Wesco金融2011年股东大会——查理·芒格发言纪要

2011 · 会议 · 原文约 8786 词
译文与英文原文逐段对齐可在本页展开英文,也可打开发布者原址核对上下文。
打开来源正文

与查理·芒格对话

2011 年 7 月 1 日

帕萨迪纳会议中心

开场致辞:

西科金融被伯克希尔·哈撒韦(BRK)收购后,问题是谁来支付今天这场活动的费用。查理决定自掏腰包,延续这个传统。

西科合并:

他说自己感觉像一位终于抵达了梦想港口的船长。他认为 BRK 是西科金融的正确归宿。约半数的西科金融股东成为了 BRK 的股东。因为瑞士再保险确认的损失,这份合同对 BRK 并不利。后来 BRK 的股价跌得极低,西科金融股东拿到的股票数量超过了沃伦和他原本的打算。不过他认为,最终遇到了顺风。

沃伦和查理因行事公道而建立了声誉。以行事公道著称,效果相当不错,就算 BRK 拥有权力而合作伙伴或交易对手没有,也是如此。

引语:拥有暴君的力量是多么美妙,而像暴君一样使用它又是多么错误。

学术讨论

查理原本觉得听众在会议结束时没耐心听这个,所以把它放在开头。当你面对一个复杂系统时,他所谓的“合奏效应”可能极具影响力。这些效应几乎总是来自不同学科——经济学、金融学和心理学——中朝同一方向作用的因素汇聚在一起。不过他从不在意这些因素来自哪个学科。重要的是它们汇聚起来,产生重大影响。

带着“合奏效应”这个思路,他想让我们了解他是如何思考问题的。有一个长期困扰大学经济系的问题。经济学家去电影院时,注意到可乐和爆米花的定价远高于这些商品在其他地方的价格。人们投入了数百万小时来理解这个现象。他们明白为什么头等舱机票比经济舱卖得贵,却无法用边际效用理论解释——为什么影院里的糖果棒卖得那么贵。

类似地,众所周知,汽车制造商以 4 万美元卖出一辆车,然后以 400 美元卖给你一个成本 20 美元的小配件。当你为车支付 4 万美元时,400 美元的费用小到人们几乎注意不到,卖方就能用这种方式从顾客身上榨取更多钱。他跟我们说的这些再简单不过了,但他难以置信有那么多学术人士就是不明白。接着他建议,如果你能采纳他的窍门和思考方式,你就能比大多数其他人做得更好。

Conversation with Charlie Munger July 1st, 2011 Pasadena Convention Center Opening Remarks: The question after Wesco was bought by Berkshire Hathaway (BRK) was who was going to pay for the event today. Charlie decided to pay for it to continue the tradition. Wesco Merger: Said he feels like a captain who finally got to the port he had always dreamed of. He believes BRK is the right port for Wesco. About one half of the Wesco shareholders became shareholders of BRK. The contract was disadvantageous for BRK because of the losses recognized in Swiss Re. BRK’s stock subsequently went to a price that was so low that Wesco shareholders got more shares than Warren and he had ever intended. He thinks there was a favorable wind at the end though. Warren and Charlie developed a reputation for doing the right thing. It has worked well to be known for doing the right thing, even when BRK has the power and their partners or counterparties do not. Quote: How nice it is to have a tyrant’s strength and how wrong it is to use it like a tyrant. Academic Discussion Charlie didn’t think the audience would bear listening to this at the end of the conversation so he put it in the beginning. When you have a complex system, what he calls lollapaloozas can be very impactful. These almost always come from a confluence of factors operating in the same direction, but coming from different academic disciplines—economics, finance, and psychology. He has never cared what disciplines they come from though. It is that they come together to have a large impact that is important. With lollapaloozas in mind, he wanted to let us know how he approaches things. There is a problem that has bedeviled the economic departments of universities. When economists went to the movie theater, they noticed that Coke and popcorn were priced way too high relative to the prices of these goods elsewhere. There have been millions of man hours devoted to understanding this phenomenon. They understand why first class airplane seats sell for more than coach seats but can’t understand—using marginal utility—why candy bars sell for so much at theaters. Similarly, it is well know that car manufacturers sell a car for $40,000 and then sell you an extra gizmo that costs $20 for $400. When you are paying $40,000 for a car, a $400 charge is so small that people barely even notice it and the seller can extract more money out of customers this way. Nothing can be simpler than what he told us but he can’t believe how many academics don’t understand this. He then suggested that if you can adopt his tricks and his approach, you can do better than most other people.

随后,他用同样的方法去审视更复杂的领域。凯恩斯主义后来成了正统理论,认为可以通过借贷和印钞来缓解经济衰退。凯恩斯主义者相信,由于有了借贷和印钞,衰退会变短,萧条也不太可能发生。人们太迷恋这个想法了,以至于觉得这些经济规律就跟物理定律一样。

日本因为房地产的愚蠢泡沫而陷入困境。他们现在把凯恩斯那套理论里的所有招数都试了一遍,想解决问题。结果不得不在经济停滞中熬过 20 年——日本人因为有独特的文化才能扛住,他们是个和善有礼的民族。但如果换成美国人或大多数其他国家的人,恐怕撑不过 20 年的停滞。如果这些“新”经济规律不像教授们想得那么灵,美国人也会陷入麻烦。

当然,凯恩斯主义的招数和货币手段,一旦人人都知道你在玩这套把戏,效果就会打折扣。比如说,1930 年代管用的东西,现在可能就不管用了。那时候美国信用更好,人们也不会靠民意调查来发财——意思是,没人靠选票上台再拿权力光顾着自己捞钱。这真是个“合奏效应”的系统。

接着,查理给出了一个很少被引用的日本经济低迷的原因。日本是出口依赖型经济体。到了 1980 年代末和 1990 年代,日本面临来自中国和韩国巨大且真实的新竞争。之所以如此,是因为传统经济规律在中国和韩国运行得很好——它们采纳了类似自由市场资本主义的体制。主要竞争对手变得更有竞争力,这对日本造成了实质性冲击。这个解释你从来不会听到。这就是为什么你需要用多种方法去解决问题——借助清单。

此外,查理最近又重读了马特·里德利(Matt Ridley)的《理性乐观派》。这是一本很棒的书。里德利被自由市场资本主义改变世界的方式彻底迷住了。具体来说,他爱上了“劳动分工是这种成功的主要贡献者”这个想法。但他只看这一种解释,而这远远不够。让自由市场资本主义如此成功的因素有很多。即使斯大林来经营一个制针厂(亚当·斯密在《国富论》里让这家工厂出了名),他也能从中榨出效率来。不同经营体和公司之间的竞争过程,会把权力分配给那些能干、能提供优质服务的人。但如果你只看到这里,就漏掉了别的东西。比如,企业主会频繁得到“强化”——每次收银机一响,他就得到一次“啊哈”的感觉。自由市场资本主义里有大量的奖励和惩罚,而这些对在农业部工作(不能被解雇)的人,或者对东欧的共产党人来说,根本起不了作用。

要点是,各种问题最好通过清单来逐一核对解决。这在基础医疗领域也同样有效。只有糟糕的内科医生才会一头扎进第一个结论并死抱着不放(可悲的是,大约 75% 的内科医生正是如此)。

He then applied the same approach to something that is far more complex. It became orthodoxy from a Keynesian point of view that you can borrow and print money to ameliorate recessions. The Keynesians believed that recessions would be short and depressions less likely as a result of borrowing and printing money. People became so enamored with this idea that they thought these economics laws were like those of physics. The Japanese got in trouble because of an idiot boom in real estate. They now have tried everything in the Keynesian book to try to fix that. They have had to deal with 20 years of stasis, which they are uniquely able to handle. They are a nice and polite people. However, Americans and people from most other countries would likely not be able to go through 20 years of stasis. If the “new” laws of economics do not work as well as the professors think they will, Americans will be in trouble. Of course Keynesian and monetary tricks do not work as well when everyone knows you are playing them. For example, things that worked in the 1930s might not work now. Back then the US had better credit and people did not use the polls to make themselves rich. Meaning, people did not get voted into power and then use their power just to become rich. This is a lollapalooza system. Next, Charlie provided an explanation of Japan’s economic malaise that is not commonly cited. Japan is an export dependent economy. In the late 1980s and 1990s, Japan got huge and credible new competition from China and Korea. They got this because the traditional laws of economics were working well in China and Korea when they adopted something like free market capitalism. The main competitors got more competitive and this impacted Japan substantially. This is an explanation that you never hear. This is why you need to try multiple approaches to solving problems—using checklists. Additionally, Charlie recently re-read Matt Ridley’s The Rational Optimist again. This is a great book. Ridley is absolutely charmed with the way that free market capitalism changed the world. Specifically, he has fallen in love with the idea that the division of labor was the main contributor to this success. He only looks at this explanation though and it is wholly inadequate. There are multiple factors that have made free market capitalism so successful. Even if Stalin were running a pin factory (made famous by Adam Smith in Wealth of Nations) he would get efficiencies out of it. The process of competition between different operations and companies causes the power to be allocated to people who are good and can perform a great service. But, if you just stop there you miss other things. For instance, what happens is that the owner of a business gets “reinforcement” very often. Each time the cash register rings he or she gets an “aha” feeling. There are lots of rewards and punishment in free market capitalism that do not necessarily apply to someone who works for the Department of Agriculture (and can’t be fired) or who is a communist in Eastern Europe. The takeaway is that there are all kinds of problems that are better solved by going through a checklist. This works well in primary medicine too. Only a terrible internist jumps to the first conclusion and sticks to it. (Sadly, this represents about 75% of internists.)

