Charlie Munger dead at 99.

[Thailand J]

Charlie Munger, the longtime vice chairman and second-in-command to Warren Buffett at Berkshire Hathaway, died on Tuesday morning.

Munger was 99, and would have turned 100 on Jan. 1.

Munger had been a Berkshire vice chairman since 1978.

 

 

https://nypost.com/2023/11/28/business/charlie-munger-berkshire-hathaway-vice-chairman-dead-at-99/

 

50.04% of BRK/B is invested in Apple.

About 80% is invested in top 5 holdings.

Brk/B vs S&P 500, 10 years:

[Mike Lister]

Charlie was a brilliant mind, a lawyer first and an investor second, some of his quips and quotes at Berkshire AGM's are pure gold. RIP Charlie

[CartagenaWarlock]

He was a legend RIP.

[save the frogs]

wow, look at that chart. it keeps going up and up and up and up.

 

why do people worship someone who "claims" to be worth 100 billion dollars?

does no one think crass obscene materialism is a problem when there is so much inequality and poverty out there?

 

should people get filthy rich not actually contributing anything to society, but playing with graphs on a computer all day?

RIP charles. 

 

 

[Mike Lister]

4 minutes ago, save the frogs said:

wow, look at that chart. it keeps going up and up and up and up.

 

why do people worship someone who "claims" to be worth 100 billion dollars?

does no one think crass obscene materialism is a problem when there is so much inequality and poverty out there?

 

should people get filthy rich not actually contributing anything to society, but playing with graphs on a computer all day?

RIP charles. 

 

 

Forget the money, look at the achievements of the man, they are remarkable. He was told he would lose his sight so he learned brail beforehand and began to use brail as his means of communication, even though he could still see. Despite having vast wealth, he gave 98% of it away to schools, universities and charities he supported yet you see that as not contributing to society, really! As a wise old sage, for younger people wanting to learn something from others, you could do a lot worse than to read the quotes of Charlie Munger, they are priceless.

Edited November 28, 2023 by Mike Lister

[save the frogs]

1 minute ago, Mike Lister said:

he gave 98% of it away to schools, universities and charities

yeah, says his Public Relations team

[Mike Lister]

3 minutes ago, save the frogs said:

yeah, says his Public Relations team

Changing history to suit your personal narrative doesn't make it fact.

 

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/id-rather-be-a-billionaire-and-not-be-loved-by-everybody-charlie-munger-shrugs-off-controversy-over-200m-donation-for-nearly-windowless-dorm-11635547043

[save the frogs]

6 minutes ago, Mike Lister said:

you could do a lot worse than to read the quotes of Charlie Munger, they are priceless.

I'm sure they are.

 

99 per cent of them are probably complete BS.

 

but when he tell you the truth, he doesn't hold back the punches.

 

here he is admitting that investing in the stock market is a major scam. and he is a fund manager admitting this.

 

do you see how comical all this is? or you just don't get it?

 

it's like the Pope admitting that 95% of catholic churches are a scam. 

 

 

[save the frogs]

4 minutes ago, Mike Lister said:

Changing history to suit your personal narrative doesn't make it fact.

 

try worshipping people who contribute something to society.

not people who horde vast amounts of wealth that they bamboozled from suckers. 

 

[Mike Lister]

1 minute ago, save the frogs said:

I'm sure they are.

 

99 per cent of them are probably complete BS.

 

but when he tell you the truth, he doesn't hold back the punches.

 

here he is admitting that investing in the stock market is a major scam. and he is a fund manager admitting this.

 

do you see how comical all this is? or you just don't get it?

 

it's like the Pope admitting that 95% of catholic churches are a scam. 

 

 

Like I said, his quotes are priceless and excellent value, everyone needs to take them onboard.

[steven100]

Charlie had a pretty good innings .... 

[Mike Lister]

2 minutes ago, save the frogs said:

 

try worshipping people who contribute something to society.

not people who horde vast amounts of wealth that they bamboozled from suckers. 

