• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

Warren Buffett says recession may be worse than feared

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

seemingly random

Diamond Member
Oct 10, 2007
5,281
0
0
Originally posted by: Genx87
Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
Originally posted by: Jaskalas
Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
Well, according to the numbers just released - we aren't even in a recession so....
Not everything happens instantly. The Fed's 500 billion spent to save the economy has had some short term positive effect, the long term is completely screwed.
I understand nothing happens instantly, however we are not yet in a recession and none of the "relief" has had a chance to work(not saying it will but...)

But anyway, we've had tons of talking the economy down the last 6-9 months but yet the numbers just released say we aren't in a recession - that's all I was really pointing out with my statement.
6-9 months? The media has been on this "bad economy" storyline since summer of 2004.
As has been said, a broken clock is correct twice a day.

The same logic can be applied to the perma-bulls.
 

HeXploiT

Diamond Member
Jun 11, 2004
4,358
0
71
Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
Well, according to the numbers just released - we aren't even in a recession so....
Oh yeah and I heard president Bush back that up yesterday at a press conference.:thumbsup:
(I started this thread with sarcasm so I'll just carry on)
 

LegendKiller

Lifer
Mar 5, 2001
18,261
68
86
Originally posted by: seemingly random
Originally posted by: LegendKiller
Originally posted by: seemingly random
Originally posted by: LegendKiller
Originally posted by: seemingly random
Originally posted by: Perry404
...
Well...this Buffet guy did say this is not his specialty.
Probably he doesn't understand what he's saying.
Yeah, Buffet doesn't know what he's talking about. :disgust:
Buffet clearly stated that his expertise isn't in gauging macro-economic movements. He is very good about picking long-term investments with strong companies which he feels have the management and products to deliver long-term returns.

He is not an economic prognosticator and can be wrong. To consider somebody infallable, especially outside of their core competence, is not very smart.
We'll see - I happen to think we're in for a long, rough ride.

I didn't claim that anybody was infallible - that would be arrogant. I would claim to trust buffet's gut instinct over just about any macro-economist though. buffet has quite a bit of data available that an independent economist doesn't have.
But less data than *all* economists have.
Sometimes less is more. I suppose that bill gross can't make any predictions either since he's just a bond trader. :disgust:
You're also forgetting motivations, of which Gross has many.

I remember that he was on CNBC and Bloomberg trashing CDOs but not 2 weeks later issued his own.

He was also advocating 1-1.5% interest rates, but then recently came out and said that he thinks rates are now low enough.

Gross is also not infallabe.

 

HeXploiT

Diamond Member
Jun 11, 2004
4,358
0
71
Originally posted by: seemingly random
Originally posted by: LegendKiller
Originally posted by: seemingly random
Originally posted by: Perry404
...
Well...this Buffet guy did say this is not his specialty.
Probably he doesn't understand what he's saying.
Yeah, Buffet doesn't know what he's talking about. :disgust:
Buffet clearly stated that his expertise isn't in gauging macro-economic movements. He is very good about picking long-term investments with strong companies which he feels have the management and products to deliver long-term returns.

He is not an economic prognosticator and can be wrong. To consider somebody infallable, especially outside of their core competence, is not very smart.
We'll see - I happen to think we're in for a long, rough ride.

I didn't claim that anybody was infallible - that would be arrogant. I would claim to trust buffet's gut instinct over just about any macro-economist though. buffet has quite a bit of data available that an independent economist doesn't have.
Remember Buffet never produced anything. The man is 100% investor and the worlds most successful one over the past 50 years. He's also very humble.
 

seemingly random

Diamond Member
Oct 10, 2007
5,281
0
0
Originally posted by: Perry404
Remember Buffet never produced anything. The man is 100% investor and the worlds most successful one over the past 50 years. He's also very humble.
in almost everything. I did however see him once exhibit some pride in his knowledge of insurance - it has out of character. For some reason, I listen more carefully to those who appear to be humble than the "big mouths".
 

seemingly random

Diamond Member
Oct 10, 2007
5,281
0
0
Originally posted by: Perry404
Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
Well, according to the numbers just released - we aren't even in a recession so....
Oh yeah and I heard president Bush back that up yesterday at a press conference.:thumbsup:
(I started this thread with sarcasm so I'll just carry on)
Gee, now I feel warm and fuzzy all over.
 

seemingly random

Diamond Member
Oct 10, 2007
5,281
0
0
Originally posted by: LegendKiller
Originally posted by: seemingly random
Originally posted by: LegendKiller
...
Gross is also not infallabe.
There's the use of that word again for some reason...
There is a reason, but I do suck at spelling it eh?
I suck at spelling sometimes too but that wasn't the point. Are you going to reveal the fixation on infallibility?
 