蓝筹印花公司

接着,他谈到了蓝筹印花公司,一家“注定没落的”印花券公司。这类公司如今几乎全都死了或行将就木。不过,在它当年生意红火时,它产生了像财产保险公司那样巨大的浮存金。有意思的是,他们在管理这笔浮存金的投资任务时,几十年里只用这笔钱做了三件大事:买下喜诗糖果、《布法罗新闻》以及取得西科金融的控制权。他和沃伦只出手三次这件事,想想挺有趣,尤其跟那些投行家总催人买买买对比。经营一家生意、确保每家餐厅干净,那叫“无聊”;找东西买,那才刺激得多。然而,几乎任何数据都表明——学术研究也证实了——股东们大多在这些并购里亏了钱。但伯克希尔的股东没亏,因为我和沃伦只做了三件事,而且有耐心。他们能有耐心,是因为这笔钱还有别的事可做——他们可以选择买入可流通证券。大多数公司没这选项,而选项的组合给了他们一套很体面的工具包,前提是他们得有耐心。

奇怪的是,最糟糕的一件事其实是买下西科金融。另外两家买下的生意赚钱得多。但即便如此,西科金融的股价还是从 5 美元涨到了 385 美元。就算起步阶段微软比买西科金融更赚钱,他和沃伦也不在乎。他们不想沦为嫉妒的俘虏。嫉妒很蠢,因为你没法从嫉妒里找到乐子——嫉妒永远是一种净亏损。总有人做得比你好。

伯克希尔这套做法的另一个好处是,沃伦和查理是边干边学。在买喜诗糖果之前,他们并不真正理解一个强大品牌的威力。他们发现每年可以提价 10%-15%,没人会多嘴。这一认识后来改变了伯克希尔及其投资模式。我们都是无知的——现在没人知道得足够多到能应付未来。他的座右铭是先付给自己——守护自己的心智,让它变得更好。你必须不断学习。提高理性是一种道德责任,尽可能不断提升自己非常重要。他和沃伦就是这么做的,效果很好。

他们不是最聪明的人——他们曾经极其无知。事实上,伯克希尔许多重大成功,最初都是从重大失败起步的。比如,他们买下巴尔的摩四大百货商店之一——这真的太蠢了!但他们很快认错了,想法子退出,也确实退出了。他们差不多按买入价卖了那家店。而通过买那家百货商店时结识的人脉,他们之后又买下一家利基零售商,那家店后来让他们赚了大钱。

现在很多人从沃顿商学院毕业,就觉得自己什么都会了——那是大错特错。需要的是终身学习的过程——这既有益处,也充满乐趣。他说自己从学习中获得的乐趣非常大。事实上,看到经济学教授们把那么多工时花在一些傻瓜问题上、那些他左手都能解决的问题(尽管他从未上过经济学课),实在令人发笑。

Blue Chip Stamps He then went on to talk about Blue Chip Stamps, a “doomed” trading stamp company. Almost all of these companies are now dead or almost dead in general. However, when this business was more profitable it produced a large float like a casualty insurance company. What was interesting about the task of investing that float was that BRK only found 3 big things to do in decades with the money: it bought Sees, Buffalo News and control of Wesco. The idea that he and Warren only made 3 moves is interesting given how investment bankers are always pushing people to buy things. It is “boring” to run a business and make sure each restaurant is clean, for example. It is much more fun to look for things to buy. However, almost any data suggests that most shareholders lose with all of these mergers— academic studies prove this. But, BRK shareholders did not lose because he and Warren only did 3 things and were patient. They were able to be patient because they had something else to do with the money. They had the option to buy marketable securities. Most companies don’t have this option and the combination of options gave them a respectable repertoire provided that they were patient. Strangely, the worst thing that could have happened was the purchase of Wesco. The other two businesses they bought were way more profitable. But, even so the Wesco stock went from $5 to $385. Even if starting Microsoft was better financially than buying Wesco, he and Warren don’t care. They don’t want to fall prey to envy. Envy is stupid because you can’t have fun with envy—envy always represents a total net loss. There is always someone doing better than you. Another advantage to BRK’s process was that Warren and Charlie were learning as they went. They didn’t understand the power of a great brand until they bought See’s Candy. They found that they could raise the price 10-15% each year and nobody cared. This understanding then changed BRK and its investment pattern. We are all ignorant—no one knows enough now to cope with the future. His motto is to pay yourself first—protect your own mind and make it better. You always have to learn. Increasing rationality is a moral duty and it is very important to keep improving as much as you can. That’s how he and Warren went at it and it worked well. They weren’t the smartest guys—they were massively ignorant. In fact, many of the major successes of BRK started off with massive failures. For example, they bought one of the 4 major department stores in Baltimore. This was really stupid! But they recognized the mistake, tried to exit, and did. They were able to sell it for what they bought it for, basically. Out of the contacts they made when they bought the department store they were able to buy a niche retailer that made them a lot of money. Many people graduate from Wharton now and think they know how to do everything—that is a big mistake. What is needed is a lifelong learning process—this is both helpful and a lot of fun. He said that he has had so much fun learning. In fact, it is amusing to see economics professors spending all these man hours on silly problems that he could solve with his left hand even though he never took a class in economics.

大萧条

美国的泡沫源于许多银行业人士——无论是抵押贷款还是投资银行——身上的狂妄自大、疯狂和邪恶。格林斯潘是个聪明人,但他在年轻时对艾因·兰德的崇拜过了头。你不能给赌博游戏完全的自由。投资银行业中渗入的很多东西,本质上就是伪装成其他东西的赌博游戏——它不是资本融资。现在,银行在衍生品领域建立了优势,并且不愿放弃。赌场永远不会为了保留轮盘赌和二十一点而放弃老虎机。同样,银行也不愿放弃他们最好的业务来保护我们其他人免受风险。银行不想放弃这种优势,这说得通。

押注股票指数就像押注在外汇骗局上。银行通过衍生品市场把外汇骗局带回来了。赌场需要停车场、酒吧、餐厅和娱乐表演。但银行拥有一个没有管理费用的赌场。然后,政府还允许他们通过回购系统使用杠杆运营。保守的投资银行用上了 30 到 50 倍的杠杆,每笔交易赚取微薄回报,但总体赚得盆满钵满。

接着,会计行业允许银行列报那些并非真正收益和资产的收益和资产。会计师们认为自己没有责任去揭示可能拖垮整个系统的实际乱象。医疗系统想要预防流行病,但会计行业却不愿处理棘手且具有系统性风险的问题——他们想通过让一切变得更复杂来收取更多费用。这是一种可鄙的做法。会计界有谁表达过悔意?美国有哪位大人物曾为美国的会计问题感到难堪?几乎没有。但有一个例外,那就是摩根大通的杰米·戴蒙,他在自己的年报中对会计准则做出了尖锐的批评。

举个例子,坏账准备金在经济繁荣时期会归零。什么样的疯子会认为这是好的会计做法?只有注册会计师或会计学教授才会这么想。我们这些成年人心里清楚,那根本不是好的会计做法。借用伯克的一句话意译:要让世上所有的愚蠢畅行无阻、泛滥成灾,所有善良而明智的人只需袖手旁观就够了。

伯尼·麦道夫没有表现出任何悔意。在他看来,自己没做错什么。大多数人认为判他 150 年不公平。查理打赌,迪克·富尔德今天也不会感到一丝悔意。他用自己的狂妄自大彻底毁掉了雷曼兄弟。这情况非常严重,因为人们不会感到任何羞耻。你需要一个社会有正确的规则来阻止人们发疯。应该制定规则,只允许银行用政府的信用做简单的事情。还记得储贷行业发生的事吗?银行家们显然没有那么明智或自律。他们会因嫉妒而疯狂。如果街对面的家伙赚了大钱,你很难不去尝试同样的事。大型会计公司开始兜售欺诈性的避税方案。但是,当最终有人吹响哨子揭露他们时,他们才不情愿地开除了涉事的合伙人。然而,他从没听到任何人说自己感到羞愧。嗯,查理为自己和这些人处于同一个行业感到羞愧。能够防止人们做出疯狂或邪恶之事的英明法律很重要。

在韩国和墨西哥的案例中,投资银行向他们出售衍生品,导致这些国家和存在几十年的公司破产。金融公司变得有点乏味也没什么不好。我们一些最好的银行提供免费支票来吸引那些没有能力使用信贷的人签约,这导致了透支,让人们被收取巨额费用。银行还编程让电脑先处理最大的支票,从而导致费用更高。这些银行目前正因这些行为而面临集体诉讼,它们活该。能够约束人们不知怎么就将其合理化的最恶劣行为的英明法律,非常有价值。

你正在跟一个欣赏伊丽莎白·沃伦的共和党人说话。他随后表示,这些评论和他在那篇关于大萧条责任者的文章里写的内容相比,还算不上那么轻蔑。

当前投资环境

当前的环境非常困难。查理喜欢太平洋投资管理公司比尔·格罗斯的“新常态”概念,认为世界情况会糟透了。他说我们不能爱债券,因为收益率太低了。此外,麻烦如此之多,老的把戏在日本和欧洲已经不再奏效,这些国家正在经历“成年”体验,世界看起来很糟糕。当然,精心挑选一些股票仍然会盈利。然而,这些回报会受到这样一个事实的制约:存在大量顾问、经理、交易员和分析师,他们成本高昂,会从我们其他人手中夺走利润。现在,人们凭借他们在数学和计算机方面的技能,做着本质上合法化的抢先交易。我们的大学捐赠基金和养老基金正因为这种不公平的优势,通过更低的回报来买单。更糟的是,公共养老金计划中有权力的人正在以扩大养老金规模的方式运作。即将退休的人通过在他们工作的最后一年大量加班来操纵养老金,使得最后一年的工资异常高。这样一来,一个整个职业生涯只挣 5 万美元的警察,退休时能拿到 10 万美元的养老金。这很邪恶且错误。

