"In fact, 88 of the 400 in 2008 reported no wages at all, though every one of them reported capital gains. Some of my brethren may shun work but they all like to invest. (I can relate to that.)"
Warren Buffett (BRK.A, Financial)(BRK.B, Financial) from his recent New York Times article.
Message boards are certain to be buzzing today; if you admire Mr. Buffett as I do you would be well served to avoid reading them. The sheer vitriol and personal attacks which such comments will draw is extremely distressing. Message boards facilitate such attacks since they provide anonymity.
It seems we have become increasing more intolerant as a society when someone disagrees with our personal viewpoint. What used to amount to civil disagreement in coffee shops and local cafes has been transferred to message boards and comment sections following the articles, and make no mistake; the commentary is far from civil.
Mr. Buffett is going to be the subject of every radio talk show and political television channel today. He is going to be hailed as a hero on the left while being dissected and portrayed as a pompous ass on the conservative channels. Not only will his ethics be brought into question but also his acumen as an investor and his understanding of economics.
Mr. Buffett's age is certain to become part of the attacks; rest assured that the word senility will become ubiquitous today. It seems that the difference between an extremely wise man and a cretin now resides strictly in one's particular political views. The rigidity of this type of political-thinking is extremely troubling.
In reality Mr. Buffett is exactly the same man he has always been. Whether one agrees with his political or economic views is not really material. What is material is the fact that he has committed nearly his entire wealth to philanthropic pursuits. Further, he has used his outstanding business sense in an attempt to create the maximum utility for his enormous wealth.
Most people are not aware that Mr. Buffett was once a young Republican. His father Howard was an extremely conservative politician who feared that enormous debt would be the downfall of this country. In fact, Howard Buffett believed that his family should have a farm to fall back upon if his greatest fears were realized.
According to Warren, his epiphany came when he attended a speech by Dr. Martin Luther King in Iowa in the 1960s, as described in Buffett's autobiography, "The Snowball." While one could question Mr. Buffett's economic and political opinions (it seems that the two are also intertwined), no one should ever question his integrity or his character.
Mr Buffett is a man of principle who has dedicated his later life and nearly his entire wealth to the betterment of mankind. He is not a saint but he is indeed conducting a saintly act. Unlike politicians and political commentators, there is not a bit of spin in his words nor his actions. He is exactly as he appears to be. I would only hope that his critics take those facts into account when they criticize him today. I suggest they debate him only upon economic and political principles rather than attacking his character. That should never be brought into question.
Here is the entire editorial from the New York Times: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/15/opinion/stop-coddling-the-super-rich.html?_r=1
Warren Buffett (BRK.A, Financial)(BRK.B, Financial) from his recent New York Times article.
Message boards are certain to be buzzing today; if you admire Mr. Buffett as I do you would be well served to avoid reading them. The sheer vitriol and personal attacks which such comments will draw is extremely distressing. Message boards facilitate such attacks since they provide anonymity.
It seems we have become increasing more intolerant as a society when someone disagrees with our personal viewpoint. What used to amount to civil disagreement in coffee shops and local cafes has been transferred to message boards and comment sections following the articles, and make no mistake; the commentary is far from civil.
Mr. Buffett is going to be the subject of every radio talk show and political television channel today. He is going to be hailed as a hero on the left while being dissected and portrayed as a pompous ass on the conservative channels. Not only will his ethics be brought into question but also his acumen as an investor and his understanding of economics.
Mr. Buffett's age is certain to become part of the attacks; rest assured that the word senility will become ubiquitous today. It seems that the difference between an extremely wise man and a cretin now resides strictly in one's particular political views. The rigidity of this type of political-thinking is extremely troubling.
In reality Mr. Buffett is exactly the same man he has always been. Whether one agrees with his political or economic views is not really material. What is material is the fact that he has committed nearly his entire wealth to philanthropic pursuits. Further, he has used his outstanding business sense in an attempt to create the maximum utility for his enormous wealth.
Most people are not aware that Mr. Buffett was once a young Republican. His father Howard was an extremely conservative politician who feared that enormous debt would be the downfall of this country. In fact, Howard Buffett believed that his family should have a farm to fall back upon if his greatest fears were realized.
According to Warren, his epiphany came when he attended a speech by Dr. Martin Luther King in Iowa in the 1960s, as described in Buffett's autobiography, "The Snowball." While one could question Mr. Buffett's economic and political opinions (it seems that the two are also intertwined), no one should ever question his integrity or his character.
Mr Buffett is a man of principle who has dedicated his later life and nearly his entire wealth to the betterment of mankind. He is not a saint but he is indeed conducting a saintly act. Unlike politicians and political commentators, there is not a bit of spin in his words nor his actions. He is exactly as he appears to be. I would only hope that his critics take those facts into account when they criticize him today. I suggest they debate him only upon economic and political principles rather than attacking his character. That should never be brought into question.
Here is the entire editorial from the New York Times: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/15/opinion/stop-coddling-the-super-rich.html?_r=1
