Talk:Warren Buffett Information & Talk:Warren Buffett Links at HealthHaven.com
advertise
add site
services
publishers
database
health videos
Bookmark and Share

search wiki for    ?
web dir firms image gallery news pdf wiki shop video 
about
toolbar
stats
live show
health store
more stuff
JOIN/LOGIN
Featured Results:
Talking Watch, Talking Watches, Talking Clock, Talking Bible, Talking...
Talking Watch, Talking Watches, Talking Clock, Talking Bible, Talking...
independentliving.com
 Liposuction Surgeons Warren, Lipoplasty Doctors Warren, Body Contouring...
Liposuction Surgeons Warren, Lipoplasty Doctors Warren, Body Contouring...
myliposuctionusa.com
 

Contents

[edit] American nationality?

He is an U.S. citizen, not an 'american'. A mexican or a peruvian person is an 'american' too. It's not the first time i find such cultural bias in the wiki. I can't correct it because i just created my user a few days ago and the page is blocked. Can anybody do it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Voetius (talkcontribs) 00:55, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Actually, no. From the American English language expert Bryan Garner's Garner's Modern American Usage:

American. As an adjective limited in application ot the United States, this word has long been known to be anomalous. All North Americans and South Americans have claim to being called Americans, and yet the language has never quite recognized this fact: "In strict logic such a use is not justifiable, but common practice and understanding have long since put the word beyond the jurisdiction of logic." 1 George Philip Krapp, The English Language in America xiii (1925). Perhaps one reason for the firmly established usage is the lack of any reasonable alternative (United Statesian?)

ryguillian (talk) 22:51, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

[edit] What about the probability of his having autism, specifically aspergers syndrome?

There are numerous hints of it in his Bio, and the foundations he supports and his sister supports contribute heavily to autism/aspergers research. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.253.30.129 (talk) 04:06, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

  • I read a book review in the Sunday Times of the new authorised biography on him, and the reviewer questioned why the author hadn't brought up the subject of him probably having asperger's. He eats the same food each day (burgers and cherry coke) and has many irrational aspects of his behaviour... I'll check the review (I kept it) and give a ref tomorrow :) But it seems a relevant issue. Malick78 (talk) 20:29, 24 September 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Edited some possibly misleading comments on 'financial failings'

Using today's stock price as a measure of anything is not really helpful in 2008, given the overall world economy.Ykral (talk) 11:02, 1 December 2008 (UTC) Which other price do you want to use? One chosen by yourself, I suppose. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.158.207.21 (talk) 15:18, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

[edit] plagurism?

a part of the introduction is 100% identical to the web page http://www.motivational-story.com/richest.html

"When Buffett spent $9.7 million of Berkshire's funds on a business jet in 1989, he jokingly named it "The Indefensible" because of his past criticisms of such purchases by other CEOs. He lives in the same house in the central Dundee neighborhood of Omaha that he bought in 1958 for $31,500 and today, it is valued at around $700,000."

the are massive similarities throughout the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.106.184.61 (talk) 15:32, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

I read some of the original article and wrote a new way of explaining the anecdote. However, I am not sure that the story even should be a part of this article as already I feel this page is too long. If anyone went behind me and deleted the story about the jet, I would not oppose. I should also say that I moved this story from the introduction to "personal life." Bluerasberry (talk) 18:18, 5 May 2009 (UTC)

[edit] References might really be just a commercial.

I want to point out that I have not found anywhere where Warren Buffett agrees that his ex daughter in laws (Mary Buffett) books are authentically teaching his method of investing.

Therefore, they have no business being listed in the reference. 24.108.136.141 (talk) 19:37, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Reorganized the article

Okay, after reading this article every once in a while and never seeing any major improvements, I just went ahead and reorganized it, giving it essentially a complete overhaul. No content was lost; all prose was kept intact. I think that the new layout is a lot better than before, but it might still need a few tweaks here and there, such as better section titles. Gary King (talk) 05:30, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

me too pohick (talk) 21:37, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Stock Holdings

I will definitely add the stock holding info to Warren Buffett /Berkshire Hathaway pages because this is what readers want to see and why they come to these pages. Gary King's edit makes the whole page non-readable and much less useful. People come to these pages because Warren Buffett is a legendary stock picker.

The stock holding info I put on is from the latest Berkshire 13F filing with SEC. It's not stock quote or anything changing fast. It's what Berkshire tells world what they bought/held/sold in last quarter. Always keep in mind Warren Buffett is about investment, i.e., stocks, without that, the page is dead.Iifacts (talk) 03:00, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