查理说,历史上他最喜欢的一个故事发生在布匿战争时期。罗马输不起战争,因为一旦战败,人民就会沦为奴隶。但是,在这个罕见的案例中,罗马在战争结束前就用硬通货偿还了三分之二的战争债务。皇帝们在这期间不断地贬值货币,但我们应当吸取的正确教训来自于那些有纪律偿还债务的人。他不喜欢我们美国在任何情况下都不能增税(共和党当前的立场)这个信息。但是,另一个想法,即富人应该支付所有税款(民主党当前的立场),同样疯狂。富人应该支付大部分税款,但每个人都应该支付适度的税款。

不管怎样,极端的对立不是好事。他记得过去美国政治阶层中真正的崇高。第一次世界大战后,协约国决定让德国人为他们的越界行为真正付出代价,这个决定导致了希特勒的崛起。如果他当时更明智一点,希特勒的祖先可能还在统治世界。查理声称,盟军赢得战争是靠运气和希特勒的失误。幸运的是,我们在第一次世界大战后吸取了教训,不想再做那些导致绝望的事情,因此决定在第二次世界大战后不采取报复行动。德国人把犹太人送进烤箱,日本人逼着人走向死亡。但我们决定做什么?我们决定给他们钱,既往不咎。这是一个伟大的决定,特别是马歇尔计划。

The Great Recession The bubble in America was from a combination of megalomania, insanity and evil on the part of a lot of people in banking—both mortgage and investment banking. Greenspan was a smart man but he overdosed on Ayn Rand at a young age. You can’t have total freedom to create gambling games. Much of what crept into investment banking was a gambling game in drag—it was not capital raising. Now, the banks have developed an advantage in derivatives and do not want to give it up. A casino would never give up slots to keep roulette and blackjack. Similarly, the banks don’t want to give up their best businesses to save the rest of us from risk. It makes sense that banks don’t want to give it up. Betting on a stock index is like betting on a bucket shop. The banks brought back bucket shops with the derivatives markets. With casinos you have to have parking, bars, restaurants and entertainers. But the banks have a casino with no overhead. The government then allows them to operate with leverage through the repo system. Conservative investment banks went to 30-50x leverage, making small returns on each transaction but making a lot of money in aggregate. Then, the accounting profession allowed banks to show income and assets that weren’t really income and assets. Accountants didn’t think they had a responsibility to show the actual mess that could bring down the entire system. The medical system wants to prevent epidemics but the accounting profession does not want to deal with difficult and systemically risky issues—they want to charge more by making everything more complex. This is a contemptible approach. What accounting figures have expressed contrition? What major person in the US has been embarrassed by US accounting? Very few. But one such person is Jamie Dimon of JP Morgan who has written scathing criticisms of the accounting rules in his annual reports. As an example, bad debt reserves go to zero in a boom. What kind of maniac would think that is good accounting? Only a CPA or a professor of accounting. The rest of us are grown-ups and know that is not good accounting. Paraphrase of a quote from Burke: For all of the folly in the world to prosper and become rampant, all the good and wise men have to do nothing. Bernie Madoff has shown no contrition. In his mind, he was OK. Most people think the 150 years he got were unfair. Charlie would bet that Dick Fuld does not feel any contrition today either. He totally ruined Lehman Brothers with his megalomania. This is very serious situation because people won’t show any shame. You need to have a society with the right rules to stop people from going crazy. There ought to be rules that only allow banks to do simple things with the government’s credit. Remember what happened in the S&L business? Bankers are clearly not that wise or disciplined. They go crazy with envy. If the guy down the street is making a lot of money, it is hard not to try to do the same. Major accounting firms starting selling fraudulent tax shelters. But, when they finally got the whistle blown on them, they reluctantly threw out the partners who were involved. However, he never hears anyone saying they feel ashamed. Well Charlie feels ashamed to be in the same race as these people. Wise laws that protect against people doing crazy or evil things are important. In the cases of Korea and Mexico, investment bankers sold them derivatives and caused those countries and decade old firms to go bankrupt. It is OK if financial companies are a little boring. Some of our best banks gave free checking to get people who couldn’t handle credit to sign up, a situation that led to overdrafts and people getting socked with huge fees. The banks also programed the computers to process the biggest check first and that led to even higher fees. The banks are paying for these actions through class auctions suits right now—and they should. Wise laws that constrain the worst activities that people somehow are able to rationalize are very valuable. You are talking to a Republican who admires Elizabeth Warren. He then said that these comments are not quite as contemptuous as what he wrote in the piece about the people who were at fault for the Great Recession. Current Investment Scene The scene is very difficult. Charlie likes the “new normal” concept from Bill Gross of PIMCO and thinks the world is going to be lousy. He said we can’t love bonds because yields are so low. Further, with so much trouble, the old tricks no longer working in Japan and Europe, and those countries having an “adult” experience, the world looks lousy. Of course picking some stocks carefully will be profitable. However, these returns will be tempered by the fact that there are consultants, managers, traders, and analysts that cost so much and will take profits from the rest of us. Now people are doing what is basically legalized front running because of their skills in math and with computers. Our university endowment and pension funds are paying for this unfair advantage through lower returns. Even worse, the people with power in public pension plans are working in ways to escalate the size of the pensions. Soon-to-be retirees are manipulating pensions by working a lot of overtime during their last year to make the final year salary abnormally high. From there a police officer who has made $50,000 his entire career can retire with a $100,000 pension. This is evil and wrong. Charlie said that one of his favorite incidents from history occurred in the days of the Punic Wars. Rome couldn’t afford to lose wars because when that happened, people became slaves. But, in this unusual case, Rome paid back 2/3rds of the war debt (in hard money) before the war was over. The emperors kept debasing the currency during the period but the right lesson for us to take away was from the guys who had the discipline to pay back the debt. He doesn’t like the message that we can’t have tax increases in the US under any circumstance (the current stance of Republicans). But, the other idea that the rich should pay all the tax is equally crazy (the current stance of the Democrats). The rich should pay the majority of the taxes but everyone should pay moderate taxes. In any case, extreme divisiveness is not good. He remembers real nobility among the American political class in the past. After World War 1 the Allies decided to make the Germans really pay for their transgressions and that decision led to the rise of Hitler. If he had been a little wiser, Hitler’s ancestors might still be in charge of the world. Charlie claimed that the Allies won the war because of luck and Hitler’s blunders. Fortunately, we learned after World War 1 that we don’t want to do things that cause desperation and thus decided not to be vindictive after World War 2. The Germans had put Jews in ovens and the Japanese marched people to death. But, what did we decide to do? We decided to give them money and let bygones be bygones. It was a great decision, especially the Marshall Plan.

凯恩斯写了《和平的经济后果》(1919 年——他在书中主张更宽厚的和平),人们后来意识到他是对的。因此,美国人在二战结束时的表现非常好。很难想象现在还能有同样的情况。政客们彼此憎恨,他讨厌看到这种局面。他抱有一丝希望,认为这可能会改变。但是,当前的体系功能失调,我们需要改变。

耐心和机会主义相结合很重要。查理有一位曾祖父,对他的人生产生了巨大影响。这个人是查理唯一富起来的祖先。他告诉查理,你必须准备好抓住机会才能成功。这就是他们在伯克希尔所做的事。他们随时准备着。当巨大的机会出现时,你不想变得胆怯。这有点像大多数婚姻并不成功,你可能只有一次机会和正确的人结婚。

问答环节:

第 1 问:在你生命中的这个时刻,你认为你的遗产最重要的三个组成部分是什么?

查理·芒格:查理犹豫着不想回答这个问题,因为他认为自己不是一个好榜样。大多数效仿他做法的人最终会相当不受人待见。他确实致力于自我提升,但他性格中的某些怪癖不应该被模仿。例如,模仿他坚持提升自己心智和目空一切的作风会给你带来麻烦。理性和客观是有效的。但是,那些吸引这么多人来听他演讲的品质,对其他人来说可能行不通。

第 2 问:第一个问题关于《华尔街日报》在鲁珀特·默多克接手后的衰落。第二个问题关于加州是否应该变成一院制州。

查理·芒格:关于第一部分,他喜欢《华尔街日报》,尽管他从来不喜欢它的社论版。不过,他最喜欢的出版物是《经济学人》。他相信那是世界上属于成年人的知识性刊物。《华尔街日报》没那么好,但在其领域内是好的。

关于第二个问题,加州不应实行一院制立法机构。他对这个问题持不可知论,倾向于怀疑。

第 3 问:你对交易所交易基金(ETF)和共同基金有什么看法?

查理·芒格:说他不知道,因为他从不看它们。总的来说,他喜欢低成本的共同基金,并认为人们通过它们做的比雇佣那些花哨的基金经理要好。他不知道哪些基金比别的更好,因为他没投它们。他更倾向于通过投资特定公司来努力做得更好。

第 4 问:问题关于为什么芒格选择在布伦特伍德打一场商业地产的战役。

查理·芒格:部分原因是他疯了。就他不疯的程度而言,他一生中做过一些他知道会非常困难的事情。他偶尔会接手一些会让他的生活变得艰难的事情。

Keynes wrote The Economic Consequences of Peace (in 1919—in which he argued for a more generous peace) and people later realized he was right. Consequently, Americans behaved really well at the end of World War 2. It is hard to imagine the same will be true now. The politicians hate one another and he hates to watch it. He is mildly hopeful it could change. But, the current system is dysfunctional and we need change. The combination of patience and opportunism is important. Charlie had a great grandfather who had a great influence on his life. This man was one of Charlie’s only ancestors who became rich. He told Charlie that you have to be ready to take advantage of opportunities to succeed. This is what they do at BRK. They are always ready. You do not want to be timid when great opportunities arise. It is kind of like how most marriages don’t work and you may have only one chance to marry the right person. Question and Answer Session: Q1: At this point in your life, what are the 3 most important components of your legacy? Munger: Charlie hesitated to answer this question because he believes that he is not a good example. Most people who follow his example would turn out to be quite unloved. He is really into selfimprovement but certain peculiarities of his personality should not be imitated. For example, copying his insistence on improving his own mind and his irreverence will get you in trouble. Rationality and objectivity work. But, the qualities that bring so many people to hear him speak may not work for others. Q2: The first question had to do with the Wall Street Journal’s deterioration since Rupert Murdoch took over. The second question had to do with whether or not California should become a single chamber state. Munger: Regarding, the first part, he loves the Wall Street Journal (WSJ), although he has never liked the editorial page. However, the publication he likes best is The Economist. He believes it is the adult intellectual publication of the world. The WSJ is not as good but is good in its field. Regarding the second question, California should not have a unicameral legislature. He is agnostic on the subject, trending towards suspicious. Q3: What are your thoughts on Exchange Traded Funds (ETFs) and mutual funds? Munger: Said he didn’t know because he never looks at them. In general, he likes low cost mutual funds and thinks people do better with them than by hiring fancy managers. He doesn’t know which funds are better than others because he is not investing in them. He prefers to try to do considerably better by investing in specific companies. Q4: Question had to do with why Munger has chosen to fight a commercial real estate battle in Brentwood. Munger: Partly because he is crazy. To the extent that he is not crazy, he has done some things in his life that he knew would be very hard. He has occasionally taken on stuff that would make his life difficult.

