Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : 2026 TeoTwawKi ... 2032 Darkest Interregnum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TobagoJack who wrote (103045)	10/3/2013 8:43:20 PM
From: Haim R. Branisteanu	Respond to of 220190

... and this is sadening

To: TobagoJack who wrote (103045)	10/4/2013 2:50:33 AM
From: Haim R. Branisteanu	3 Recommendations Recommended By carranza2 dvdw© ggersh Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 220190

After chatting with a friend who tried his hand in China, I must retract my previous conclusion. From his stories no real business will succeed if not bribing officials, or high ranking employees at state owned companies. The bribes are not always in cash, many times in expensive trinkets or overseas travel with lavish accommodations, or part of the business proceeds to family owned businesses which are actually shell companies of those to be bribed. As such may be the scrutiny of the rich is well deserved in China. The difference in Russia is that if you are well connected then there is no scrutiny of the means achieving your wealth, which in many cases was achieved violently. IMHO there are very few and far between people even in the OECD countries that truly arrived to their wealth without any law violation or an inside track, including in the US. Laws defining commercial conduct have a very broad grey area, and truly also pure luck is a great advantage, as Napoleon demonstrated in choosing his generals. As an example, Warren Buffet is not as clean as he pretends to be and as it is publicized. If any of us would have the access and receive promises he receives from government officials and being able to squeeze the deals he is doing at his cost we would be also rich. Point in case is his investment in GS, without the connection no one could have done such a deal no matter how rich he is. Fact no other entity with ample cash, (like Sovereign Funds) got access to GS deal, and no other received the proper information and guaranties from the US Treasury. Insider trading ? definitely yes but not as defined by law, and that is why he defends TARP and those that have initiated the scheme on the expense of the taxpayers. We the taxpayers did not receive a dime from the profit garnered by the financial firms that received TARP money. No check no nothing ZILCH when others collected undeserved compensation by the truck. Managers at all levels at GS or JPM are some examples Also no one was brought to trial and send to jail except some small of little importance chaps. In a nutshell he made money on the taxpayer expense based on access to administration insights, access to privileged information and promises and not from some smart invention or contribution to society at large. All this would not diminish his ability to identify undervalued companies and evaluate management but those talents are with many other people that are as talented as he is.