저자: 워런버핏 · 외국인
요약 보기
결론: 이 영상은 종목·자산 가격의 방향을 예측하는 발언이 없고, 행복과 돈, 지연된 만족, 버크셔의 의사결정 방식에 대한 일반론 위주다. 돈과 행복: 버핏은 5만~10만 달러를 가진 사람이 행복하지 않다면 5,000만~1억 달러를 가져도 행복하지 않을 것이라고 말했다. 어느 정도의 돈은 안정감을 줘서 기분을 좋게 하지만, 그 이상의 막대한 부와 행복 사이에는 상관관계가 보이지 않는다고 했다. 그는 부자들이 극도로 부유해져서가 아니라 돈 걱정을 덜 하게 되었을 때 더 행복해 보인다고 덧붙였다. 지연된 만족: 멍거는 지연된 만족 능력은 가르쳐서 생기는 것이 아니라 타고나는 성향에 가깝다고 보았다. 버핏은 장기 국채를 예로 들며 금리가 낮으면 지금 즐기지 못한 것을 나중에 보상받기 어렵다고 설명했다. 다만 모든 상황에서 저축만이 최선은 아니며, 가족과 함께 즐거움을 누리는 것도 중요하다고 강조했다. 버핏은 과거 번 돈의 2~3센트를 쓰며 원하는 것을 누렸다고 말했다. 투자 정보 공개: 버크셔는 투자 결정을 사적 자산으로 보며, 매일 매수·매도 내역을 공개하지 않는 것이 회사 이익에 부합한다고 설명했다. 법적으로 요구되는 범위 밖에서는 종목을 공개하지 않는다는 입장이다. 버크셔의 구조: 멍거는 버크셔가 본사 인력이 적고 위원회 심의가 없는 독특한 구조라서 빠른 결정이 가능하다고 설명했다. 버핏은 주말에도 100억 달러 규모의 거래를 즉시 약속할 수 있는 신뢰가 버크셔의 큰 자산이라고 말했다. 테드와 토드 두 투자자가 기회 발굴 경로를 넓혔고, 시장이 혼란스러울 때 정크본드 같은 기회에서 큰 역할을 할 수 있다고 언급했다. 비트코인: 멍거는 비트코인 행사에 초대받았지만 유다 이스카리옷을 기리는 자리 같다며 농담조로 비꼬았다. 버핏은 1952년 라스베이거스에서 룰렛에 돈을 거는 사람들을 보며 수학적으로 어리석다고 느꼈던 일을 회고했고, 비트코인이 그 감정을 되살린다고 말했다. 이는 가격 방향에 대한 예측이 아니라 부정적 평가다. 리스크/조건: 특정 자산의 1~3개월 가격 방향에 대한 발언은 없다. 금리·환율·반도체 등 대상 자산에 대한 언급도 없다. 출연자 전망: 버핏과 멍거 모두 단기 시장 전망은 제시하지 않았고, 세계가 나빠지더라도 현금을 보유한 버크셔가 패닉 상황에서 잘 대응할 수 있다는 장기적 시각만 드러냈다.
다듬은 글
One thing you should understand, if you aren't happy having $50,000 [clears throat] or $100,000, you're not going to be happy if you have 50 million or 100 million. A certain amount of money does make you feel when those feel around, you feel better just in terms of being more secure in some cases, but loads and loads of money.
I probably know as many rich people as just about anybody and I don't think [clears throat] they're happier because they get super rich. I think they are happier when they don't have to worry about money, but you don't see a correlation between happiness and money beyond a certain place. like I see you in our living room a lot.
My dad is constantly playing these videos of you at these meetings and he teaches me a lot of lessons about you guys. But many of them require the delayed gratification skill. I want to know, is there any way that kids can develop the delayed gratification skill? I'll take that because I am a specialist in delayed gratification.
I wrote the whole time to delay it and my answer is that they either come out of the womb with the delayed gratification thing or they come out of the womb where they have to have everything right now and I've never been able to change them at all. So, we identify it, we don't train it in. Charlie's had eight children, so he's become more and more of a believer in nature versus nurture.
He'll probably sign some nice old woman of about 95 out there in threadbare clothing and she's delaying gratification right to the end and probably has 4,000 A shares. It's just these second and third generation types that are buying old jewelry. It's interesting if you think about, we'll take it to a broader point, but if you think of a 30-year government bond paying 3% and you allow for as an individual paying some taxes on the 3% you'll receive and you'll have the Federal Reserve Board saying that their objective is to have 2% inflation, you'll really see the delayed gratification you own a long government bond is that you get to go to Disneyland and ride the same number of rides 30 years now that you would if you did it now.