他觉得有责任做正确的事,不管对芒格家族来说结果如何。

不过,这种自虐倾向也有个限度。他一生备受眷顾,天性又不太谦卑,也许确实需要一点自虐来平衡。

第五个问题:伯克希尔的股票现在是否被低估?

芒格:现在买股票和经营企业都不容易。他和沃伦在股票投资上更出色,因为他们拥有这些企业;在经营企业上更出色,因为他们持有股票。

他们收购公司时往往出价相当慷慨——比如买 Dexter 鞋业那次。但 Dexter 这笔交易,他们在本该很简单的问题上彻底失败了。他们买企业时从不贪便宜——不过有些交易,像喜诗糖果,结果就非常好。把所有交易平均下来看,他喜欢现在的局面,因为伯克希尔拥有一大堆好企业。未来不可能像过去一样,因为伯克希尔的净资产和资产规模会限制回报。话虽这么说,他相信持有伯克希尔股票并且什么都不做、只是拿住的人,最终会赚得很好。

他愿意认为伯克希尔的文化对世界有所贡献。虽然他一直等着有一大群高管追随者的榜样,也像他那样只拿 10 万美元年薪——但至今没出现。只有洛克菲勒家族和卡内基家族才愿意这么做。此外,很少有公司像伯克希尔那样对其他企业进行严厉批评。结果,有些人骨子里真的很不喜欢他。比如,当他说华尔街的人又蠢又坏时,他在那儿可交不到什么好朋友。这可不是在美企里出人头地的办法。

第六个问题:关于成功养育家庭和应对逆境,您有什么建议?

芒格:面对逆境,你只能咬牙挺过去。过于恐惧只会招来轻蔑。应对逆境反而带来机遇。不要惊慌,也别抓狂。人们总会记住那个保持冷静的人。当年博比·肯尼迪遇刺,整个肯尼迪家族都崩溃了,只有杰姬·肯尼迪一个人保持镇定。我们记得谁?我们记得杰姬·肯尼迪。

第七个问题:鉴于股价下跌,比亚迪的股票现在是不是一个重大机会?他会把自己的多少钱投进比亚迪股票?

芒格:他不想推荐某一只股票——尤其是一生中大部分时间他都避开初创公司。比亚迪是一家高科技公司,正在努力制造不会爆炸的锂电池。他们有两万名工程师来应对这些极其复杂的难题。他会把自己持有的比亚迪股票一直拿到最后,因为他热爱那里的人。但他不能告诉别人该怎么花自己的钱。他在早期风险投资方面经验很少(暗示买入比亚迪股票类似于一笔风投);他投资这家公司是因为他想提升自己的认知。

第八个问题:关于通胀,鉴于这么多印钞,他怎么看?未来会有更多通胀吗?如果美国是一家公司,每一美元代表一股股票,他会买、卖还是持有?(提问者提到,自 1900 年代初以来,美元已贬值 95%)

He felt a duty to do the right thing, regardless of whether or not it would work out for the Mungers. There is a limit to this masochistic ethos however. His life has been so favored and he is so un-humbled by disposition that maybe he needs some masochism. Q5: Question had to do with whether or not BRK’s stock is undervalued now. Munger: It is tough to buy stocks and operating businesses. He and Warren are better investors in stocks because they own the businesses and they are better business operators because they own stocks. When they buy companies they pay quite liberal prices—like they did for Dexter Shoes. But, in the case of Dexter, they utterly failed at an easy problem. When they do buy businesses they do not buy them cheaply—however some like See’s Candy worked out really well. When all of the deals are averaged out he likes what has happened because BRK owns a ton of good businesses. The future can’t be like the past because the weight of BRK’s net worth and assets will limit returns. Having said that, he believes that someone who owns BRK stock and does nothing but hold it will do really well. He likes to think that the culture of BRK has made a contribution to the world. Although, he has waited for a cascade of high ranking executive followers to take only a $100,000 salary (like he does) but it hasn’t come. Only the Rockefellers and Carnegies were willing to do that. Additionally, few corporations are as critical as BRK is of other business. As a result, deep down some people really don’t like him. For instance, he doesn’t make great friends on Wall Street when he says people there are stupid and evil. This is not the way to get ahead in corporate America. Q6: What recommendations do you have for successfully raising a family and dealing with adversity? Munger: When it comes to adversity, you have just to soldier through. Being too frightened leads to contempt. Coping with adversity brings opportunities. Don’t panic or go crazy. People will always remember the person who could keep his or her cool. When Bobby Kennedy was dying and the entire Kennedy family was falling apart, Jackie Kennedy was the only person who kept her head. Who do we remember? We remember Jackie Kennedy. Q7: Given the fall in the share price, does BYD’s stock represent is a major opportunity right now? What percentage of his money would he put in BYD shares? Munger: He doesn’t want to tout one security—especially when he has avoided early stage companies for most of his life. BYD is a high technology company trying to make lithium batteries that do not blow up. They have 20,000 engineers to cope with these very difficult issues. He will hold his BYD stock to the bitter end because he loves the people. But, he can’t say what other people should do with their money. He has very little experience in early stage venture capital (implying that the purchase of BYD shares was similar to a venture capital investment); he is investing in the company because he wants to improve his mind. Q8: Regarding inflation, what are his thoughts given all of the money printing? Is more inflation ahead? If the US was a corporation and each dollar represented a share of stock, would he buy, sell or hold? (The questioner mentioned that the dollar has lost 95% of its value since the early 1900s)

芒格:他说在 50 到 100 年的时间跨度内,我们很可能会经历通货膨胀。但是,与人们的担忧相反,通货膨胀并没有阻碍我们文明的进步。尽管经历了通货膨胀,我们的人均 GDP 几十年来仍保持着 2% 的增长。提问者认为,未来即将到来的通货膨胀将意味着失败。然而,失败远比那更糟糕。事实上,提问者所描述的情况简直是天堂,尽管美元已经贬值了 95%。查理说他曾在意大利的一家酒店用几十亿的账单付房费。所以,提问者所恐惧的情形,在查理看来却是成功的巅峰。

如果这房间里的每个人都必须承受实际投资回报率为 0%(税后),他认为我们都应该感到相当满足了。不过,很多人可能不会满意——看看希腊就知道了。在希腊,他们不想工作:他们只想坐等着钱从天上掉下来。工作是种负担,一天要浪费 8 个小时。如果他是欧盟的掌权者,他不会让希腊加入。他说,我们应该有个欧盟,但不是为那些无可救药的国家准备的。当你陷入像欧洲目前这样的困境时,你必须在某个地方划清界限。在他看来,他们不能任由大银行的储户血本无归。他们可以让银行的股东倒闭,但不能让储户受损失。他早就知道欧元行不通,总有一天欧盟不得不直面现实。

在这个国家,我们对雷曼兄弟的处理还算划清了界限。但是,在雷曼倒闭之后,我们不得不进行大规模的干预。他认为汉克·保尔森、两党以及乔治·布什对经济大衰退的处理方式令人欣慰。大规模的干预是成功的。如果你预见到情况会非常艰难,但你能够承受,那就微笑面对,继续前行。如果世界变得如此艰难,以至于芒格的财富失去了购买力,那又怎样?如此巨大的财富可能对家庭来说也未必是好事。

Q9:在美国,工程文化很重要。对于那些市场认为正在衰落的公司(提问者提到了谷歌、英特尔和苹果),历史上是否有先例?

芒格:这个他了解得不够多。他不知道如何取代谷歌,但很多其他公司将会遇到竞争麻烦。

Q10:芒格对别人的金融活动一直非常挑剔。然而,在他自己的金融活动中,他是否为社会增加了价值?

芒格:如果他这辈子所做的只是判断哪些证券会涨价,然后坐享其成,那确实没什么贡献。唯一的区别是他对此感到羞愧,所以他加了所有这些其他活动——比如他在布伦特伍德的地产开发中的受虐倾向。然后他说,我们可能认为他来参加这个活动是因为他本性中的某种高尚情操。然而,事实上,举办这样的活动不过是一种赎罪。

Q11:你以前似乎是个非常严厉的父亲。现在孩子们都长大了,你和他们的关系如何?你在经济上帮助过他们吗?

芒格:他当然在经济上帮助过他们。完全不帮助孩子的富人最终会让他们的孩子憎恨他们。从某种意义上说,他幸运的是自己并非一直富有。他可能把最早的孩子教育得比后来的孩子更好。富人家的孩子会像那些不得不奋斗的人一样有动力吗?不会。你不会让家人心甘情愿地去受苦,并提供“美妙的”磨难。因此,答案是富人应该体面地接受失败。但这不包括给孩子提供人为的磨难——那根本不现实。

Q12:历史上哪些经济实体与伯克希尔最相似?比亚迪的竞争优势是什么?

