No. of Recommendations: 32
Just thinking that there is a small possibility of Buffett changing his entire view due to two months of "odd" politics is an indication of not understanding Buffett at all. Hmm, perhaps we can agree to disagree.
Mr Buffett's genius is not that the has a set of rules that work perfectly, but that he is a "learning machine". He is also famously unwedded to preconceived notions, and totally immune to the disposition effect (the tendency to prefer what you already own over what the alternatives might offer). Consider the way he calmly and promptly blew out the immense Wells Fargo position without a second thought, at a plainly terrible price, after years--decades--of being their most vocal fan, when he decided there was something that he didn't like there. Or the way he immediately liquidated every last one of Mr Simpson's positions when he left without a second thought. The list could go on...plunging into Japanese equities, which was shocking to everyone, when that looked like a more sensible thing to do than to chase fully valued American opportunities. He invested in bullion once, for heaven's sake, and a slate of junk bonds, and tens of billions worth of index puts. He was heavy bonds, then he almost completely moved out of them. He placed wagers on other currencies, and in a big way.
So...
If Mr Buffett were to perceive that his previous conclusion about the invincibility of the US governance/investment environment was no longer valid, I can totally imagine him simply switching to some other horse(s). I am not at all suggesting that he perceives the problem in the same way that I do [if/yet/ever], but
if he did I certainly would not expect him to be as hidebound as your comment might suggest. If he sees a material risk, he'd be out. (I will try to resist the temptation to ascribe any meaning to the observation that he has raised a third of a trillion dollars in cash)
Sometimes, very rarely, things really do change. As the treaty of Augsberg of 1555 might summarize, "
cuius regio eius religio", or (to paraphrase) diff'rent strokes for different folks, or horses for courses. To every thing there is a season, and a time to every purpose under the heaven. If (a truly immense if) we are seeing the first true politico-financial regime change underway since (say) the time that the US economy took over prime global significance of the British one, then I would not at all be surprised to see Mr Buffett among the first to prepare for or act on it.
In short, I appreciate that his mantra of "all US, always" has been both correct so far and probably correct in the future. But I also absolutely give him credit for the ability to change his mind about that if he decides that circumstances warrant, and not hesitate in the least to take major action if that were his assessment. This is a fellow who has never realized a loss of 1% of any portfolio he was managing. You don't get there by not considering bad outcomes, even the unlikely ones.
As he has commented in the past, "what the wise do in the beginning, fools do in the end". Can the era of America's profitable exceptionalism ever have an end? Obviously it could. If and when that end comes, those who assume otherwise near the end will have been the fools in the saying. We probably aren't seeing that end process now...but perhaps, just faintly perhaps, we are. At what point is the size of a "perhaps" something that affects how you allocate capital?
As a side note, I don't think the issues started in just the last couple of months. I really hate to be the bearer of bad news, but it's not a current news cycle problem. The shift away from "good guy governance" has been an issue for some time. As a random example among thousands, nothing the current administration has done lately caused this sort of outcome:
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/mar/19/ca...Jim