I low interest rates for people who invest in fixed dollar investments really mean that you really aren't going to have each steak later on after you eat hamburgers now, which is what I used to preach my wife and children and anybody else that would listen many years ago. I don't necessarily think that for all families and all circumstances that saving money is necessarily the best thing to do in life.
I mean you know, I don't you really tell your kids that whatever it may be they never go to the movies or will never go to Disneyland or something of the sort because if I save this money 30 years from now, you know, we'll be able to stay a week instead of two days. I think I think there's a lot to be said for doing things that bring you and your family enjoyment rather than trying to save every dime.
So, delayed gratification is not necessarily an unqualified uh course of action under all circumstances. I always believed in spending two or three cents out of every dollar I earned. I was at everything I wanted. I mean, one thing you should understand, if you aren't happy having $50,000 or $100,000, you're not going to be happy if you have 50 million or 100 million.
A certain amount of money does make you feel and those feel around you feel better just in terms of being more secure in some cases, but loads and loads of money I've probably known as many rich people as just about anybody and I don't think they're happier because they get super rich. I think they are happier when they don't have to worry about money, but you don't see a correlation between happiness and money beyond a certain place.
So, don't go overboard on delayed gratification. We regard investment decisions as proprietary basically. They belong to Berkshire and we are not an investment advisory organization. So, that is counter to the interest of Berkshire for them to be talking about securities they own. It's a counter to the interest of Berkshire for Charlie or me to to doing it.
We've done better because we don't publish every day what we're buying and selling. I mean, if somebody's working on a new product at Apple or somebody's working on a new drug or they're assembling property or something of the sort, they do not go out and tell everybody in the world exactly what they're doing every day.
And we're trying to generate ideas and investment, and we we do not believe in telling the world what we're doing every day except to the extent that we're legally required. But, it's a good idea. Charlie? Well, one of the reasons we have trouble with these questions is because we're Berkshire is so very peculiar.
There's only one thing like it. We have a different kind of un-bureaucratic way of making decisions. There aren't any people in headquarters. We don't have endless committees deliberating forever and making bad decisions. We just we're radically different, and it's awkward being so different, and but I don't want to be like everybody else because this has worked better.
So, I think you're just going to have to endure us. We do think that it's a huge corporate asset, which may only surface very occasionally, and depending very much on how the world is around us. But, to be the one place, I think, in the world, almost, where somebody can call on a Saturday morning and meet on Sunday morning and have a $10 billion commitment, and nobody in the world doubts whether that commitment will be upheld, and it's not subject to any kind of welching on the part of the company that's doing it.
It's got nothing involved other than Berkshire's word, and that's an asset that every now and then will be worth a lot of money to Berkshire, and I don't really think it will be subject to competition. And Ted and Todd, in particular, are an additional pipeline, and have proven to be an additional pipeline in terms of facilitating the exercise of that ability.
I mean, things come in through them that, for one reason or another, I might not hear about otherwise. They have expanded our universe in the markets we've had in recent years. That hasn't been important. I can see periods where they would be enormously valuable. Just take the question that was raised by the fellow from Winnipeg about weak covenants in bonds.
I mean, we we could have a situation, who knows when, who knows where, who knows whether, but we could have a situation where there could be massive defaults in the junk bond type market. We've had those a couple times and we made a fair amount of money off of them, but Ted and Todd will multiply our effectiveness in a big way if such a period comes along or some other types of periods come along.
They're very, very, very useful to Berkshire. The call happened to come in on Friday from Brian Moynihan, the CEO of Bank of America, and he's done an incredible job, but we have a better chance of getting more calls and having them properly filtered and everything appropriately filtered the next time conditions get chaotic than we did last time.
And that's that's important. Charlie? Well, I do think it's true that as the world goes to hell in a hand handbasket, that you people will be in the right company. We've got a lot of cash and we know how to behave well in a panic. And if the world doesn't go to hell, are things so bad now? And I also want to report that your vice chairman is getting new social distinction.
I've been invited during this gathering to go to a happy hour put on by the Bitcoin people. And I tried to figure out what the Bitcoin people do with their happy hour, and I finally figured it out. They celebrate the life and work of Judas Iscariot. Is your invitation still good? Oh, Bitcoin, actually, on my honeymoon in 1952, my bride, 19, and I, 21, uh, stopped in Las Vegas.
We just got mar- Alice gave me the car and said, "Have a good time." and we went west. So, we stopped in the Flamingo, and I looked around, and I saw all of these well-dressed, they dressed better in those days, well-dressed people who had come in some cases thousands of miles away. And this was before jets, so transportation wasn't as good.
And they came to do something that every damn one of them knew was mathematically dumb. And I told Susie, I said, "We are going to make a lot of money." Imagine people going to stick money on some roulette number with a zero and a double zero there and the way the they all could do it and they they just do it. And I have to say, Bitcoin has rejuvenated that feeling in me. That happened to
Comments 0