芒格:如果你回到 1911 年,看看当时的前十大公司,很多都已经消失了。留存至今的两大巨头是通用电气和标准石油。在当今所有的大公司中,标准石油是独一无二的。它的成功源于其工程文化和占据了天时地利。一切都对这个公司有利。当石油从地面渗出时,你不需要那么聪明。你只需要早早地富起来,并有能力收购富含石油的地产。这场游戏的本质是,随着能源供应越来越紧张,石油价格越来越高。事实上,保罗·盖蒂之所以变得极其富有,正是因为他拥有那些无法快速开采出来的石油储备,然后,当石油还在地下时,价格已经大幅上涨。

今天谁才是标准石油?他不知道。标准石油被拆分时,一共有 13 家标准石油公司,它们都取得了巨大的成功。他完全不知道下一个标准石油会是谁。

关于比亚迪,他喜欢他们勇于攻克艰难工程问题这一点。他喜欢他们在失败时埋头苦干、继续尝试的态度。他年纪太大了,宁愿通过思考他敬佩的人来赚钱,也不愿与那些他不太在意的人打交道。幸运的是,他敬佩伯克希尔,所以他不用担心自己的钱。

Q13:来自波士顿大道家族办公室的查克·吉尔曼——你是否希望看到更多价值投资者在业绩不佳的公司发起代理权争夺战?

芒格:查理说他对此感到很矛盾。他不太喜欢那些像秃鹫一样到处惹事生非的人。然而,他也不喜欢那些无能且过度放纵的固步自封的管理者。最终,他并不希望看到更多的企业掠夺。他宁愿忍受我们现有的弊病。

Q14:我们应该如何根据人生的不同阶段来安排时间的优先次序?

芒格:查理说,除了他关于投资于个人学习的一般性建议之外,他并没有什么特别的建议——他相信持续改进。他不认为你能在人生中途改变自己。你不能先是个彻头彻尾的混蛋,然后到了晚年再变得友善。如果你知道自己想去哪里,你最好尽早到达那里。终身学习是有效的,而且很有趣。他今年 88 岁,还在学习更多天体物理学的知识。这能带来什么?非常少——但他真的很享受。好消息是,他对天体物理学的理解比一般的 88 岁老人要好。

Q15:你明年还会举办这个活动吗?伯克希尔如何处理其现金?公司是否面临银行或交易对手违约的风险?

Munger: He said it is pretty likely that we will have inflation over a 50-100 year period. But, contrary to people’s fears, inflation has not halted the success of our civilization. We have had growth of 2% in GDP per person for decades despite the inflation we have had. The questioner suggested that the inflation in the pipeline would represent failure. However, failure is way worse than that. In fact, the situation the questioner described is hog heaven even though the dollar has lost 95% of its value. Charlie said he went to a hotel in Italy and paid his bill in billions. So, what the questioner described with horror is the top of success in Charlie’s mind. If every person in this room had to live with a real investment return of 0%, after tax, he thinks we all should be reasonably happy. A lot of people would not be happy though—look at Greece for example. In Greece, they don’t want jobs: they want to sit on their asses as the money comes in. A job is a burden; it wastes 8 hours a day. If he were running the European Union (EU) he would not have let Greece in. He said that we should have an EU, but not for basket cases. When you get into a mess like Europe is in, you have to draw a line somewhere. In his mind, they can’t let the depositors of their major banks get wiped out. They can let the shareholders of the banks fail but not the depositors. He knew that the Euro wouldn’t work and at some point the EU will have to face the music. We drew the line pretty well in this country with Lehman Brothers. But, after Lehman failed, we had to intervene to a major degree. He feels good about the way that Hank Paulson, both parties and George Bush handled the Great Recession. The massive intervention was successful. If you assume things will be really tough but you can bear it, you just smile and go on. And if the world is so tough that the Munger’s fortune loses purchasing power, so what? Such great wealth may not be good for the family anyway. Q9: In the US engineering cultures are important. Are there historical precedents of what happens to companies that the market currently thinks are deteriorating (the questioner mentioned Google, Intel and Apple)? Munger: This is something that he does not know enough about. He does not know how you displace Google but a lot of the other companies will have competitive troubles. Q10: Munger has been very critical of the financial activities of others. However, in his financial activities, has he added value to society? Munger: If all he ever did was figure out what securities would go up in price and sat on his ass, then that is not much of a contribution. The only difference is that he is ashamed of it so he has added all of these other activities—like his masochism with property development in Brentwood. He then said that we may think we were at this event due to some nobility in his nature. However, in fact, hosting an event like this is nothing more than atonement. Q11: He seems like he was very strict as a father. What is his relationship with his children now that they are older? Has he helped his children financially? Munger: Of course he has helped them financially. Rich people who don’t help their children out at all end up having children who hate them. He was lucky in a sense that he was not always rich. He probably raised his earliest children better than the later ones. Will rich children ever be as motivated as people who had to struggle? No. You won’t get people to be willing to suffer and provide “wonderful” hardships for their family. Thus, the answer is that rich people should lose graciously. But, this does not include providing artificial hardships for children—it is just not practical. Q12: Which economic entities in history were most similar to BRK? What are BYDs competitive advantages? Munger: If you go back to 1911 and look at the top ten companies of the time, many of them are gone. The 2 main ones that remain are General Electric and Standard Oil. Of all of the big companies of today, Standard Oil stands all by itself. It succeeded because of its engineering culture and from being in the right place. Everything was working for the company. When oil was seeping out of the ground, you didn’t have to be that smart. You just had to be early rich and have the ability to buy oil-rich properties. The nature of the game was that as energy supplies got shorter and shorter, oil prices went higher and higher. In fact, Paul Getty became very rich precisely because he had oil reserves that he couldn’t pull out of the ground quickly enough and then, while the oil was still underground, the price appreciated enormously. What is the Standard Oil of today? He doesn’t know. There were 13 Standard Oil companies when it got broken up and they were all huge successes. He has no idea what the next Standard Oil is. Regarding BYD, he likes the fact that they are tackling tough engineering problems. He likes that they put their heads down when they fail and keep trying. He has gotten so old that he would rather make money thinking about people he admires than dealing with other people he doesn’t care as much for. Luckily, he admires BRK so he doesn’t have to worry about his money. Q13: Chuck Gillman of Boston Avenue Family Office- Would you like to see more value investors run proxy battles at under-performing companies? Munger: Charlie said he is conflicted about this subject. He doesn’t really like people who run around like vultures raising hell. However, he also doesn’t like entrenched managers who are not good and who are over-indulgent. In the end, he does not want more corporate raiding though. He would rather endure the evils we already have. Q14: How should we prioritize our time based on which stage of life we are in? Munger: Charlie said that he did not have much advice apart from his general advice to invest in personal learning—he believes in continuous improvement. He doesn’t believe that you can change your life midway. You can’t be a total jerk and then be nice later in life. If you know where you want ago, you might as well get there sooner. Lifelong learning works and it is a lot fun. He is 88 years old and he is learning more about astrophysics. What could come from it? Very little—but he is really enjoying it. The good news is that he understands astrophysics better than an average 88 year old. Q15: Will he do this event again next year? How does BRK take care of its cash? Is the company at risk to bank or counterparty failure?

芒格:他说他很高兴这次来主持活动,但他不想再继续了,因为他觉得我们需要一个新的崇拜偶像。所以,明年不主持活动,他实际上是在帮我们,让我们能往前走。

伯克希尔依赖现代金融/存款系统和计算机交易系统。不幸的是,伯克希尔不得不与沃伦和查理不喜欢的人打交道,或者那些人的行为令人怀疑。例如,他讨厌信用卡公司,那些公司拼命向人们推销信用卡,而这些人在使用信贷时难免会伤害自己。在有一次西科金融的股东会上,他说企业只应该通过销售对客户有益的东西来赚钱——而不是更像赌博的东西。没错,他这话就是在批评我们那些领先的投资银行。

问题 16:如果你现在是个大学生,有 20 年时间让自己成为某个特定领域的专家,你会选择什么方向?

芒格:他说这个问题很简单。当你年轻时在寻找要做的事情时,必须选择你喜欢做的事。他从来做不好自己不感兴趣的事——他感兴趣的时候效率高得多。如果上天赐给你画建筑的激情,那你就得当建筑师——顺便说一句,这行赚钱可够呛。不过,他有个建筑师朋友,那朋友说不在乎这行赚不赚钱,因为在他眼里这根本不是工作。

一个人是他自己才能的囚徒。这句话在他自己的生活里也是真的。他不可能成为芭蕾舞演员或者职业橄榄球四分卫。法律也许并非最适合他的才能和兴趣,但也是次优选择了。跟别人不一样,他不愿意拿很低的薪水。

问题 17:您曾说过把一天中最好的一小时留给自己。这是什么意思?可口可乐今天跟 20 年前一样好么?

芒格:他当律师那会儿,说早上会留一小时给自己,然后把剩下时间都交给客户。大多数人就算那么做了也不肯承认,但他觉得这非常值。

可口可乐不如 20 年前好了。不过跟那些出售消费品的大公司比,它还是更胜一筹。但它像伯克希尔一样,公司规模太大了,很难再有大的起色。换个角度想:如果我们每天要喝 8 杯水,而某家公司能略微改善那水的味道,这就能用一种便宜又简单的方法让人们喝掉那 8 杯水。竞争对手很难打垮一个有强大品牌的廉价产品。但如果是一台 500 美元的电脑,那就未必如此了。如果他是为养老基金投资,那每个账户里都会有可口可乐。这倒不是说可口可乐会为人们创造奇迹,但跟其他公司比,他更愿意持有可口可乐。

问题 18:您怎么安排每天的时间?

