However, Buffett's "move" was free market driven.
It was also slick in that it burned the short sellers who were confident of a BAC bankruptcy.
Now, that possibility looks slim.
I think it was to burn the shorts for sure!
In Europe they are civilised, the 'Powers that be' merely ban short sellers.
In the Barbaric US of A they burn 'em!
It's a casino and the house plays too!
...sometimes the house loses though.
However, Buffett's "move" was free market driven.
It was also slick in that it burned the short sellers who were confident of a BAC bankruptcy.
Now, that possibility looks slim.
Buffet is a PPT shill for the administration. Believe me, he got assurances from the white house that this will be a winning investment one way or another.
Buffet is a PPT shill for the administration. Believe me, he got assurances from the white house that this will be a winning investment one way or another.
I firmly believe that Buffet is simply a "surrogate buyer" when the government cannot directly prop up a company. And yes, he is given many assurances that they "have his back".
It's just occurred far too many times over the years for me to think that it's anything otherwise.
