Charlie Munger: 'Idiots Of Each Party' In Control | CNBC
Vložit
- čas přidán 25. 08. 2024
- Berkshire Hathaway's Warren Buffett; Charlie Munger, Berkshire Hathaway vice-chairman; and Bill Gates, Microsoft chairman, share their thoughts on the 2016 presidential race for the White House.
For more of Warren Buffett's wit and wisdom visit Buffett.CNBC.com
» Subscribe to CNBC: cnb.cx/Subscrib...
About CNBC: From 'Wall Street' to 'Main Street' to award winning original documentaries and Reality TV series, CNBC has you covered. Experience special sneak peeks of your favorite shows, exclusive video and more.
Connect with CNBC News Online
Get the latest news: www.cnbc.com/
Find CNBC News on Facebook: cnb.cx/LikeCNBC
Follow CNBC News on Twitter: cnb.cx/FollowCNBC
Follow CNBC News on Google+: cnb.cx/PlusCNBC
Follow CNBC News on Instagram: cnb.cx/Instagra...
Charlie Munger: 'Idiots Of Each Party' In Control | CNBC
I agree with Mr. Charlie
1:30 haha titanic
Buffett And Munger are legends. Seems like the world was more stable when Bill/Buffett were the richest
Politics and business
are supposed to be
"Fail MD people" and
"Fail Engineer people."
Law is actually extremely useful for everything.
What I'm looking at is 3 multi billionaires
No, Charlie Munger has less than 2 billion dollars. He gives all his money away all the time.
Tell the truth munger
Do you have the full conversation?
Least the idiots on our side our accountable to us when we leave ☺
Bubbles is that what you look like when you get rich? lol.
1:12 DID HE JUST SAY REPUBLICANS WILL DIE OFF?
Bill could have sat this one out
I wish I knew a time where politicians, didn't play politics.. I resigned from a political party as a matter of integrity.. With all due respect; has there ever been a time, where it hasn't been say one thing and do another?
This is not limited to the public sector.. Geuine lack of accountability is a common trait.
He looks like that guy from Hannibal who cuts his own face
Bill Gates you da man!
**democratic socialist** not just socialist
+Kerrs Opinion A distinction in name alone. Just like New Labour.
Still socialism, can't just put "democratic" in front and make the socialist part go away. It's more of a marketing strategy to make socialist ideas more pallatable to voters who would be less likely to vote for a self proclaimed "socialist"
No such thing. A total fallacy.
Nobel Prize-winning economist Richard Thaler has shown that markets aren't efficient. That's a big problem for capitalism.
And our history has shown that Government isn't efficient either. There is failures in the world that neither capitalism or government can't solve.
He’s smarted person I’ve seen
the only thing which you need to consider at this point is to first notice just how delusional some of the "authoritative" assumptions are... besides having to frequently stop a teenager from attempting to cause me paranoia, i have the would be in-laws giving me the silent treatment.. maybe they cannot get the desired responses out of me but that is only because there aren't any of the elements necessary to form a relationship. my dilemma is whether i should abandon the road to a relationship, in order to rescue the financial boat, which has almost sunk... or just stick with it, considering how much social capital is at stake already.
there is a part of me that wants to abandon bill altogether if i could pin point the source of claims, but the majority is still leaning towards my young age with no shortage of adrenaline, a desire for intimacy and room to take greater risk. If i could determine the underlying benefit exactly, that is..
There has never been a truly capitalist system: all societies are a hybrid of capitalism and socialism. "The right amount of socialism" is an empirical question. The US has a lower standard of living than 9 or 10 other countries, which are more socialist. The US has a smaller economy that China (adjusted for PPP) which is also a socialist country. Based on the evidence, it would probably help us to become more socialist. Many people will argue against this based on their beliefs. But I ask: what is a better guide, beliefs or evidence?
Sure, but go plot economic freedom with GDP per capita and you'll see an undeniable positive correlation. Every single countries that ranks higher in living standards have much higher taxes and welfare but they are fundamentally capitalistic and pro free market. The amount of taxes and welfare are debatable, but take away economic freedom and you'll end up like Venezuela or North Korea.
I think one of the main reasons why this nation has done well so far is that it is a combination of capitalism and socialism. And of course the biggest reason has been our generosity and spirituality, both of which are unfortunately on the decline. There are many factors for it, but a lack of true justice is the most prevailing.
Charlie fails to identify that it absolutely has to be this way. When countries move closer and closer toward a Socialist state, there must be a bold and politically violent revolution in order to turn that bulky ship around. When the British Empire continued to grow their control over the American colonies, what did it result in? A bloody battle to the death! A war! What we have today in America is far less crazy that the American Civil War. These are just a few examples. Charlie seems to have taken a narrow view here, by thinking that we could change such a sturdy political status quo with the respectful, diplomatic politics of the 50's.
And once again, here is proof why Charlie is brilliant and these guys that think they know more are idiots.