LegendKiller

Lifer
Mar 5, 2001
18,261
68
86
Originally posted by: seemingly random
Originally posted by: LegendKiller
Originally posted by: seemingly random
Originally posted by: LegendKiller
...
Gross is also not infallabe.
There's the use of that word again for some reason...
There is a reason, but I do suck at spelling it eh?
I suck at spelling sometimes too but that wasn't the point. Are you going to reveal the fixation on infallibility?
There is no fixation. I just think that people relying on any single opinion, or using that opinion as all basis for a position without considering counter positions, which is not a great way of operating.

It's pretty silly to say "but but but...Buffet says so!" as support for an argument.
 

WHAMPOM

Diamond Member
Feb 28, 2006
7,630
181
106
Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
Well, according to the numbers just released - we aren't even in a recession so....
Remove the billions of OUR money Gov. has given to bail-out the poor lil' :( corporate banking industry, then do the numbers.
 

seemingly random

Diamond Member
Oct 10, 2007
5,281
0
0
Originally posted by: LegendKiller
Originally posted by: seemingly random
Originally posted by: LegendKiller
Originally posted by: seemingly random
Originally posted by: LegendKiller
...
Gross is also not infallabe.
There's the use of that word again for some reason...
There is a reason, but I do suck at spelling it eh?
I suck at spelling sometimes too but that wasn't the point. Are you going to reveal the fixation on infallibility?
There is no fixation. I just think that people relying on any single opinion, or using that opinion as all basis for a position without considering counter positions, is not a great way of operating.

It's pretty silly to say "but but but...Buffet says so!" as support for an argument.
This must be stemming from some personal pet peeve but that's ok. It would be foolish to make a decision based on such a small sampling - or the opinion of one person.

I hope that I didn't leave the opinion of being a buffet cheerleader - since I'm not. His opinion should be considered though since he has figured things out pretty well through the years. He did knock his buddy bill out of the richest person in the world slot recently - although this was the result of market conditions more than anything he did in particular.
 

JS80

Lifer
Oct 24, 2005
26,297
4
81
Originally posted by: Perry404
Originally posted by: seemingly random
Originally posted by: LegendKiller
Originally posted by: seemingly random
Originally posted by: Perry404
...
Well...this Buffet guy did say this is not his specialty.
Probably he doesn't understand what he's saying.
Yeah, Buffet doesn't know what he's talking about. :disgust:
Buffet clearly stated that his expertise isn't in gauging macro-economic movements. He is very good about picking long-term investments with strong companies which he feels have the management and products to deliver long-term returns.

He is not an economic prognosticator and can be wrong. To consider somebody infallable, especially outside of their core competence, is not very smart.
We'll see - I happen to think we're in for a long, rough ride.

I didn't claim that anybody was infallible - that would be arrogant. I would claim to trust buffet's gut instinct over just about any macro-economist though. buffet has quite a bit of data available that an independent economist doesn't have.
Remember Buffet never produced anything. The man is 100% investor and the worlds most successful one over the past 50 years. He also sucks at economics.
FIXED

IMO Buffett isn't all that. I read his biography and his investing philosophy isn't revolutionary or anything. The guy picked stocks in an era where it was like shooting fish in a barrel. He got lucky on a few picks and built his "empire" from there. It's not that hard to be successful at investing if you have a few billion and your strategy is to invest in extremely conservative companies.

He's certainly no Peter Lynch.
 

HeXploiT

Diamond Member
Jun 11, 2004
4,358
0
71
Originally posted by: seemingly random
Originally posted by: Perry404
Remember Buffet never produced anything. The man is 100% investor and the worlds most successful one over the past 50 years. He's also very humble.
in almost everything. I did however see him once exhibit some pride in his knowledge of insurance - it has out of character. For some reason, I listen more carefully to those who appear to be humble than the "big mouths".
Well the talking heads have proven again and again that they don't know what they're talking about. Whether or not the chairmen' of the fed believe what they say is debatable. I'm of the opinion that the chairmans primary function is to protect the fed and be a sort of press secretary to the public always presenting a friendly face. They haven't given us reason to have faith in them.
Berkshire Hathaway stock was up 20% in the past year.
If he can do this in 2007 and continues to hold gold at $1000 you can bet your bottom dollar we're in for a ride.
 

seemingly random

Diamond Member
Oct 10, 2007
5,281
0
0
Originally posted by: JS80
...
He's certainly no Peter Lynch.
I don't claim to have done extensive research to compare buffet to lynch (or anybody else). However, I do remember in 2000-01 (pre-9/11), fidelity trotted lynch out in an attempt to calm investors - told them/us to continue putting money in the market. This turned out to be a very bad idea for almost all long bets.

Lynch came to fame during the "shooting fish in a barrel times" of the 1980-90s. The magellan fund did quite nicely for me on average.
 

JS80

Lifer
Oct 24, 2005
26,297
4
81
Originally posted by: seemingly random
Originally posted by: JS80
...
He's certainly no Peter Lynch.
I don't claim to have done extensive research to compare buffet to lynch (or anybody else). However, I do remember in 2000-01 (pre-9/11), fidelity trotted lynch out in an attempt to calm investors - told them/us to continue putting money in the market. This turned out to be a very bad idea for almost all long bets.

