Friday, July 29, 2011 - 10:58 AM

Check out this Pentagon briefing on how military retirees are overpaid and overbenefitted. Now do you believe me?
Says an Army friend, "I think any changes made to the military retirement system should be made, measure for measure, to the House and Senate retirement plans. It might be a symbolic gesture, but it would probably be enough to keep me from breaking out the torch and pitchfork." I like that idea.
Defense Business Board
Thursday, June 16, 2011 - 10:41 AM

Most people who can write clearly aren't billionaires. Even so, I suspect that the ease of Warren Buffett's prose is related to his business success, because his simple, informative writing reflects his clear, unfettered thinking.
Buffett writes plainly even when discussing complex financial theories: "Both Charlie and I believe that Black-Scholes [a financial formula for valuing stock options and other derivative financial instruments] produces wildly inappropriate values when applied to long-dated options.… Part of the appeal of Black-Scholes to auditors and regulators is that it produces a precise number. Charlie and I can't supply one of those.… Our inability to pinpoint a number doesn't bother us: We would rather be approximately right than precisely wrong." (p. 21) (Tom's italics, because I just liked that phrasing so much. And so should all you J-2s out there.)
He also discusses his criteria for buying companies: "A line from a country song expresses our feeling about new ventures, turnarounds, or auction-like sales: ‘When the phone don't ring, you'll know it's me.'" (p. 28)
But, you may wonder, isn't the military just too big to be run like Buffett runs Berkshire Hathaway? Consider this: In 2010, the company's revenue was $136.2 billion, and the total payroll of entities in which it is involved numbers more than 260,000. (p. 106) Not as big as the Pentagon overall, but almost in the same league as the military services, and, as I noted last year, actually bigger than the Marine Corps. So consider this final note in the annual report: He thanks "the 20 men and women who work with me at our corporate office (all on one floor, which is the way we intend to keep it!)." (p. 26)
That's not a typo for 20,000. His headquarters consists of twenty people -- down one from last year.
Neubie/Flickr
Tuesday, December 22, 2009 - 6:57 PM

I believe in a strong national defense. But I don't think buying jets, ships, and anti-missile systems is necessarily the best way to improve the nation's security right now. In the long term, one of the best ways to make the country strong is to spend more on national infrastructure and especially education. Without the GI Bill, my father probably wouldn't have gotten to college. As it happened, he wound up going from growing up poor in rural Wyoming to teaching at Harvard.
I also understand that military operations are expensive. Got it. I want to support soldiers, give them what they need. I am all for building day care centers on military bases and buying good body armor. I can even live with $1.2 billion being given to combat commanders for CERP money (i.e., "walking around money").
But there is a whole lot of defense spending that simply stuns me. Here are a few examples from the current FY 2010 defense appropriations bill:
This list makes me wonder just how out of touch with the country's economy our military leaders are. This makes it more understandable how they could think that that the scandal over triple-dipping generals being paid millions of dollars to "mentor" is no biggie.
(HT to National Priorities Project for the spending summary)
RIZWAN TABASSUM/AFP/Getty Images
Thursday, March 26, 2009 - 6:10 PM
I was surprised when I saw this Financial Times chart passed along by the ever-inquisitive Nirav Patel. (Use the Y axis slider to move it from 1999 to the present-and watch the rise of Asian banks.) I was surprised to see how the relative size of American banks has shrunk.