GEICO, the second-largest vehicle insurance underwriter in the US, has decided it will no longer cover Tesla Cybertrucks. The company is terminating current Cybertruck policies and says the truck “doesn’t meet our underwriting guidelines.”

  • sunzu2
    link
    fedilink
    233 months ago

    Warren Buffet refuses to insure Elon Musk

    aka the battle of geriatric nepo babies

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      14
      edit-2
      3 months ago

      Wait, how is Warren Buffett nepotistic? He’s giving the vast majority of his wealth to charity. He gave his kids each $17.5M to start their organizations, and then donated like $5B total to their organizations once they proved their management skills. But he pledged to give away most of the rest (almost $100B), and has already given away about $50B (latest pledge is 99% of his assets).

      I really don’t see him as nepotistic, he’s pretty much the best kind of billionaire.

      • @Glytch
        link
        English
        293 months ago

        Buffett himself is a nepo-baby. His father was a congressman who’s connections were very helpful when starting out in business and investing.

        Sure it isn’t Emerald mine money, but you can’t tell me being the son of a 4-term congressman didn’t give him a leg up.

            • @Soggy
              link
              English
              153 months ago

              They have to believe in meritocracy, that wealth isn’t intrinsically tied to exploitation and a long history of classism.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              33 months ago

              Look at his history. He started out selling gum and candy to kids at school, then took increasingly demanding jobs (delivered newspapers and whatnot) until he went to college, after which he worked for his professor (IIRC, I don’t recall specifics).

              And he never was a day trader, so he’s not the type that’s making money on the margins off other traders, he’s actually investing and sometimes buying a controlling stake in companies that he believes in. If you look at his lifestyle, he very much doesn’t look like your typical billionaire, he lives in the same house he bought in his 20s, and generally lives a pretty modest life, especially given his wealth. Yeah, he makes a ton at his job, but he seems to be doing it because he loves his work, not because he loves money.

              In my mind, he’s basically the best possible example of a billionaire. He didn’t do much of anything shady to get rich, he worked hard in his youth and invested wisely the rest of his life. And he started a pledge for other billionaires to donate the vast majority of their wealth, leading by example by giving away half of his wealth to drop from #1 to #2, and now to #10 or so.

              If you’re going to criticize billionaires, start with Gates, Bezos, Musk, Trump, or Zuckerberg, not Buffett. Buffett is about as ethical of a billionaire as you can get, and while there’s room to criticize him, he should be nowhere near the top of the list.

              • sunzu2
                link
                fedilink
                -12 months ago

                I hope you get paid for this becuase this hellava shilling by one adult for the benefit of another adult man

                Jfc… The bootlicking, never seen anyone do it this strong on fediverse.

                It is a tankie strategy too, just keep repeating falsehoods with home it resonates with somebody since clearly people ain’t buying it

          • @Glytch
            link
            English
            12 months ago

            You’re underestimating the effect of his father knowing the right people. Yes, there was no “small million-dollar loan” and yes Warren actually hustled quite a bit to capitalize on the advantages given to him by his father, but that doesn’t erase those advantages when talking about his success.

            Hard work is not the thing that got him where he is. If it were there are millions of people working multiple who should also be billionaires. Or, better yet, no one should be a billionaire at all and we make it so people don’t have to work multiple jobs to survive, but I digress.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              12 months ago

              Hard work is not the thing that got him where he is

              No other investor has his track record, or anything close to it, so I really do think it comes down to hard work.

              Whether the type of work he did should be compensated as well as it was is certainly a valid discussion to have. That said, he’s pretty much the top of his industry and extremely well-respected by his peers, so it makes sense that he has an outsized portion of the wealth of those in his industry. That said, I absolutely agree with Buffett that we should have higher taxes on the wealthy (like Buffett) because that level of wealth concentration doesn’t benefit anyone, including the wealthy individual.

              What got him to the top of his profession absolutely was hard work. What got him to become one of the richest people in the world was that plus the tax system and other legal structures that reward that work. In other words, “don’t hate the player, hate the game.”

