Stanley Druckenmiller: "We Have An Entitlement Problem" And One Day The Fed's Hamster Wheel Will Stop

Tyler Durden's picture

Two and a half years ago, George Soros' former partner Stanley Druckenmiller closed shop when he shut down his iconic Duquesne Management, after generating 30% average annual returns since 1986. Some time later he raised many red flags by being one of the first "establishment" types to expose the Fed's take over of the market when he said in a rare May 2011 interview that "It's not a free market. It's not a clean market.... The market isn't saying anything about the future. It's saying there's a phony buyer of $19 billion of Treasurys a week." This was in the context of the constantly declining interest rates on an ever exploding US debt load. And while back then total debt was a "manageable" $14.3 trillion, as of today it is some $2.3 trillion higher moments ago printing at a fresh record high of $16.6 trillion, not surprisingly the phony buyer is still here only now he is buying not $19 billion by over $20 billion in total debt each week. But just like it was the relentless rise in the US debt that forced him out of his privacy in the public scene back then, so it was also the US debt that was also the topic of his rare CNBC appearance today (where he fiercely poked at all those other TV chatterbox pundits when he said "money managers should manage money and not go on shows like this") in the aftermath of his recent WSJ Op-Ed. There, he once again said what everyone knows but is scared to admit: "we have an entitlement problem."

Druckenmiller's definition of the problem:

The media was more concerned about the fiscal cliff and what might happen to the economy over the three months than the big picture which is the debt which is going to swallow our kids in 15 or 20 years. They totally take a pass on entitlements which is the problem. And the president comes out and says i'm not going to do this on the back of seniors. Those seniors, that we put out in the article, are all taking out more than they put in, and it's guaranteed under the system today that all the kids are going to get less than they are putting in...  the reason we're here is I think we have time to deal with this issue. If we don't deal with it in the next four or five years, we'll wake up and interest rates will explode and the next generation will have a very, very tough time and it's so unfair.... In 1994 entitlements were 50% of federal outlays, up from 28% in 1960, but to my horror under the George Bush administration they went from 50% to 63%. Now at 67% of all federal outlays are entitlements. To put that in perspective, if you look at the actuaries out there, entitlements are scheduled to grow $700 billion in the next four years just due to change in entitlements. That's as the demographics kick in.

A quick primer on the unsustainable Bernanke math:

If you normalize interest rates, i'm not talking about a spike, just normalize where they were before QE and took them to 5.7% federal funding costs of the debt, that's $500 billion a year in interest expense that goes out door. We're having a heart attack over an $85 billion sequester when we can lose $500 billion just if you normalize. The way markets work if and when that were to happen, you don't normalize, you keep going because the market figures out that you now have a credit problem which is exactly what's happened in the foreign nations.

A reminder on the irrationality of bond markets:

The bond market is a funny thing. In Greece the bond market was perfectly fine until February of 2010. Not moving, not doing anything, and then in two weeks it was over.

The topic of the free Fed money's diminishing returns is well-known:

The market is fine because you've got all the free money in the federal reserve. But that can only last so long. Eventually the hamster can't move on the wheel anymore and the free money has less and less impact.

His solution: means testing:

Means-test people like me on social security. You realize I've done all right in life, okay? I'm going to start getting social security checks in five years. It's absurd. And i'll get the same social security checks that some people who have not done so well are. And the same thing with medicare. Raise the ages, as I pointed out earlier. When all this stuff was started, life expectancy was way below where it was now, and frankly probably the guesses on life expectancy where they are are too low. It's not that hard.

Finally, on political incentives to act, or rather not:

... Congress is not getting the market signal we talked about in the article so you can scream all you want about congress and the president being clowns, I can't think of any political system anywhere where they acted without interest rates going up. When did greece act? When the bond market blew up. When did Spain act? When the bond market blew up. What was Clinton's response to Rubin, "you mean the f'ing bond market is in control." Doing what they are doing the politicians have no incentive, but the market is a very fickle and violent thing. I don't think it's today, but we've got 3-year-old kids we've promised we'll get them through college and once college is done we'll get them a job. it's going to happen before those kids.

But of course, the merest suggestion of any of the above becoming policy and whoever is in charge screams bloody "austerity" knowing full well their political career is over the moment people's entitlements are cut.

And thus: back to square one.

The full clip follows below:

And for those who missed it, here is the WSJ op-ed from a week ago penned by Stanley Druckenmiller and former Fed governor and current Fed critic, Kevin Warsh:

Generational Theft Needs to Be Arrested

A Democrat, an independent and a Republican agree: Government spending levels are unsustainable

We come from different backgrounds, parties and pursuits but are bound by a common belief in the promise and purpose of America. After all, each of us has been the beneficiary of the choices made—and opportunities created—by previous generations of Americans.

