Warren Buffet Made An Astonishingly Wrong Prediction

"In November 22, 1999, Warren Buffett gave a speech in which he famously said he didn't invest in technology stocks. His rationale was that you can't predict who the winners and losers will be, only that society usually benefits. He cited the auto and airplane industries as losers for investors but winners for society. Anyway, on to Buffett's bad prediction - in the speech he noted that the next 17 years of returns for equities would probably be lower than the spectacular returns from 1983-1999 (true), but that the standard of living for most people would be much higher."* The Young Turks host Cenk Uygur breaks it down.

*Read more here from Matt Stoller:

**********

The Largest Online News Show in the World. Hosted by Cenk Uygur and Ana Kasparian. LIVE STREAMING weekdays 6-8pm ET.

Young Turk (n), 1. Young progressive or insurgent member of an institution, movement, or political party. 2. Young person who rebels against authority or societal expectations. (American Heritage Dictionary)

The Young Turks (Winner - Best Political Podcast & Best Political News Site of 2009) were the first original talk show on Sirius satellite radio and the first live, daily webcast on the internet. But that is not the revolution.

We are a rare show that combines all of the news that people care about in one place. We are not afraid to talk about politics and entertainment and sports and pop culture. But that is not the revolution either.

The real revolution is in daring to be honest with people. We don't patronize our viewers or lie to them. We have real conversations and deliver the news honestly.

[upgrader]

My government teachers said to me in 2004, "If you want to fix washington, the first step is to eliminate lobbyists."

[infiniteinfiniteinfi]

Either the people get money out of politics or money get the people out of politics.

[tetsubo]

It's just the Invisible Hand flipping off the People.

[ikeknights]

Cenk, you're in journalism. Get in touch with Buffet. He's one of the few stand up guys in big business. I would bet he'd be willing to admit his mistake and probably offer some sage advice on how to rectify this.

[theearthcircus]

Bunk report.  Buffet was correct.  *The standard of living has gone up*.  Most of the costs of goods (that the government isn't involved in) have gone down in price, allowing the average American to purchase *more for less*. 

The answer is that *government isn't supposed to be involved* in aiding and abetting some corporations over others.

[bigraviolees]

I like this guys chain of restaurants. They all seem to center around serving yourself though

[zarkoff]

The effects of crony capitalism seen here.

[BeornBorg]

Also that's "household" income, meaning more than one person working to make 50K a year.

[rangers]

But we don't have capitalism that is the problem

The wealth gap roughly increases at the rate of government spending. 

[SkepticalSocialist]

It's not just a problem with money in politics, it's a built in problem with capitalism.

When there's such vast income inequality the money becomes pooled in the accounts of rich people and everyone else has less to spend. If everyone has less to spend everyone is less able to act as a consumer, and if everyone is less able to act as a consumer everyone is less able to act as entrepreneurs.

Rich people don't create jobs, consumer demand from below creates jobs. The point of employing people in most cases is to make money by paying them less than they make for their employer. If no one has any money to spend to act as a consumer then it's not profitable to hire wage workers.

[CraftsmanDomjan]

I hate it when TYT uses graphs that jump up on the y-axis from zero to its highest points. I'd like it more if the scale of the graph was consistent so I (and other viewers) could have an accurate idea of what the graphs actually look like.

[zoidberg]

Most figures on income don't take into account the actual level of inflation. Even counting inflation the way governments did a few decades ago gives you a scary number.

[flake]

Workers income is of course going down, because of globalism and  rising population workers have to compete more and companies have more clients that's why inequality is widening and will continue to raise no matter who is in government.

[Buffylover]

Standard of living does not mean average income.  Do your young kids have iphones, flat panel tvs, fast cheap computers.  SOL did rise.

[bobbytiger]

Let's see now, who has been President since 2008?  Oh yeah . . .

[hleo]

Not sure where you got that quote from but Warren Buffett famously said: 
"The rich are always going to say that, you know, just give us more money and we'll go out and spend more and then it will all trickle down to the rest of you. But that has not worked the last 10 years, and I hope the American public is catching on" 
Key is that he 'hoped' for this to happen. 

[TylerJuranovich]

I wish the Democrats were more "corrupted" (HA) by the unions. 

[CoNNspiracy]

A man like Buffet does not get to where he is by making wrong predictions.... But by making false predictions. Might I add that a certain bank's shares that he had purchased (Bank or America?) was bailed out to the tune of 20 bn. Ironically, a greaat deal of this money in politics... comes from good old Buffet, who MUST have had only good intentions when he petitioned for that 20 billion bailout of a company whose shares he owns....

[breadyru]

WHY DO YOU LOOK DOWN WHEN YOU ANSWER YOUR OWN QUESTION, MMM

[renzonovatore]

This sort of has a weird implication that supply-side economics would lead to lower inequality if it wasn't for money in politics. Which I find incredibly dubious.