A community for discussing events around the World
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed.
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF OCTOBER 19 2025
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
Ask Historians !askhistorians@lemmy.world
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
He may be one of the least evil of the billionaires, but a 96-year-old handing the reigns of a $1T company over to his 71-year-old son really sums up how well trickle-down economics works for the rest of us.
I've worked for a handful of Berkshire owned companies. They are by far the worst employers in my area. If you manage to get past entry level some of the benefits are nice, but none of them compare to the entry level benefits at the worst union jobs I've had.
he is know to play it safe with his companies, unlike most other billionaires, who gather negative public perceptions really quick.
By definition they are evil
But he can be among the least evil. There are certainly degrees.
They didn't said not evil. Least evil is still evil.
It doesn't do, to grade evils. For if one is the worst, you might be tempted to kinship with least.
No such thing.
Sure there are degrees of evilness. Musk is certainly more evil than buffet. Both can still be evil though.
He's a piece of shit, and his greed comes at the expense of the public good.
And that he worked to 96, with one of the most monumental fortunes in human history, just goes to show what a greedy, careless, unfeeling motherfucker he is.
I met him a few times. He was a student of Ben Graham, and his life's joy has been investment analysis and investing. Weatlh has been almost incidental to him. He lives relatively humbly, and still works because he likes it, not because he needs it.
There is a whole class of people like him. My mentor, when I was still in investing, is nowhere as rich as Buffet, but can live comfortably in one of his estates around the US. Yet, he's still doing investment analysis in his 90s. I met quite a few others who have been working on Wall Street since the 1970s, and many of them still work past their retirement because they like it. It's almost like a psychosis. They aren't inherently evil; they are just more comfortable with numbers and business processes rather than human beings (which is ultimately why I switched careers). Buffet has simply been more successful than the others, but it could have been anybody.
My guess is he's received news he'll be dead within a year and this is just them executing the succession plan.
Meaning he is only stepping down to protect the weath fund becuase preserving his pile of dragon gold is the most important thing to him.
Whereas for the rest of us, the most important thing he'll ever do is die as is true for any billionaire. May his son soon do what's best for us all.
I don't think he's the "owner" of Apple and Coca-cola.
(Edit: I believe the title was edited to include the word 'major')
Well he’s the owner in the sense that Berkshire Hathaway owns shares. They do not own all or even most of the shares though.
They own 1.56% valued at ~$66B USD
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_assets_owned_by_Berkshire_Hathaway
(I commented here about numbers for coca-cola shares, but missed you referred to Apple shares, not cocoa-cola)
I love you Lemmy math nerds.
True. But he is one of the largest shareholder of these two companies.
10% of Coke. 1.5% of Apple. Largest owner of Coke maybe but only top ten for Apple.
They had about 8% of Apple at one point but reduced their holdings quite a bit a year or two ago.
Billionaires dying of old age proves they haven't invented reverse aging therapy yet.