I oppose any addition of the stocks, as they are indiscriminate bits of information which other websites can serve more efficiently. I would accept linking to an SEC page from this article that contains the same information, to provide readers the information without cluttering what is already in this article. Gary King (talk) 03:01, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
The stock holding in a table form is the best way to view it, and I will keep it up-to-date. If you think the info is wrong in that part, change it. But it's not right to simply cut it off. Also, please get the time line back. It's a lot of work from a lot of people, it cannot simply go away because of your personal taste. Iifacts (talk) 03:09, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
An external link would work fine and would save time and effort. I noticed that you (Iifacts) reverted even though consensus was against you and you had already reverted twice. Please keep in mind the three-revert-rule. Dabomb87 (talk) 03:10, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
Looking at the page, I agree that an external link is more appropriate than having a list of stock holdings that may or may not be kept up to date. However, if an external link is used, I highly suggest that it be to a page other than iifacts.com, however, which I would suspect, from the editor's username, may be a conflict of interest issue. Tony Fox (arf!) 04:24, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
Wow, thanks for bringing that up, I didn't actually check the URL used and so I didn't suspect a COI. This brings a whole new dimension to this. Gary King (talk) 04:26, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
Well if you can find better info elsewhere than what's on iifacts.com, go ahead. Gary: your stock holding link on Berkshire Hathaway is misleading. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Iifacts (talkcontribs) 05:03, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
I renamed it to Assets. It was Holdings for a while until I merged the lists together on that page. Gary King (talk) 05:07, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
I was unaware that such a page existed. Dabomb87 (talk) 13:20, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
Yeah, there were a few lists before in this article. One was the stock information, which I removed. The other was a list of assets that his company owned; some items in the list were not yet in the separate article, so I merged it in there to be cleaned up later. Gary King (talk) 17:06, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Books about Warren Buffett

According to an entertaining and informative USA Today article[1] from October 2008, more books have Buffett's name in their title than any other living person, excluding U.S. presidents, major world political figures, and the Dalai Lama. I've added a section describing this phenomenon, and listing the books about Buffett that have an indicia of notability--namely, the book or the book's author has its own Wikipedia article. I added one additional book to the list, a gigantic book that's described at some length in the USA Today article. If others think it would be useful to create a list of all books about Buffett, perhaps that would appropriate for a separate article linked from this section.--Arxiloxos (talk) 23:51, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Goldman Sachs

Buffett's investment in Goldman Sachs is partly financed by the tax-payer. See reference 13 in the Goldman article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.158.207.21 (talk) 10:40, 13 March 2009 (UTC) Reference 15 in the Goldman article is much the same, showing how Buffett is being partly financed by the U.S. tax-payer. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.158.207.21 (talk) 09:58, 17 March 2009 (UTC) Reference 14 in the Goldman article is interesting, too. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.194.34.71 (talk) 13:47, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

huh? he invested in Goldman, the Government is a counterparty, no financing there. however, with the Government largess, there is less chance of default, and also the dividend exclusion for corporations. i take it you want the AIG counterparties to take a haircut, but there is no legal rationale for that. With the quitting of AIG executives,[2] the value of our investment is impaired more than the amount of the bonuses. pohick (talk) 14:10, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Vandalism on bottom of Page

Please remove the vandalism on the bottom of this page. 140.175.214.35 (talk) 12:30, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing that out. It's now been reverted. If you notice vandalism in the future, feel free to be bold in removing it yourself. --OnoremDil 12:44, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Cutting Tobacco quote

i'm considering cutting the tobacco quote. no context, using Buffett as straw man vs. "ethical" investing, he's only bought tobacco stocks when they're cheap, never a core holding pohick (talk) 21:41, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

ok i put it down in a new section, with a follow on quote. dropped guardian ref as secondary, to book barbarians at gate. pohick (talk) 22:17, 17 March 2009 (UTC)

[edit] wealthalchemist.com link spamming

Many of the links seem to go to wealthalchemist.com blog postings instead of legitimate news sources. This should be fixed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.21.94.195 (talk) 04:26, 21 March 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Citation 26

Citation 26 appears to be a Duke student's uncited and IMHO poorly written paper. I think it should go. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.22.55.47 (talk) 11:33, 12 July 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Fisher/Graham

Either this page or Fisher's page is incorrect as it has the Buffett percentage quote reversed —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.80.44.231 (talk) 23:13, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

I would like to submit an e-mail to Mr. Buffett and I don't have an e-mailaddress to Mr. Buffett. how do i get an e-mail to this busy man? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.100.142.244 (talk) 16:59, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Try berkshire@berkshirehathaway.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.139.171.34 (talk) 15:05, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

why not go to the Hagstrom book? <sigh> Pohick2 (talk) 20:34, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Political Views

I noticed you guys conveniently left out that buffett is actually a conservative, and usually supports republican nominees. He is a fan of the free market, obviously, and while he has endorsed obama, he hasnt actually supported any of his economic policies. This should be mentioned, because as it is written now it is a bit misleading. Any business man would be lying if they said obama's economic policies are good for free market.136.160.191.18 (talk) 16:49, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

this is a profound misreading of his views, but do you have a reference to support this? Snowball goes into great detail about his pro-choice, pro-estate tax, anti-privatization of social security views. what economic policy did he fail to support? even if, it wouldn't make him a conservative. Munger is the conservative. Pohick2 (talk) 20:15, 23 December 2009 (UTC)
this contrast between Obama policy and the free market is interesting. i've seen the opposite point made: that Obama has been co-opted by the wall street, goldman sachs set, and the jaw-boning is only rhetoric, but i take it you wouldn't agree. Pohick2 (talk) 15:15, 24 December 2009 (UTC)



Product Results (view all...)

search wiki for    ?
web dir firms image gallery news pdf wiki shop video 



↑ top of page ↑about thumbshots