芒格:他说他会先完成分内的事,因为不想让别人失望。但他对很多新机会都说“不”——他在这一点上很无情。他的日程出奇地空——就像个……

Munger: Said he is glad to host the event this time but he doesn’t want to continue because he thinks we need a new cult hero. So, by not hosting the event next year, he is actually trying to help us by allowing us to move on. BRK is dependent on the modern financial/deposit systems and computer trading systems. Unfortunately, BRK has to deal with people who Warren and Charlie don’t like or are whose actions elicit skepticism. For example, he doesn’t like credit card companies that are pushing credit on people who will inevitably hurt themselves with credit. At one of the Wesco meetings he said that firms should only make money by selling things that are good for customers—not things that are more like gambling. Yes, he is directing these comments at our leading investment banks. Q16: If you were a college age students and had 20 years to become an expert in a specific field, what would focus on? Munger: He said that this is an easy question. When you are looking around for something to do as a young person, you have to select something you like doing. He has never been good at things he wasn’t interested in— he is way more effective when he is interested. If god has given you a passion for drawing buildings then you have to be an architect—which is a terrible way to make money by the way. However, he has an architect friend who says he doesn’t care if it is a bad way to make money. The man doesn’t care because in his mind it isn’t work. A man is a prisoner of his talents. This statement is true in his life as well. He couldn’t have been a ballet dancer or a professional football quarterback. Law may not have been perfect for his talents and interests but it was the next best. Unlike others, he was not willing to be ill-paid. Q17: He once said he sold the best hour of his day to himself. What does that mean? Is Coca Cola (KO) as good today as it was 20 years ago? Munger: When he was a lawyer, he said he spent an hour to himself in the morning and then gave the rest of the day to his clients. Most people would not admit it if they did that but he thinks it was very valuable. KO is not as good as it was 20 years ago. Compared to the big companies that sell consumer products however, it is better. But, it is like BRK in that the company is so big that it is hard to move the needle. Think about it this way: if we have to drink 8 glasses of water a day and company can slightly improve the taste of that water, it is a cheap and easy way to get people to drink those 8 glasses of water. It is hard for competitors to knock off a cheap product with a great brand name. That may not be true with a $500 computer though. If he were investing for pension funds, there wouldn’t be an account that didn’t have KO in it. It doesn’t mean KO will do wonders for people, but compared to other companies, he would rather own KO. Q18: How does he plan his day? Munger: Said he fills his duties first because he doesn’t want to disappoint people. But he says no to many new opportunities—he is brutal in that way. He has an amazingly open calendar—like that of

巴菲特。他喜欢能自由接听亲友来电,不愿意像忙碌的牙医那样被排满日程,这种灵活性对他来说很管用。如果你的性情能让你应对别人无法理解的问题,那就是一种优势。他偏爱难题,不想当牙医(牙医只是重复执行简单的流程)。

第 19 问:关于巴菲特对未来业绩的评论,伯克希尔在几年内略微跑赢指数是否不现实?

芒格:不,这并非不现实。如果他们只是持有大型普通股,可能做不到。但凭借经营业务以及那些不想卖给别家而找上门来的企业主,巴菲特或许能如愿。不过,巴菲特可能无法在那里待上 20 年亲眼看到它发生。

第 20 问:关于抚养儿子,您有什么建议?

芒格:不要自己过一套,却教孩子另一套!

第 21 问:成为崇拜偶像这件事,是限制还是提升了他做自己想做的事的能力?

芒格:两者都有。他想打动的只有像我们这样的特殊人群。他很幸运,因为我们是他唯一打动过的人。就他被这群人熟知的程度而言,他认为这是加分项。但他不想要更大的房子或更多的赞誉。事实上,他在这些方面已经超出了自己的预期。

第 22 问:能列出他使用的 99 种心智模型吗?

芒格:这位提问的女士对他的评价比他自己对自己的评价还高。他做不到!

第 23 问:问题涉及伯克希尔派发股息的前景。

芒格:他说我们中的一些人会活着看到伯克希尔派发股息,但他不想看到这一天。那将意味着公司不再拥有绝佳的投资机会。他不想看到自己眼中的失败。

第 24 问:在评估持久竞争优势时,他最看重什么?

芒格:他和沃伦只关注自己具备核心能力的行业和公司。每个人都必须这么做。你的时间和才能有限,必须聪明地分配它们。

第 25 问:您认为美国的衰落与罗马帝国的衰落有相似之处吗?

芒格:他当然看到了相似之处。伟大帝国在地理上的失败率是 100%。看看今天的雅典和英国——每个帝国都在适当的时候交接了接力棒。然而,从某种意义上说,这些帝国至今仍与我们同在。古希腊的伟大之处今天依然存在于世界——它只是转移了。你可以确信,美国不会永远是世界上最具主导地位、最受钦佩的国家。我们可能比大多数国家持续得更久——甚至可能还有漫长的路要走。但最终,我们会从巅峰跌落。

但是,美国对亚洲产生了巨大而建设性的影响。亚洲对世界的未来至关重要,那里很多人从美国的经验中学习。另一个对世界有巨大教育作用的人是新加坡的李光耀。他帮助改变了中国。李光耀的价值观从何而来?他在英国接受教育,一生都说英语。因此,这间屋子里的很多文化都被新加坡吸收了。如果中国成为世界上最伟大的国家,我们的一些最佳美德也将成为那个国家的一部分。

第 26 问:您是否认为高失业率会在不久的将来导致经济萧条?

芒格:与我们期望的相比,就业状况很糟糕。就业将在相当长一段时间内成为问题。但这不会毁了生活。他是在大萧条时期长大的,那并没有毁了他的生活。我们处理就业问题的一个好办法就是凭干劲(gumption)。(“干劲”是他最喜欢但已没人用的词之一。)

第 27 问:有没有什么建议可以帮助解决就业问题?

芒格:就像日本过去几十年经历的那样,美国面临着来自中国等地巨大的新竞争。这种动态减少了就业机会。这些都是投资者必须考虑的非常现实的问题。未来,他们必须比伯克希尔收购戴克斯特鞋业时更明智(该公司很快就输给了更便宜的中国竞争对手)。麻烦的部分原因在于亚洲人太有才华了。他们长期受到压制,因为陷入了马尔萨斯陷阱——他们没有足够的食物,现在这个问题在很大程度上得到了缓解。这些人现在被解放出来了,他们拥有巨大的雄心和深厚的文化。我们受益于中国商品越来越好、越来越便宜。但是,作为一个副作用,我们在制造业方面面临着大量竞争。

查理说他对这类事情看得很开。他喜欢中国崛起。他喜欢日本成功所取得的成就。看看汽车和电视生产的去向——它们去了韩国和日本,离开了美国。他几乎不敢相信现代产品的发展程度。例如,他的牙医在他去看牙的这些年里,至少对全部设备进行了 4 次翻新。这些设备好到他觉得自己都能用。牙医助理现在有了类似于矿灯的现代装备,能让她看得更清楚。现在,她把东西戳到牙龈上而不是目标位置的可能性就小多了。

第 28 问:对于管理养老金的集中投资者,您有什么建议?

芒格:那些使用风格箱和收取大量费用的现代顾问,平均来看根本不管用。但他相信,有着提问者那种态度和理念的人会比平均水平做得更好。但对某些雇主来说,比平均水平好可能还不够。他绝不会让养老基金做出 8% 的回报假设。在债券和股票收益率都很低的情况下,你怎么能得出 8%?你得出这个数字是因为你希望如此。这不是芒格的方法。在他看来,你要在生活中寻找痛苦,并提前承受它。这能让你成为你自己和雇主的保护者。

第 29 问:除了伯克希尔,您最喜欢哪家公司?您最钦佩哪位 CEO?

芒格:他唯一的另一个董事职位是在好市多(Costco)董事会。他担任董事,既是出于自己的意愿,也是因为很多公司避开他,不希望他进入他们的董事会。他会说好市多是世界上最令人钦佩的公司之一,其 CEO 吉姆·西尼格(Jim Sinegal)是全球顶尖高管之一。查理对好市多的钦佩之情溢于言表。但世界已经看清了这一点,其股票以 25 倍市盈率交易。世界应该如此运作——找到好的投资地点。如果你对 25 倍市盈率、缓慢的增长以及与优秀的人共事感到满意,那么好市多以 25 倍市盈率交易,是世界上最令人钦佩的资本主义机构之一。它完全是任人唯贤的体制。他们把节省下来的钱传递给顾客,仿佛这是他们的道德义务。这家公司正在短期内亏损,以在长期内赚钱。在座的每个人都应该看看好市多的年报。事实上,每当唐纳德·特朗普说了什么让你沮丧的话,就想想好市多。

第 30 问:问题涉及他读什么书,以及如果他开始读一本不喜欢的书会怎么做。

芒格:当他开始后悔读某本书时,他会翻页更快。但他并没有被糟糕透顶的书所困扰,因为他要么完全避开它们,要么在读一小会儿后放弃。他年轻时如饥似渴地阅读世界上最伟大的小说。但在他了解了大多数套路后,就逐渐远离了。他转而主要阅读非虚构类作品,现在很少读小说,即使是为了消遣。

他小时候喜欢福尔摩斯。后来,在人生的某个阶段,他读了一本收录了阿瑟·柯南·道尔全部作品的平装书。他发现有些非福尔摩斯题材的作品糟透了。福尔摩斯系列是一座金矿。柯南·道尔甚至没那么优秀——他只是偶然碰对了金矿。然而,查理喜欢他现在可以承认自己曾经崇拜的东西并不那么好这一想法。他也喜欢更好地理解偶然碰上正确的金矿有多么重要。

同样,他喜欢在自己完全是个傻瓜的时候承认这一点。最近,他的乡村俱乐部想花巨资砍掉很多树,他反对这个计划。现在树被砍掉了,他看到了这是值得花这笔钱的,而他当时是个傻瓜。如果你乐于在犯错时让自己面对错误,你就能消除愚蠢带来的痛苦。这是一件很棒的事。你永远不会缺少机会。

第 31 问:如果您无法看到某位投资经理的回报率,您会如何挑选?

