4 ms·

They weren't insults to me, I want those privileges too, he's very inspirational. It is surprising to me that people want a particular image of him, when I see

They weren't insults to me, I want those privileges too, he's very inspirational. It is surprising to me that people want a particular image of him, when I see the opposite of what he projects and I like it. I like the influence. I forgot other people hadn't seen it, but I am surprised how important his image is to people. I think these privileges are a part of his type-A trader life, and is par for course for successful traders living that life.

mav3rick 8y ago
Not every trader has an open relationship. You are just brushing people with a broad stroke. Buffet is his own individual who had his own arrangement with his family. You are insinuating that he's the same as all "traders" while also insinuating the things "traders" are notorious for. No one's perfect , but time and again Buffet has set a good example for principled investing. You allege that he took a wild swing and got lucky, but he follows what he learnt from Benjamin Graham and then invests. He's always done that. For the layman he suggests just resting and vesting in index funds which have time and again worked over a long period of time.
- gammateam 8y ago
  I don't consider his incongruence with a nuclear family to be an imperfection, I consider it privilege. I never said even said it was a lucky wild swing, there is no interpretation of what I said that meant that, your hyperbole is based on a completely wrong assumption of anything I care about it. Perhaps you decided to latch on to "highly speculative" as "wild swing and got lucky". Lets talk about the curve of risk, buying distressed companies after consolidating your friends and family's money with the addition of massive borrowing on top of that to accomplished your 'principled investing' would still be called highly speculative. This exists within the category of "highly speculative". There is nothing wrong with that? I find it entertaining that his approach to inspiring people is the exact opposite of risk, as he could easily just be another Carl Icahn or Soros if he wanted and only inspire finance majors to make massive bets against governments. He is so successful at this image that people would actually ask me to post a source for my allegations. This is obviously a lot more important to you than it is to me, and your cognitive dissonance is showing. This has been enlightening.
  - mav3rick 8y ago
    No sources, no proof. "He's a trader" is your argument. I"ll live with my "dissonance", best of luck with yours.

mav3rick 8y ago

Not every trader has an open relationship. You are just brushing people with a broad stroke. Buffet is his own individual who had his own arrangement with his family. You are insinuating that he's the same as all "traders" while also insinuating the things "traders" are notorious for. No one's perfect , but time and again Buffet has set a good example for principled investing. You allege that he took a wild swing and got lucky, but he follows what he learnt from Benjamin Graham and then invests. He's always done that. For the layman he suggests just resting and vesting in index funds which have time and again worked over a long period of time.

gammateam 8y ago
I don't consider his incongruence with a nuclear family to be an imperfection, I consider it privilege. I never said even said it was a lucky wild swing, there is no interpretation of what I said that meant that, your hyperbole is based on a completely wrong assumption of anything I care about it. Perhaps you decided to latch on to "highly speculative" as "wild swing and got lucky". Lets talk about the curve of risk, buying distressed companies after consolidating your friends and family's money with the addition of massive borrowing on top of that to accomplished your 'principled investing' would still be called highly speculative. This exists within the category of "highly speculative". There is nothing wrong with that? I find it entertaining that his approach to inspiring people is the exact opposite of risk, as he could easily just be another Carl Icahn or Soros if he wanted and only inspire finance majors to make massive bets against governments. He is so successful at this image that people would actually ask me to post a source for my allegations. This is obviously a lot more important to you than it is to me, and your cognitive dissonance is showing. This has been enlightening.
- mav3rick 8y ago
  No sources, no proof. "He's a trader" is your argument. I"ll live with my "dissonance", best of luck with yours.