      • sunzu2
        link
        fedilink
        163 months ago

        Warren buffet is literally a senator’s son… CCR has a song on the topic ;)

        He gave his kids each $17.5M to start their organizations, and then donated like $5B total to their organizations once they proved their management skills.

        Literally this what nepotism looks like… 17m is prolly just enough not to get eaten by estate tax.

        You are confusing estate planning with charity.

        But he pledged to give away most of the rest (almost $100B), and has already given away about $50B (latest pledge is 99% of his assets).

        Without reviewing the structures, this is just a trust me bro

        Use some critical thinking? And a bigger question why are you worshiping some gereatric nepo baby enough to try to defend him with propaganda that he paid a lot of money to get into your head.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          93 months ago

          Without reviewing the structures, this is just a trust me bro

          You can literally see the donation of $48B. The pledge itself isn’t legally binding, but he has been consistently donating. He’s 94, so I don’t think it’ll take long to see the proof in the pudding.

          Here are some notes from his Wikipedia page:

          In 2008, Buffett was ranked by Forbes as the richest person in the world with an estimated net worth of approximately $62 billion. In 2009, after donating billions of dollars to charity, he was ranked as the second richest man in the United States with a net worth of $37 billion.

          As of 2023, Buffett has given over $50 billion to charitable causes.

          I will note that the last figure probably includes the money given to his kids’ organizations (not directly to his kids).

          And a quote about inheritance for his kids:

          “I want to give my kids just enough so that they would feel that they could do anything, but not so much that they would feel like doing nothing”

          He has a pretty consistent track record of philanthropy and statements about philanthropy, so I would be really surprised if he changed that in the last few years of his life. I guess we’ll see though.

          why are you worshiping some gereatric nepo baby

          Where did I say I was worshipping him? I’m merely saying I think what he’s doing is admirable and that he doesn’t qualify as a “nepo baby.” If you look into his history, he worked hard throughout his early life to save and invest, and I see no indications that his parents gave him a huge inheritance or kickstarted his career in any meaningful way. Yeah, his dad was a House Rep for 8 years (6 of those consecutive), and here’s a quote about him on his father’s Wikipedia page:

          ‘Unshakably ethical, Howard refused offers of junkets and even turned down a part of his pay. During his first term, when congressional salary was raised from $10,000 to $12,500, Howard left the extra money in the Capitol disbursement office, insisting that he had been elected at the lower salary.’ His wife said he considered only one issue when deciding whether or not to vote for a bill: ‘Will this add to, or subtract from, human liberty?’

          That doesn’t sound like the kind of man to give his son an unfair advantage…

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            53 months ago

            It’s not charity to give money to an organization you (or friends or relatives) control, it’s a way to keep your assets under your control without having to pay taxes that would otherwise be required.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              23 months ago

              It is if that charity uses the money to help people. So any accusation needs to actually look at the financials of those orgs to see where the money is going.

            • @[email protected]
              link
              fedilink
              English
              12 months ago

              That would be true if he were secretly using those charities to enrich himself but there’s no evidence of that at all.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                English
                12 months ago

                I think you’re missing the point - it’s not that he’s enriching himself - he’s already done that. It’s that the charity carries out his will, not necessarily the will of people who need charities.

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  12 months ago

                  Charity is about who benefits, not about who decides how to provide that benefit.

                  The idea of choosing a charity based on the donor’s will of how it will get spent describes almost all types of charity. If someone donates to any charity at all, they have made a choice on how to allocate their resources and they just take it on faith that that’s the people who need it the most.

                  Furthermore, any given dollar of his can only be spent once. The money he spent on himself enriches himself. It’s a considerable amount of money but it’s a tiny fraction of the money he controls. Any dollar he gives away can’t be spent to enrich himself.

