If you had taken Buffett's advice on October 17th, you'd be in even deeper. Now why would a person living in a studio apartment and who owns zero stocks have been right where the second richest man in the world was wrong on financial matters of all things? It's the only time I ever went public against Buffett specifically on an investment-timing call of his. I didn't say maybe he's wrong. I said he's wrong on the timing. Do you really believe that it was just a lucky guess?

You can't test these things.

Here's what I wrote very early on October 20 right after a huge rise in stocks:

This is sad, very, very sad.

The prospect of a slowing economy after $660 billion in losses and writedowns from mortgage-related investments at banks has sent the S&P 500 down 36 percent this year. Buffett, the world's second-richest person, said he's buying U.S. stocks after the decline and urged investors to "be greedy when others are fearful" in an Oct. 17 New York Times column.

Source: U.S. Stocks' Roller-Coaster Week Gives Dow Best Gain Since 2003
By Lynn Thomasson
Oct. 18 (Bloomberg)

Warren Buffett is not infallible. People are going to find that out. I'm not saying I mean his timing of getting back in is wrong, although it is. I mean he's completely wrong to be promoting to people to "be greedy." Greed is the last thing that's needed. Greed is what caused the problems. Buffett thinks that it's the degree of greed that matters. He's wrong. All greed is wrong. Unless and until humanity moves out from the darkness Buffett is promoting, the world will continue suffering and experiencing pain.

Buffett so-called philanthropy with Bill Gates isn't going to make up for or atone for his call to greed.

Watch what happens. Turn before it is too late for you.

May God bless all with the truth rather than the garbage Warren Buffett is spreading.

Why am I bringing this up? Am I bragging? No, I'm not bragging. I'm far from the only person who knew that the market would go down more. I'm simply trying to get people to see the light and to get some sense. It's the same as with the military generals who said that the Iraq occupation would be a cake walk. Buffett's greed is blinding him. The generals were deluded. Their blood lust and visions of military glory blinded them.


The following should appear at the end of every post:

According to the IRS, "Know the law: Avoid political campaign intervention":

Tax-exempt section 501(c)(3) organizations like churches, universities, and hospitals must follow the law regarding political campaigns. Unfortunately, some don't know the law.

Under the Internal Revenue Code, all section 501(c)(3) organizations are prohibited from participating in any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for elective public office. The prohibition applies to campaigns at the federal, state and local level.

Violation of this prohibition may result in denial or revocation of tax-exempt status and the imposition of certain excise taxes. Section 501(c)(3) private foundations are subject to additional restrictions.

Political Campaign Intervention

Political campaign intervention includes any activities that favor or oppose one or more candidates for public office. The prohibition extends beyond candidate endorsements.

Contributions to political campaign funds, public statements of support or opposition (verbal or written) made by or on behalf of an organization, and the distribution of materials prepared by others that support or oppose any candidate for public office all violate the prohibition on political campaign intervention.

Factors in determining whether a communication results in political campaign intervention include the following:

  • Whether the statement identifies one or more candidates for a given public office
  • Whether the statement expresses approval or disapproval of one or more candidates' positions and/or actions
  • Whether the statement is delivered close in time to the election
  • Whether the statement makes reference to voting or an election
  • Whether the issue addressed distinguishes candidates for a given office

Many religious organizations believe, as we do, that the above constitutes a violation of the First Amendment of the US Constitution.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

That said, we make the following absolutely clear here:

  • The Real Liberal Christian Church and Christian Commons Project not only do not endorse any candidate for any secular office, we say that Christianity forbids voting in such elections.
  • Furthermore, when we discuss any public-office holder's position, policy, action or inaction, we definitely are not encouraging anyone to vote for that office holder's position.
  • We are not trying to influence secular elections but rather want people to come out from that entire fallen system.
  • When we analyze or discuss what is termed "public policy," we do it entirely from a theological standpoint with an eye to educating professing Christians and those to whom we are openly always proselytizing to convert to authentic Christianity.
  • It is impossible for us to fully evangelize and proselytize without directly discussing the pros and cons of public policy and the positions of secular-office holders, hence the unconstitutionality of the IRS code on the matter.
  • We are not rich and wouldn't be looking for a fight regardless. What we cannot do is compromise our faith (which seeks to harm nobody, quite the contrary).
  • We render unto Caesar what is Caesar's. We render unto God what is God's.
  • When Caesar says to us that unless we shut up about the unrighteousness of Caesar's policies and practices, we will lose the ability of people who donate to us to declare their donations as deductions on their federal and state income-tax returns, we say to Caesar that we cannot shut up while exercising our religion in a very reasonable way.
  • We consider the IRS code on this matter as deliberate economic duress (a form of coercion) and a direct attempt by the federal government to censor dissenting, free political and religious speech.
  • It's not freedom of religion if they tax it.

And when they were come to Capernaum, they that received tribute money came to Peter, and said, Doth not your master pay tribute? He saith, Yes. And when he was come into the house, Jesus prevented him, saying, What thinkest thou, Simon? of whom do the kings of the earth take custom or tribute? of their own children, or of strangers? Peter saith unto him, Of strangers. Jesus saith unto him, Then are the children free. (Matthew 17:24-26)

  • Subscribe

  • Tom Usher

    About Tom Usher

    Employment: 2008 - present, website developer and writer. 2015 - present, insurance broker. Education: Arizona State University, Bachelor of Science in Political Science. City University of Seattle, graduate studies in Public Administration. Volunteerism: 2007 - present, president of the Real Liberal Christian Church and Christian Commons Project.
    This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.