Warren Buffett says second stimulus might be needed

[Joanne98]

Source: Reuters

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Legendary investor Warren Buffett said in an interview aired on Thursday unemployment could hit 11 percent and a second stimulus package might be needed as the economy struggles to recover from recession.
Buffett, the billionaire founder of Berkshire Hathaway, said Americans suffered "a shock to the system" from the economic difficulties in the final quarter of last year but had started to rebound.

"We're not in a freefall, but we're not in a recovery either," he told ABC's "Good Morning America."

"We were in a freefall really in the last quarter of last year, starting in the financial markets and spreading to the economy, and we had this huge change in behavior."

Buffett, a supporter of President Barack Obama during last year's election campaign, said a second economic stimulus package might be needed. The Obama administration says it does not see a need for a second stimulus yet.

"I think a second one may well be called for. It is not a panacea. A stimulus is the right thing. You hope it doesn't get watered down," he said.

He likened the first $787 billion stimulus package passed by Congress to "half a tablet of Viagra and then having also a bunch of candy mixed in --- it doesn't have really quite the wallop.


Read more: http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSTRE56846L20090709

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

1. There is a second stimulus.

The other 90% of the first stimulus.

Criminey!

[dkf]

2. Oh gosh that is funny isn't it?

I sure would like to see some use it or lose it provisions added to the package. Funds only become stimulus if its spent.

[Warpy]

3. And third, fourth and fifth with no end in sight

but each time, the targeting has go to become more refined while being linked to the states themselves and their ability to raise their own revenue to match funding.

This is all from Reaganism, giving the rich a free ride on our backs. It has been a miserable failure, looting the country of a solid infrastructure and the people of most of their wealth while allowing a few individuals like Mr. Buffett to become obscenely rich, something he freely admits.

Only a stick offered along with the carrot is going to end Reaganism and only ending Reaganism will get this country back on the right track. Prepare for a lot of red baiting in our near future should this come to pass, though.

[predfan]

4. Unfortunantly a second stimulus is often needed at our house.

[predfan]

5. Or, to quote The Office "That's what she said"

[Rage for Order]

6. Translation: "I haven't milked enough from the taxpayers, give me more"

Remember that http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2008/sep/24/warrenbuffett.goldmansachs">$5 billion investment in Goldman Sachs that Buffett made last September? He received a http://www.businessinsider.com/warren-buffett-almost-up-on-his-goldman-sachs-investment-2009-3">guarantee of 10% per annum on his investment, plus the right to purchase 43 million shares of GS stock at $115 a share. Goldman's share price as of today is about $143, so Buffett has made...what's $28 x 43 million?...he's made $1.204 billion on his investment in 10 months, and that's just what he made on the increase in share price. If you add in the 10% coupon rate he also receives, it becomes clear that Buffett is making out quite nicely.

Warren, you've made enough money on the backs of taxpayers. Go away and STFU you disingenuous fuck.

[Amonester]

10. He should be taxed (at the very least) $1 billion on that profit.

That would "leave" him "just" $204 million to play with.

All those money-grabbers should be taxed to the roof (and they'd STILL have PLENTY left to play with).

But hey, Reaganites would start SCREAMING.

How about: LET THEM SCREAM! all they want?

[undeterred]

7. Then he should pay for it.

[notadmblnd]

8. there won't be any recovery until jobs are created

no jobs = no one paying into the system = the system keeps going broke. How hard is that for the powers that be to comprehend?

[Vidar]

9. We always need more handouts for the rich.

[depakid]

11. Why would a stimulus need to involve "handouts to the rich?"

I think you're confusing stimulus with bailouts.