                  Finally, Buffet has donated over $57 billion. How is he supposed to distribute that? Fly a plane around the country and dump cash out the window? Send a huge check to the IRS? Give it all to your favorite charity? The obvious answer is that he sets up an organization that will analyze existing charities for need and effectiveness and then distributes his assets accordingly.

          • sunzu2
            link
            fedilink
            13 months ago

            You are poorly educated on the issue and you are citing propaganda he paid for.

            Please do some proper researcher on topic of oligarch charity and what that’s all about.

            I can’t believe in 2024 we still have adults larping this shite. No wonder we got shit sociology-economic conditions and only getting worse…

                • @[email protected]
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  43 months ago

                  I haven’t watched the YouTube video (I generally distrust what Reich says), but here’s what I see from the other sources:

                  currentafairs

                  Mentions Buffett once, and only when mentioning the pledge to Gates’ foundation. The article seems to mostly be about the Gates’ foundation taking credit for things they didn’t do. I’ll certainly read through the rest of the article, but it definitely seems to be a criticism of that org, not Warren Buffett.

                  inequality

                  Talks about The Giving Pledge (created by Buffett) and how those who have pledged aren’t donating their money fast enough (i.e. their money is growing faster than their donations). I don’t really see this as an issue, since the problem should correct itself when they die.

                  The article also complains about most donations going to foundations or DAFs, but honestly, when you need to move that much money, that’s probably the most efficient way to do it. So I guess I don’t understand the criticism.

                  apnews

                  This one is about wealthy people avoiding taxes generally. I don’t know how this applies to Warren Buffett, whose wealth is in the US and AFAIK isn’t being hidden in tax shelters like offshore banks or trusts. His tax bill is relatively low (this article claims 0.1% from 2014 to 2018), but I think that’s countered by his statements about increasing taxes on the rich (he is registered Democrat, if that matters to you at all).

                  So I don’t think the issue here has anything to do with Buffett himself, the issue is the tax law doesn’t account for unrealized gains. Or in other words, don’t blame the player, blame the game. The closest Buffett gets to tax shelters is his stock donations to his kids’ foundations, but my understanding is that those are charitable orgs, so I don’t see a ton of difference there vs donating to other orgs like the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, which he has donated way more to vs his kids’ orgs.

                  My personal view here is that any compensation above some amount (say, $400k) regardless of source should be taxed at the current rates, and those assets stepped up in basis appropriately. I don’t like Harris’ proposal though because it’s based on wealth instead of income, but I think Buffet himself would approve a change here. If we handled it that way, the income from stock grants and whatnot for extremely highly compensated employees (like a CEO) would end up being taxed as income (short term gains), and therefore would be functionally equivalent to a cash salary, which is what it’s intending to be.

                  • @[email protected]
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    43 months ago

                    If you’re not being purposefully obtuse I’ll save you the time from what the argument is. Wealth of his magnitude is a detriment to society, doesn’t matter if he’s saint Joseph or the pope. You’re saying “he’s the best kind”, deflecting from all of them being bad. If you don’t see that, then it’s fine. Just an economical opinion on where to go with society from the stalemate we seem to be in regarding workers and compensation.

                    I do feel like you’re being blind about the nepotism definitions though, you don’t need 200 billion from a family slush fund to qualify. The very act of what their parent’s profession is changes networking and exposure opportunities. Doesn’t matter if Daddy has ethical values, the name recognition and reputation you’re proclaiming gives an advantage.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      22 months ago

      There’s an odd trend of labeling everyone with even the slightest advantage a, “nepo baby”.

      Nepotism is when you give friends or relatives special consideration for jobs or positions. As far as I know the only job Buffet ever had from a relative was working in his grandfather’s grocery store. The closets I could find for Elon Musk was that he started one of his companies with his brother.

      Elon’s father was an engineer. That certainly put him in a comfortable position, particularly as a white engineer in South Africa but it definitely doesn’t get you recognition from old money families. Buffet went to public school.

      They both had advantages growing up but if we expand nepotism to include people like that, it becomes a pretty meaningless term.