw what happened in the Pacific Northwest, and it’s eventuated by what we’ve seen as to how utilities have been treated in certain other situations. So it wasn’t just a direct question of what was involved at PacifiCorp. It was an extrapolation of a societal trend…
…We’re not in the mood to sell any business. But Berkshire Hathaway Energy is worth considerably less money than it was two years ago based on societal factors. And that happens in some of our businesses. It certainly happened to our textile business. The public utility business is not as good a business as it was a couple of years ago. If anybody doesn’t believe that, they can look at Hawaiian Electric and look at Edison in the current wildfires situation in California. There are societal trends that are changing things…
…I would say that our enthusiasm for buying public utility companies is different now than it would have been a couple years ago. That happens in other industries, too, but it’s pretty dramatic in public utilities. And it’s particularly dramatic in public utilities because they are going to need lots of money. So, if you’re going to need lots of money, you probably ought to behave in a way that encourages people to give you lots of money.
Buffett thinks the future capital intensity of the USA’s large technology companies remains to be seen
Warren Buffett: It’ll be interesting to see how much capital intensity there is now with the Magnificent 7 compared to a few years ago. Basically, Apple has not really needed any capital over the years and it’s repurchased shares with a dramatic reduction. Whether that world is the same in the future or not is something yet to be seen.
Buffett thinks there’s no better system than capitalism that has been discovered so far
Warren Buffett: Capitalism in the United States has succeeded like nothing you’ve ever seen. But what it is is a combination of this magnificent cathedral which has produced an economy like nothing the world’s ever seen, and then it’s got this massive casino attached…
…In the cathedral, they’re designing things that will be producing goods and services for 300 and some million people like it’s never been done before in history. It’s an interesting system we developed, but it’s worked. It dispenses rewards in what seems like a terribly capricious manner. The idea that people get what they deserve in life – it’s hard to make that argument. But if you argue with it that any other system works better, the answer is we haven’t found one.
Disclaimer: The Good Investors is the personal investing blog of two simple guys who are passionate about educating Singaporeans about stock market investing. By using this Site, you specifically agree that none of the information provided constitutes financial, investment, or other professional advice. It is only intended to provide education. Speak with a professional before making important decisions about your money, your professional life, or even your personal life. I currently have a vested interest in Alphabet, Amazon, Apple, Meta Platforms, Microsoft, and Tesla (they are all part of the Magnificent 7). Holdings are subject to change at any time.