One of us grew up poor in the South Bronx of the 1960s and went on to lead a children's antipoverty program in Harlem. Another grew up in a small town in South Jersey, and went on to be a leading money manager. The third grew up in a small suburb in upstate New York and found his way to serve in the government amid the financial crisis.

One of us is a Democrat; one, an independent; another, a Republican. Yet, together, we recognize several hard truths: Government spending levels are unsustainable. Higher taxes, however advisable or not, fail to come close to solving the problem. Discretionary spending must be reduced but without harming the safety net for our most vulnerable, or sacrificing future growth (e.g., research and education). Defense andhomeland security spending should not be immune to reductions. Most consequentially, the growth in spending on entitlement programs—Social Security, Medicaid and Medicare—must be curbed.

These truths are not born of some zeal for austerity or unkindness, but of arithmetic. The growing debt burden threatens to crush the next generation of Americans.

Coming out of the most recent elections, no consensus emerged either to reform the welfare state or to pay for it. And too many politicians appear unwilling to level with Americans about the challenges and choices confronting the United States. The failure to be forthright on fiscal policy is doing grievous harm to the country's long-term growth prospects. And the greatest casualties will be young Americans of all stripes who want—and need—an opportunity to succeed.

Three main infirmities plague Washington and constitute a clear and present danger to the prospects for the next generation.

First, the country's existing entitlement programs are not just unaffordable, they are also profoundly unfair to those who are taking their first steps in search of opportunity. Social Security is one example. According to Social Security actuaries, the generational theft runs deep. Young people now entering the workforce will actually lose 4.2% of their total lifetime wages because of their participation in Social Security. A typical third-grader will get back (in present value terms) only 75 cents for every dollar he contributes to Social Security over his lifetime. Meanwhile, many seniors with greater means nearing retirement age will pocket a handsome profit. Health-care spending through Medicare represents an even less equitable story.

The government has an obligation, of course, to support needy seniors. But this pension system is ripe for common-sense reforms, including changing eligibility ages and benefit structures for those with greater means, ridding the Social Security disability program of pervasive fraud, and removing disincentives for those who would rather work in their later years.

Powerful, vested interests portray reformers as avowed enemies of seniors. But, the status quo is, in fact, tantamount to saddling school-age children with more debt, weaker economic growth, and fewer opportunities for jobs and advancement.

Second, while many in Washington pay lip service to the long term, few act on it. The nation's debt clock garners far less attention than the "fiscal cliff" clock. Elected officials continue to allow the immediate to trump the important. Washington appears poised to forego fundamental reform at the altar of the expedient, yet again. This could have tragic consequences.

In successive administrations, the country has spent trillions in temporary tax credits and short-term "stimulus" to goose growth by the next election. What do we have to show for this spending surge? Modest growth, declining incomes and a level of national debt that undermine our long-term prospects.

The Federal Reserve's policies reinforce this short-term orientation. To offset weak economic conditions, the Fed's principal policy objectives appear to be twofold: suppress interest rates and raise stock prices. As a result Congress may be missing market signals and failing to see the costs of its spending addiction in time to undertake real reforms. Ultimately, economic fundamentals—not the promises of central banks—will determine the prices of stocks and bonds.

But the deeper failing is one of essential fairness. The benefits of rising stock prices accrue to those who have already amassed wealth at the expense of those who are struggling to save. And failing to deal with runaway spending will burden the country's children with higher interest rates and a debt bomb that will come due in their lifetimes.

Third, too many politicians appear more eager to divide the spoils of electoral victory among their own than to increase the size of the economic pie for all. The grab-bag of special tax favors under the guise of the recent fiscal-cliff deal is only the latest example.

Crony capitalism and corporate welfare aren't just expenses we cannot afford. They are an anathema to economic growth. They deny opportunities to aspiring people and companies who seek to better their lot. They ration opportunity based on things other than merit and hard work. They further ensure that poor children—who already are disadvantaged by failing schools, inadequate health care and little access to necessary resources—will never get the chance to break the cycle of generational poverty through education.

Some individual Americans are surely better off than they were many years ago. The more probing question is whether America is better off. That can only be true if the hopes and aspirations of the next generation are achievable.

The country must find the courage, conviction and compassion to fix what ails it. The opportunity to advance real reform is still possible. But failure to reform the entitlement culture, reaffirm long-run objectives, and re-establish a common purpose will mean a dimming of opportunities for American children today and for future generations. And a great nation will have ceded more than its greatness, but its goodness.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Stoploss's picture




Zap Powerz's picture

It is my hope that one day we live in a world where the people reject the idea of someone else being responsible for them and their well being.  It is my hope we progress as a species to the point where acceptance of charity, help, welfare, entitlements etc will be flatly rejected by humans because it (assistance) is considered dishonest, shameful, embarrassing and wrong.