芒格:这很难做到。大量高素质的投资者来到伯克希尔,但挑选经理不像在桶里射鱼那么容易。你不想找那些只有待在特定领域才会表现出色的人。查理和沃伦能够扩展规模,这是他们的优势。他现在只知道一个人能以那种方式扩展规模。他不喜欢管理人的管理人概念(例如基金的基金)——太多人和复杂性。他将把这个挑选过程留给哈佛——一个犯下大量愚蠢错误的捐赠基金。

找人避开很容易,但要挑选令人钦佩的人就很难了。尤其是当经理人规模变大、雇佣更多人时,这就更加困难了。大型投资公司在获得更多资金后表现会变差。但有钱到需要找投资经理,这确实是个美妙的问题。

第 32 问:近期和持续发生的灾难会改变财产与意外险行业吗?

芒格:这个行业一如既往——它一直是个平庸的行业。任何一个你收进钱、持有一段时间、然后在很久以后还得还回去的行业,都会吸引很多蠢人。这个行业没有应收账款,账面上很有吸引力。但保险业总是有点疯狂。不过,它不像金融业那样糟糕——金融业里的人会彻底发疯。意外险是一个非常艰难的行业,寿险更难。然后他说,尽管近期发生了可怕的事件,保险业目前是正常的。

第 33 问:您如何看待美国将如何变得更成熟?

芒格:正如狄更斯所说,这是最好的时代,这是最坏的时代。例如,人们看着能源形势,决定把玉米变成燃料。这是一个愚蠢的想法,人们才刚刚开始意识到它有多蠢。他一直都知道,但无法阻止。他提到,伯克希尔在爱荷华州的公用事业公司 20% 的电力来自风能。在世界能够认真考虑在没有碳氢化合物的情况下获取能源之前,你可能会对人类的前景感到沮丧。但现在我们可以更乐观了——我们很可能有足够的能源来应对某些资源的枯竭。我们将不得不为页岩气之类的东西支付更高的价格。但能够获得那些天然气是一件非常积极的事情。未来我们将通过太阳获取大量能源。我们最终将拥有一个庞大的国家电网。我们正在向中国学习,中国正在建设一个庞大的电网。

许多技术问题只要有能源就可以解决。我们会有全球变暖,人类可能对此有一些影响。但他不相信情况会那么糟糕。有些人喜欢坐在那里想事情会有多糟,但人类过去已经适应了温度变化。在历史上,有更冷和更热的时期。我们现在甚至拥有了地球工程的能力。如果我们对地球温度不满意,我们可以改变它。如果我们想要,我们可以反射更多的阳光。他还说,让世界稍微变暖一点可能是个好主意。他没看到很多人从南加州搬到北达科他州。而且,加拿大有大量土地如果全球变暖一点可能会产出更高。他喜欢一个叫弗里曼·戴森(Freeman Dyson)的人在这个问题上的研究。

第 34 问:来自加州大学洛杉矶分校安德森商学院和西海岸资产管理的杰夫·埃利斯提问——巴菲特去世后董事长的角色。比尔·盖茨会比霍华德·巴菲特更适合担任董事长吗?

芒格:不会评论巴菲特的某个儿子是否会成为好董事长。

Buffett. He likes to have the freedom to take calls from friends and family. He doesn’t want to be booked like a busy dentist and this flexibility has worked for him. There is an advantage if you have a temperament that allows you to cope with problems that others can’t understand. He prefers hard problems and doesn’t want to be a dentist (who follows simple processes over and over). Q19: Regarding Buffett’s comments on future performance, is it unrealistic that BRK will outperform indexes slightly over a few years? Munger: No, it is not unrealistic. If they just held big common stocks it might not work. But, with a mixture of operating business and business owners selling to them because they don’t want to sell to someone else, Buffett may get his wish. However, Buffett might not get his wish to be there for 20 years to see it happen. Q20: What is his advice regarding raising a son? Munger: Don’t preach one thing and then live another life! Q21: Has being a cult hero limited or improved his ability to do what he wants? Munger: It has done both. It is only peculiar people like us that he wants to impress. He is lucky because we are the only people he has ever impressed. To the extent he is known by this crowd, he thinks it is a net plus. But, he doesn’t want a bigger house or more acclaim. In fact, he has outshot himself already on those fronts. Q22: Could we get a list of the 99 mental models he uses? Munger: The women who asked the question appraises him higher than he does himself. He can’t do that! Q23: Question had to do with the prospect of a BRK dividend. Munger: He said that some of us will live to see a BRK dividend but he doesn’t want to see it. It will mean that the company does not have great investment opportunities available any longer. He doesn’t want to see what he would consider failure. Q24: When assessing durable competitive advantages, what does he consider the most? Munger: He and Warren only look at industries and companies that they have a core competency in. Every person has to do the same thing. You have a limited amount of time and talent and you have to allocate it smartly. Q25: Do you see parallels between the decline of the US and that of the Roman Empire? Munger: Of course he sees parallels. The failure rate of great empires in terms of geography is 100%. Just look at Athens and Britain today—everyone has passed the baton in due course. However, there is one sense in which these empires are still with us today. What was great about ancient Greece is with us in the world today—it has just moved. You can be confident that the US will not be the most dominant and admired country in the world forever. We may have a longer run than most– we may even have a long run ahead. But, we will eventually fall from the top. But, the US has had a huge, constructive influence on Asia. Asia is important for the future of the world and many people there have learned from the US’s experiences. Another person who has been a great instructor to the world is Lee Kwan Yew of Singapore. He helped change China. Where did Lee Kwan Yew learn his values? He was educated in England and was English speaking all of his life. As such, a lot of the culture of this room was absorbed by Singapore. If China becomes the greatest nation in the world, some of our best virtues will be a part of that country as well. Q26: Do you see a depression in the near future due to high unemployment? Munger: Employment conditions are bad compared to what we desire. Employment is going to be a problem for a considerable period. But, that doesn’t ruin life. He was raised in the Great Depression and it did not ruin his life. A good way for us to deal with the employment problem is gumption. (Gumption is one of his favorite words that no one uses anymore.) Q27: Is there anything he suggests that can be done to help employment? Munger: Like Japan had in previous decades, the US has had huge new competition from places like China. This dynamic has reduced employment opportunities. These are very real issues that investors have to take into account. Going forward they have to be wiser than BRK was when it bought Dexter Shoes (and the company soon lost out to cheaper Chinese competitors). Part of the trouble is that the Asians are so talented. They were held down so long because they were stuck in a Malthusian trap— they didn’t have enough to eat and now that problem has been alleviated to a large extent. These people now have been unleashed and they have great ambition and culture. We have benefited from Chinese goods being better and better and cheaper and cheaper. But, as a side consequence we have a lot of competition in terms of manufacturing. Charlie said he is very philosophical about stuff like this. He likes that the Chinese are coming up. He likes what was achieved by Japan’s success. Look where car and TV production went—it went to Korea and Japan and away from the US. He can hardly believe the modern products that are developed. For example, his dentist has had at least 4 total equipment makeovers during the years he has been going there. The equipment is so good he thinks even he could use it. The dental assistant now has the modern equivalent of miner’s lamp that helps her see better. Now she is less likely to stick something into his gums rather than where she wants to. Q28: What does he advise for concentrated investors who run pension money? Munger: Modern consultants with their style boxes and all of the fees are not going to work worth a damn, on average. But, he believes that someone with the attitude and philosophy of the questioner will do better than average. But better than average may not be good enough for certain employers. He would never let pension funds make 8% return assumptions. With low yielding bonds and stocks, how do you come up with 8%? You come up with it because that is what you want. That is not the Munger system. In his eyes you go through life looking for pain and taking it advance. It makes you a protector of yourself and your employer. Q29: Which is the company you love the most outside of BRK? What CEO do you admire the most? Munger: His only other directorship position is on the board of Costco. He is on the board because it is his wish and also because many companies avoid him and wouldn’t want him on their boards. He would argue that Costco is one of the most admirable firms in the world and that CEO Jim Sinegal is one of the top executives in the world. Charlie can’t say enough about his admiration of Costco. But the world has figured it out and the stock sells at 25x earnings. The world should work that way—finding great places to invest. If you are comfortable with 25x earnings, slow advances, and working with great people, Costco at 25x earnings is one of the most admirable capitalistic institutions in the world. It is a total meritocracy. They pass on savings to their customers as if it were a moral duty. The company is losing money in the short term to make money in the long term. Everyone in the room should go through Costco’s annual report. In fact, every time Donald Trump says something and you get discouraged, just think about Costco. Q30: The question had to do with what books he reads and what he does if he starts a book he doesn’t like. Munger: As he starts regretting reading a book, he starts turning the page faster. But, he is not too burdened by god awful books because he either avoids them altogether or desists after a short time. He passionately read the world’s great fiction when he was young. But, he gradually drifted out of it after he knew most of the tricks. He moved to non-fiction for the most part and rarely reads fiction now even for pleasure’s sake. When he was a kid he loved Sherlock Holmes. Then, later in life he read a paperback that included the total work of Arthur Conan Doyle. He found that some of the non-Sherlock Holmes stuff was just awful. The Sherlock Holmes genre was a gold mine. Conan Doyle wasn’t even that good—he just stumbled into the right gold mine. However, Charlie likes the idea that he can now admit that what he once admired was not that good. He also likes to better understand how important it is to stumble on the right gold mine. Similarly, he loves to admit it when he is a total horse’s ass. Recently, his country club wanted to tear out a lot of trees at an exorbitant cost and he fought the plan. Now that the trees are gone, he sees that it was worth spending the money and that he was a horse’s ass. You take the pain out of being foolish if you take pleasure in rubbing your nose in your own mistakes. It is a wonderful thing to do. You will never lack for opportunities. Q31: How would you approach selecting an investment manager if you could not see his or her returns? Munger: It is very hard to do. Tons of people come to BRK who are very high grade investors but picking a manager is not like shooting fish in a barrel. You don’t want to find people who will only be really good if they stick in their niche. Charlie and Warren could scale and that was their advantage. He only knows of one person right now who can scale in that way. He doesn’t like the manager’s manager concept (funds of funds for example)—too many people and complexities. He is going to leave that selection process to Harvard—an endowment that makes a lot of asinine mistakes. It is easy to find people to avoid but it becomes tough with admirable people. This is especially hard as the managers get bigger and hire more people. The big investment firms underperform as they get more money. But, it sure is a wonderful problem to be so rich that you need an investment manager. Q32: Will recent and continuing disasters change the property and casualty insurance industry? Munger: This business is continuing as it has it in the past—it has always been a mediocre business. Any business where you take in money, keep it for a while and then have to give it back much later will attract a lot of dumb people. The business has no receivables and is very attractive on paper. But, the insurance industry always goes a little crazy. Although, it is not terrible in the way finance is—where people go plum crazy. The casualty business is a very tough business and life insurance is even harder. He then said that the insurance business is currently normal, despite recent awful events. Q33: What is your perception of how the US will become more adult? Munger: As Dickens said, it is the best of times; it is the worst of times. For example, people have looked at the energy situation and decided to turn corn in fuel. This is an asinine idea and people are just starting to see how stupid it is. He knew it all along but couldn’t do anything to stop it. He mentioned that 20% of BRK’s Iowa utility’s power comes from wind. Before the world could think seriously about having energy without hydrocarbons, you could be glum about human’s future. But now we can be more optimistic—we are likely to have enough energy to face the depletion of certain resources. We are going to have to pay more for things like shale natural gas. But, having access to that gas is a very positive thing. We are going to take a lot of energy through the sun in the future. We are going to have a big national grid at some point. We are learning from China as China is putting in a huge grid. Many technical problems are solvable if you have power. We will have global warming and man may have some impact on it. But, he doesn’t believe that it will be that bad. There are people who like to sit around and think about how bad things will be but mankind has adapted to temperature changes in the past. It has been colder and hotter during periods of time. We now even have the power of geoengineering. We can change the temperature of the earth if we are not happy about it. We can reflect more light if we want to. He also said that it might be a good idea to have a slightly warmer world. He doesn’t see many people moving to North Dakota from Southern California. Also, there is a lot of land in Canada that could be much more productive if the world warmed a bit. He likes the work of a guy named Freeman Dyson on this subject. Q34: Jeff Ellis of UCLA Anderson and West Coast Asset Management- Questioned about the role of the Chairman when Buffett dies. Would Bill Gates be a better Chairman than Howard Buffett? Munger: Would not comment on whether or not one of Buffett’s sons would make a good a Chairman.