 

There's no worship involved, I'm simply pointing out that he was a very intelligent man who was extremely successful and that his wisdom is something to be admired. If you don't like those things, deal with it and don't take shots at me for admiring his positive traits.

[bignok]

8 minutes ago, save the frogs said:

I'm sure they are.

 

99 per cent of them are probably complete BS.

 

but when he tell you the truth, he doesn't hold back the punches.

 

here he is admitting that investing in the stock market is a major scam. and he is a fund manager admitting this.

 

do you see how comical all this is? or you just don't get it?

 

it's like the Pope admitting that 95% of catholic churches are a scam. 

 

 

Everything is a scam

[bignok]

7 minutes ago, steven100 said:

Charlie had a pretty good innings .... 

LBW on 99.

[msbkk]

37 minutes ago, save the frogs said:

wow, look at that chart. it keeps going up and up and up and up.

 

why do people worship someone who "claims" to be worth 100 billion dollars?

does no one think crass obscene materialism is a problem when there is so much inequality and poverty out there?

 

should people get filthy rich not actually contributing anything to society, but playing with graphs on a computer all day?

RIP charles. 

 

 

Your comments are ridiculous. All people investing their money with him are happy because he made them wealthy. And as others pointed out he gave most of his money to charity. You are only grumpy because you missed the chance to invest with Berkshire.

[bkk6060]

Charlie Monger was another one of these old man they put on CNBC who can hardly talk and embarassed himself.  He obviously was smart and trusted by his boss.  Certainly has been wrong about Bitcoin though.

[Mike Lister]

Just now, bkk6060 said:

Charlie Monger was another one of these old man they put on CNBC who can hardly talk and embarassed himself.  He obviously was smart and trusted by his boss.  Certainly has been wrong about Bitcoin though.

You should go do some reading up before you comment on the man.

[LS24]

50 minutes ago, save the frogs said:

 

 

not people who horde vast amounts of wealth that they bamboozled from suckers. 

 

Sounds like Berkshire and the likes saw you coming from a mile away. Have you ever spotted the sucker in the room?

[LS24]

1 hour ago, Thailand J said:

Charlie Munger, the longtime vice chairman and second-in-command to Warren Buffett at Berkshire Hathaway, died on Tuesday morning.

Munger was 99, and would have turned 100 on Jan. 1.

Munger had been a Berkshire vice chairman since 1978.

 

 

https://nypost.com/2023/11/28/business/charlie-munger-berkshire-hathaway-vice-chairman-dead-at-99/

 

50.04% of BRK/B is invested in Apple.

About 80% is invested in top 5 holdings.

Brk/B vs S&P 500, 10 years:

Not discrediting Charlie Munger or Warren Buffett, but anyone who entered into an ETF for the S&P in 2014 would have had a similar result, no? Berkshire Do create wealth, but it can be a might sight easier to do so with a serious bankroll. A big bankroll creates its own financial gravity that people tend to flock to.

[Mike Lister]

4 minutes ago, LS24 said:

Not discrediting Charlie Munger or Warren Buffett, but anyone who entered into an ETF for the S&P in 2014 would have had a similar result, no? Berkshire Do create wealth, but it can be a might sight easier to do so with a serious bankroll. A big bankroll creates its own financial gravity that people tend to flock to.

You would need to go way back before 2014, even before ETF's were created t achieve the same thing. Buffet started investing in BH in 1963.

[LS24]

9 minutes ago, Mike Lister said:

You would need to go way back before 2014, even before ETF's were created t achieve the same thing. Buffet started investing in BH in 1963.

I am aware of that Berkshire's timeline. I quoted the first post and the graph started at 2014. That is what I referred to.

[Old Croc]

I thought this was going to be another tale of Pattaya.

 

Buffett and his ilk, all claim to be giving vast swaths of their wealth to charity, mainly after their death, but somehow still manage to retain more personal assets than most countries. Certainly way more than one individual or family could ever need.

Munger seems to have been an exception. He died with just a couple of billion in shares.

[Walker88]

1 hour ago, save the frogs said:

wow, look at that chart. it keeps going up and up and up and up.

 

why do people worship someone who "claims" to be worth 100 billion dollars?

does no one think crass obscene materialism is a problem when there is so much inequality and poverty out there?

 

should people get filthy rich not actually contributing anything to society, but playing with graphs on a computer all day?

RIP charles. 

 

 

You seem bitter.

 

Curious what is the most wealth someone should be allowed to keep? A dollar less than you? Who decides how much is too much? Who decides who is worthy of receiving the wealth taken away from those with 'too much'? The government? Do you think every person who is not wealthy is a 'salt of the Earth' type who just needs a helping hand, or are some in their predicament through every fault of their own? You trust the government with all of the wealth you earned to spread out what they take from you only to the worthy? Do you think every person truly wants to work hard and not simply take freebies so as to maintain a slothful lifestyle?

 

There's a reason both Communism and Socialism failed. Both are inefficient and unfair, allowing the lazy to do just as well as the ambitious, and squelching incentives for capable people to work hard. While not perfect, Capitalism produces the greatest overall prosperity.

 

Charlie Munger did not 'bamboozle' anyone. He took chances anyone else could take, but just used superior judgement and maybe had better luck. While it might not be easy to see what 'value' he added to society, active financial markets with lots of liquidity are what allow things like start-up money for new people-employing and service-providing businesses, pensions, insurance, and all sorts of things that require capital formation and capital return.

 

I probably have more wealth than you think a person deserves, and if up to you, the government would take it away and use it for something else (like a pork project in a politician's district so he will be loved and get re-elected). Why can't I decide what to do with the wealth I have earned? Why do I lose that right just because I've been better at acquiring wealth than you? As it turns out, I have 'given away' $millions, but to efforts and situations I chose, not some self-serving elected official or bureaucrat who may not know as much about genuine need as I do. Also, even if I just decide to buy Lamborghinis and a Gulfstream, does my spending not result in jobs and income for workers? Perhaps you think people feel just as good about what they have if it was given to them or if they worked a job for it? I think people feel better if they think they earned it, but maybe I'm wrong.

 

 

Edited November 29, 2023 by Walker88

[oxo1947]

99.7% of Buffetts wealth was created after the age of 52 --The system here is – starting at a very early age In other words, more the number of years, the better – as compounding begins to show its power with time.

Buffett started at the age of 11 and continuing well beyond the age of retirement.

 

 

Bezos once asked him--your style is so simple, why dont people just copy you?

 

Buffetts answer was----Because, Nobody wants to get rich slowly:

[Neeranam]

Dinosaurs like him and Buffet should not give advice on new technolgies.

 

Totally wrong about crypto.

 

 

[Everyman]

I completely do not care about him but the idea that wealth causes poverty is stupid. It’s fixed pie fallacy. It’s as ridiculous as your parents telling you to eat your broccoli because kids are starving in Bangladesh. 

[Liverpool Lou]

7 hours ago, save the frogs said:

does no one think crass obscene materialism is a problem when there is so much inequality and poverty out there?

Not at all.  What "inequality" are you referring to?  You're not suggesting that the successful rich should give their assets to the unsuccessful poor, are you?

[Digitalbanana]

10 hours ago, save the frogs said:

wow, look at that chart. it keeps going up and up and up and up.

 

why do people worship someone who "claims" to be worth 100 billion dollars?

does no one think crass obscene materialism is a problem when there is so much inequality and poverty out there?

 

should people get filthy rich not actually contributing anything to society, but playing with graphs on a computer all day?

 

Must all be Munger quotes. Here's another.

“Remember that reputation and integrity are your most valuable assets—and can be lost in a heartbeat.”

[BritManToo]

9 hours ago, Walker88 said:

Curious what is the most wealth someone should be allowed to keep?

$10M + 1 home.

That's enough for anyone, anywhere.

[bignok]

Dead now. Money is useless.