ManAboutDallas

Even Buffett Makes Mistakes

Berkshire collapses the minute Warren croaks; Apple collapses the minute Jobs croaks which, given the state of his health, is "any minute now".

It'll be great theatre, though, watching the in-fighting at both companies as those who presume the mantle is theirs busily cut one another's throats to achieve what, in the end, will be Pyrrhic Victories for the "winners" in each case.

Buffet's "bet" on BNI is simply the realisation that what little goods there will be to be transported in post-collapse America will be carried by rail, since the price of diesel will be rising inexorably because crude will be heading for $100.. $200... $300 a barrel as long as oil is priced in $'s and the US$ finishes its Swan Song. 18-wheelers will become an extinct species, and the only thing trucks will be used for any more will be end-point local delivery from the rail terminal.

Welcome to the United Banana Republic States of America. Now all that remains is to officially change the National Anthem to o/~ "Yes! We Have No Bananas, We Have No Bananas Today!" o/~

Buffett's Burlington Buy Is Really a Bet on China

Just about right, Roger. Let Occam's Razor give us the answer, shall we;

Buffett is buying railroads because they're going to be the most efficient way of moving what few goods there will be to move when diesel is $10 a gallon and still rising, and over the road truckers are renting out their parked on the sides of every road tractor cabs to ladies of questionable virtue for the purpose of providing their own special services.. He's not making any huge bet on the American economy, or on China; he's making a Hobson's Choice in deploying his ca$h while it still has any buying power, for anything.


On Nov 06 10:44 AM Roger Knights wrote:

> "The future is in containerized freight (both import/export) and
> domestic...rails do the long haul, motor carriers the pick up and
> delivery"
>
> Especially if there are penalties on CO2 emissions, which would benefit
> RRs at the expense of truckers.

Buffett's Burlington Buy Is Really a Bet on China

No, what you really need to do is ( take your choice )

get back on the Thorazine drip; or
take the "empty room, loaded revolver" option, you're too stupid to be running around loose on Planet Earth.


On Nov 07 12:22 AM ACEMAN wrote:

> Y'all got to understand that it makes no sense to go buy yourself
> a national railroad with aging rails and expensive to run railroad
> cars to deliver various types of coal be it thermal or slurry, hard
> or soft, utilities or steelmakers. where is the advantage to that
> theory, unless he intends to write down the whole shebang for one
> major balance sheet correction. No one in their right mind would
> do that, even if y'all wanted to save America by building confidence
> in an aging and aged infrastructure, it makes no sense. Until the
> Secy of the Interior gets religion on coal and oil shale, this admin
> is in cohoots with the environuts who wish to stifle any additional
> commercial mining, drilling where there is loads of coal, oil and
> precious metals.Go read the latest roadblocks induced by the paranoid
> and crazy new EIR's promulgated by Secy Salazar. Y'all don't know
> a thing about hard commodities if you think Robber Baron Buffett's
> deal is about coal. Coal has a purpose in its comercial use and that
> it lights up your homes as electricity. Buffett could have bought
> all the major producers in the US for the money he paid for BNI.
> The deal could be some sort of derivative play on the value of the
> land and the right of way of the rails and this can easily be leveraged,
> sliced and diced, and sold to Wall Street and then bankable as a
> credit pool and sold for its righjts as a long term bond. all sounds
> familiar, don't it? Now, I really need my beignet and coffee at the
> Cafe du Monde, NOLA.

Dr. Stephen Leeb on Commodities and Inflation - Is He a Genius or Alarmist?

[G]enius "or" alarmist ? Why must there be the implied choice? Is a genius incapable of also being an alarmist ? And vice-versa ? The real, salient question, however, is: Which of Dr. Leeb's premises are correct, and which are not ?

Your discussion of the "BRAC" countries is incomplete without the inclusion of New Zealand. It lives and labours in the shadow of neighbouring Australia, and is thus - unfairly - relegated to afterthought status when it is not deserving of such. But it is poised to enjoy the same good fortune as Great Britain did in the 70's and 80's when its vast hydrocarbon deposits are exploited over the next several decades.