Q35来自 Causeway Capital 的 Victor Liu 提问——他倾向于公立学校还是私立学校教育?

芒格:公立学校现在远不如哈佛西湖这样的私立学校好。他好奇,如果自己当初接受的是哈佛西湖的教育,而不是奥马哈的公立学校,成就可能会高多少。但他认为,自己接受的公立教育已经足够好了。无论如何,他觉得自己很快也会忘掉微积分——什么时候学并不重要。最终,你需要给孩子提供一定的基础教育。但把孩子硬往前推几年可能会出问题。他小时候已经够惹人厌了。他认为,推动最优秀的现代学校是值得的。他想看看我们的教育体系能做到多好。但毕业于这些学校的学生是否会有显著优势,还是个未知数。他确实知道的是,现在有很多不合格的大学生。而那些来自优秀学校的孩子,简直能轻松碾压他们。

Q36: 他对判断优秀管理层有什么建议?

芒格:判断像伊斯卡这样的公司管理层很容易——那些人天赋异禀、非常出色。但像这样的管理层并不多见,也很少有人能有如此强烈的动力。在以色列,失败不是选项——他们没有碳氢化合物资源,到处都是敌人。判断优秀的管理者很容易。

另一方面,他知道一家拥有优秀文化和优秀业务的公司,他和沃伦都很钦佩经营这家公司的人。但这个人刚刚做了一笔糟糕的收购。查理认为,你必须准备好对管理层感到失望。所有管理者都会有所偏离。如果他和沃伦都能在 Dexter Shoes 上犯那么大的错误,那么我们就不该对别人犯收购错误感到惊讶。如果你对所见之事不感到沮丧,那说明你根本没理解。

Q37: 美国合众银行(USB)和富国银行(WFC)表现优于其他银行,但可能被行业内的不良行为者拖累。它们如何避免这种情况?

芒格:没有人能 100% 远离麻烦。但像 USB 和 WFC 这样的公司,在避免银行业常见愚蠢行为方面比大多数公司做得更好。伯克希尔也不能拥有完美的管理者。总得有妥协——就像他妻子嫁给他时做的那样。他们必须利用现有条件。他认识一些人,他们不会持有金融股,因为他们认为银行会发疯。查理知道这并非不理性的说法。但他喜欢这些银行承认这个问题。富国银行的银行家们承认,他们在发放大量二按贷款时简直是脑袋被驴踢了。

看看美国银行陷入的麻烦。谈论决策上的耻辱吧。当然,这些公司是有风险。但制造业公司也不是完美的。他的预期寿命已大不如前,但他还是相对乐观地活着。难道他趴在地上痛哭流涕会更好吗?

Q35Victor Liu of Causeway Capital- Does he favor public school or private school education?

Munger: Public schools are now nowhere near as good as private schools like Harvard Westlake. He wonders how much better he would have done if he would have gotten an education for Harvard Westlake instead of Omaha’s public schools. But, he thinks his public school education was good enough. He thinks he would have forgotten calculus quickly in any case—it wouldn’t matter when he learned it. In the end you need to get a certain baseline education for a child. But, dragging a kid a few years ahead can be problematic. He was obnoxious enough as a kid as it was. He thinks it is worth it to push the best modern schools. He wants to see how good we can make our system. But, whether the students who graduate from these schools will have a major advantage is unknown. What he does know is that there are a lot of defective college students. Kids who come from great schools just run rings around them. Q36: What advice does he have for judging good management? Munger: Judging the management at a company like Iscar is easy—those people are enormously talented and wonderful. But, there aren’t many managements like that and few people with the incentive of such intensity. Failure is not an option in Israel—they have no hydrocarbons and enemies everywhere. It is easy to judge great managers. On the other hand, he knows of a company with a great culture and a great business and he and Warren admire the guy who runs the company. But, the man just made an awful acquisition. Charlie believes that you have to be willing to be disappointed by managers. All managers are going to drift. If he and Warren could be so wrong as to buy Dexter Shoes then we should not be surprised that others make acquisition mistakes. If you are not frustrated by what you see, you don’t understand it. Q37: US Bank (USB) and Wells Fargo (WFC) have done better than other banks but could get pulled down by bad actors in the industry. How can they avoid that? Munger: No one can 100% stay away from trouble. However, companies like USB and WFC are better at avoiding the common stupidities of banking than most. BRK doesn’t get to have perfect managers either. There is always a compromise—like what his wife did when she married him. They have to deal with what is available. He knows people who will not own financials because they think the banks will go crazy. Charlie knows this is not an irrational statement. But, he likes that these banks acknowledge this problem. Bankers from WFC admit that they had their heads up their asses when they made a lot of 2nd mortgage loans. Look at the troubles that Bank of America got into. Talk about a disgrace in terms of decision making. Of course there are risks with these companies. But, manufacturing companies are not perfect either. His life expectancy is not what it used to be but he is still here relatively cheerfully. Would it be better if he were on the floor sobbing about it?

问题 38问题是关于 Level 3 通信公司的前景?

芒格:他说自己对这家公司了解不多。人们铺设了太多光纤电缆,就像过去铺设了太多铁轨一样。他们后来得到了同样的结果:巨大的收缩。他从未看过 Level 3 的报表。他的办公桌上有三个文件夹——收文、发文和太难。Level 3 属于太难的那个文件夹。

问题 39:问题是关于本杰明·富兰克林在他人生中的角色。

芒格:富兰克林说过大致这样的话:“当世界公民发现他们可以通过投票给自己发钱时,文明就接近终结了。”现在的人们表现得好像他们需要、想要并且理应得到这些(即金钱和权力)。这些都是可悲的成年人,行为却像孩子。如果富兰克林活在今天,他会强调这个问题。我们的祖先通过只允许有产者投票来限制这一点,但由于我们的投票规则,我们在这方面遇到了麻烦。他过去常问,为什么每个人都应该有投票权。他一直反对强制投票,因为他认为如果人人都投票,实际上会损害文明。

芒格在问答环节结束时对掌声的回应:他喜欢自己得到的反响和这样好的出席率,而不是像死人那样——人们去参加葬礼只是为了确认他确实死了。

Q38The question was about the prospects for Level 3 Communications?

Munger: He said he didn’t know much about the company. People build too much fiber optic cable just like they built too many train tracks in the past. They then got the same outcome: a huge contraction. He has never looked at Level 3. He has three folders on his desk—in, out and too tough. Level 3 fits in the too tough bin. Q39: The question was about Ben Franklin’s role in his life. Munger: Franklin said something to the effect of: “When the citizens of the world find out that they can vote themselves into money, they end of the civilization is nigh.” People now act as if they need it, want it and deserve it (money and power that is). These are pathetic adults acting like children. If Franklin were alive today he would highlight this issue. Our ancestors limited this by only allowing property owners to vote but we are having trouble with it because of our voting rules. He used to ask why everyone should vote. He has always opposed mandated voting because he thinks it would actually hurt the civilization if everyone voted. Munger’s response to the applause at the end of the Q&A session: He liked the reaction he got and the great turnout as opposed to the huge turnout the dead man gets when people show up to the funeral just to make sure he is dead.