Lynch came to fame during the "shooting fish in a barrel times" of the 1980-90s. The magellan fund did quite nicely for me on average.
A professional investor who ignores tech stocks because he "doesn't understand them" is a retard in my book.

And his politics further proves to me what a simpleton he is.
 

HeXploiT

Diamond Member
Jun 11, 2004
4,358
0
71
Originally posted by: JS80
Originally posted by: seemingly random
Originally posted by: JS80
...
He's certainly no Peter Lynch.
I don't claim to have done extensive research to compare buffet to lynch (or anybody else). However, I do remember in 2000-01 (pre-9/11), fidelity trotted lynch out in an attempt to calm investors - told them/us to continue putting money in the market. This turned out to be a very bad idea for almost all long bets.

Lynch came to fame during the "shooting fish in a barrel times" of the 1980-90s. The magellan fund did quite nicely for me on average.
A professional investor who ignores tech stocks because he "doesn't understand them" is a retard in my book.

And his politics further proves to me what a simpleton he is.
That comment is dated. Buffet made that comment when the dot-com bubble was incredibly inflated. I interpreted it as saying he believed tech and especially internet issues were hyperinflated. Guess what? He was right. BRK.A was one of the few issues that didn't take a major beating during the dot-com burst.
Also if you look at BRK.A today I think you'll find their holdings do not reflect that statement. My guess is he understood them better than 99% of the the investing world.
 

seemingly random

Diamond Member
Oct 10, 2007
5,281
0
0
Originally posted by: JS80
A professional investor who ignores tech stocks because he "doesn't understand them" is a retard in my book.
Funny about this - I have tremendous respect for someone who admits when they don't know about something. In buffet's case, it served him well - whether by chance or calculation.

And his politics further proves to me what a simpleton he is.
Don't know anything about his politics but would guess that he's apolitical. Am I right?
 

CADsortaGUY

Lifer
Oct 19, 2001
25,162
1
76
www.ShawCAD.com
Originally posted by: Genx87
Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
Originally posted by: Jaskalas
Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY
Well, according to the numbers just released - we aren't even in a recession so....
Not everything happens instantly. The Fed's 500 billion spent to save the economy has had some short term positive effect, the long term is completely screwed.
I understand nothing happens instantly, however we are not yet in a recession and none of the "relief" has had a chance to work(not saying it will but...)

But anyway, we've had tons of talking the economy down the last 6-9 months but yet the numbers just released say we aren't in a recession - that's all I was really pointing out with my statement.
6-9 months? The media has been on this "bad economy" storyline since summer of 2004.
That is true to an extent but they've ratcheted it up in the past 6-9 months due to the election I suppose. A year ago the economy wasn't a "main" issue and people were wondering why it wasn't because it always is. Well.... with enough talking it down... and enough "crisis" talk it will go down.
 

Craig234

Lifer
May 1, 2006
38,584
345
126
Originally posted by: JS80
Originally posted by: seemingly random
Originally posted by: JS80
...
He's certainly no Peter Lynch.
I don't claim to have done extensive research to compare buffet to lynch (or anybody else). However, I do remember in 2000-01 (pre-9/11), fidelity trotted lynch out in an attempt to calm investors - told them/us to continue putting money in the market. This turned out to be a very bad idea for almost all long bets.

Lynch came to fame during the "shooting fish in a barrel times" of the 1980-90s. The magellan fund did quite nicely for me on average.
A professional investor who ignores tech stocks because he "doesn't understand them" is a retard in my book.

And his politics further proves to me what a simpleton he is.
A guy who says that the most successful investor on the planet is a 'retard' for his investment picks, also says the guy is a 'simpleton' for his moral politics against his own interests.
 

Jaskalas

Lifer
Jun 23, 2004
29,991
3,485
126
While everyone wants to assure us of a comfortable economic picture ? here is another article to spoil the mood.

LA Times: Disappearing now: $6 trillion in housing wealth

See, my issue isn?t with the money already used for the bailouts. I?m concerned over how many trillions will be required in future bailouts to stem the fallout of our present situation. If the $280 billion bailout plus $200 billion in rebates was all that was required - I would be standing beside you cheering on having avoided the next depression. However, this isn't over.
 

Thump553

Lifer
Jun 2, 2000
11,866
1,193
126
Buffett-despite his multi-billionaire status, has a very astute understanding of how the real America functions today. For the past ten-fifteen years far too many of us have been using our home equity as an easily tapped piggy bank to buy all the latest consumer toys and drive this economy. Buffett realizes, and quite correctly, that those salad days are over for the foreseeable future. Both the tightening of credit standards and the decrease (frequently elimination) of home equity is going to slow this economy down-both big time and for a long time.

We are truely fortunate that unemployment hasn't really ramped up yet. I don't know how we are going to avoid that, and when it comes it will drive us deeper down. Especially if we get premium paying employers, like airlines, car manufacturers, etc., folding or doing severe layoffs.

I think Buffett is correct in viewing this downturn as both more severe and much longer lasting than most people expect.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY