Subject: Re: How can Berkshire spend $300B
“ I suspect that Berkshire would be one of the few firms prepared, both financially and philosophically, to take advantage of that. So in the "unpleasant outcome" scenarios Berkshire's rate of trend growth might fall somewhat less than that of the broad US economy.”
...
That’s pretty much been your position on Berkshire for the time I’ve read your posts. Track the market during bulls and beat the market during bears. Produces a net long term win. Your big caveat is that you can boost the long term returns by buying Berkshire when it trades below average PB and sell when it’s near all term highs. You do that with options. I just hold and accept the long term market beating returns from my original good fortune of buying at a low PB.
My point is I’m not sure that anything you are saying here is any different than what you’ve been saying all along. The difference is that you are sour on the US now. Not sure the damage Trump is doing to the US economy will be any better for the world economy as a whole. So … where to hide? I vote Berkshire.

Absolutely, my tune hasn't changed. I expect a gradual slowdown in the rate of value growth per share, which has (to my pleasant surprise) been delayed a lot longer than I expected. Value growth has been inflation + 8%/year for ages on trend, and my expectation has been a drop to a rate of about inflation + 7%. The only thing new is that if, say, the trend of real growth of the US economy in real terms takes a moderate turn for the worse for whatever reason, I expect Berkshire's value generation in real currency terms to also take a hit because they are so closely tied to the US economy. That would be an additive headwind. So maybe the 7%/year one might reasonably expect otherwise might come in at 6.5%/year, 6%/year, or 5.5%/year in the next decade??? Nobody knows.

As an investor I'm "sour" on the US only in the sense that I have cut back my participation. I simply prefer not to invest in or purchase much from places that are now declared geopolitical enemies of the countries I'm from or live in, in the same way that I don't invest in or buy stuff Russia. It's not really possible to cut off from the US that completely, but one can pull back a lot.

None of that stance means I think Berkshire is a terrible investment. For example, on Friday one could write a January 2026 $450 put option for a premium of $12.90. The two outcomes: (1) you earn income, equating to a rate of 6.5%/year added to whatever you're earning on that cash balance, so a decent return in total. If the price soars in the interim, you get most of the return in a short period of time, so the rate of return might be excellent. Or (2), you get Berkshire stock at a net entry price of $437.10. Book per share at year end might be around $322 at a guess, so that would be an entry at a P/B of 1.357, which is probably a level that guarantees a reasonably good forward return, especially compared to the likely modest gains in purchasing power to be had from holding the broad US market at these levels. What would the ten year real total return be from the S&P 500 if the valuation level at the end was the same as (say) the 20 or 25 year average and real earnings track real GDP growth? Adjusted for any big change in the level of the trade weighted dollar. Nobody knows precisely, but it's almost certainly a negative number.

Jim