What a wonderful world it will be when everyone takes care of themselves and their loved ones and the expectation that someone else will do it no longer exists.  In that world, politicians will not be able to steal from some to give to others in exchange for votes because all would see that for what it is: theft.

I know I wont live in that world, but maybe my great grands kids will.

knukles's picture

And the CNBS talking heads call him a nattering nay-bob of negativism, say thank you very fucking much and with an apology of sorts, return to the program before the ever so rude, technical interruption.

BKbroiler's picture

Like most self employed business owners, I pay double social security.  I've been doing so for 10 years and will probably do so for another 20.  When I finally get out of the game, you damn right I feel ENTITLED to that money back.  Social security shouldn't be called an entitlement.  Food Stamps, unemployement, disability, fine, but not SS, that's my bread.

11b40's picture too, double taxed for myself plus my employess for 35 years.

Anytime you hear anyone calling Social Security an "entitlement", jump up and start screaming.  Call them out on it and make the explain to all in earshot how they can say that.  How is anything you paid for an entitlement?  if in fact it is an "entitlement", then I want a refund.

Encroaching Darkness's picture

i'm sorry, but the two of you are missing the point. Your money is gone, long gone, spent and not there anymore.

You were lied to. There is no account, investment pool, pot of gold or lockbox full of your contributions. It was all a lie; the money collected went into general revenues and was spent.

Spent on aircraft carriers, A-10 Warthog planes, bullets and bandages. Spent on national parks, roads and bridges; dams, railways and water / sewer projects. Or spent on waste, fraud, abuse, Solyndra, AIG bailouts; whatever you want to say, But it WAS spent.

The SS trust fund is full of IOUs from the Treasury; which cannot be redeemed by anyone else (that is, tax money must be used to repay them). We are currently deficit spending $1.3 Trillion a year; where would this tax money to repay them come from?

You have NO vested interest; no contract was created by your payments into the system. Congress can cut your benefits at any time, to ZERO if they want. The SCOTUS has already ruled on this. Flemming v. Nestor is the case, I believe.

You have no account, no investment, no recourse except the ballot box, jury box, cartridge box series.


11b40's picture

Just watch and see.  If they can bail out the banks, they can bail out SS....and there is a reason that no politician really wants to be the one who screws with it.

You see, we have resources and we have priorities.  So long as politicians are doling out tax breaks and largess to the corporate welfare state, they know they better keep SS humming, too.  Otherwise, they won't be going back to DC after the next election.  It makes no differnce as to political party.  Once you reach the age of around 50, you tend to start paying a lot more attention to these things, and you become a more dedicated voter.  Even the Tea Partiers want to make sure no one messes with their SS & Medicare....and for good reason.

donsluck's picture

Ride your bike. Plant a garden.

SafelyGraze's picture

OT but -- 

every time I load zh lately, JLHewitt keeps wanting to know if she can give me a damned massage

in your dreams, creepy old woman

Joe Davola's picture

I ain't never busted no national bank, so maybe mister drunkenmiller can hep me cypher how many billionaires have to give up their 24k/year in ss to close that entitlement gap.

Half_A_Billion_Hollow_Points's picture

<-- Ok, time to reconsider and try to understand this thing  

<-- Raging mad with envy  


Bitcoin just flew past $30.  

It's happening.

rfaze's picture

Means testing aka wealth redistribution aka socialism........ never worked never will.

How can smart people be so dumb.

Bicycle Repairman's picture

Fuck you, Stanley. 

That's our money and you don't give a shit about "the kids".  I know you'd like to loot SS, but it's not happening.  I keep waiting for shit like you to put up a politician with your viewpoint.  I'm ready to move on from discussions with pinheads to publicly eviscerating some politicians.

And in closing, fuck you, Stanley.


SqueekyFromm's picture

Disable your javascript. That kind of stuff was driving me crazy when I came here on the Kindle Fire.

Squeeky Fromm

Girl Reporter

new game's picture

"it will help the kids connect with nature"

can't make this shit up - only from a brain deranged libtard.


sun tzu's picture

Sorry, but bikes don't get food and medicine to the grocery stores. Bikes can't get you from city to city. Bikes don't run farm equipment that plants and harvests food. Your little backyard garden won't feed your family.

Payable on Death's picture

"That's where the fairness is." [In last 5 seconds.] Interesting...

Co-opting the liberal word. I like it.

AldousHuxley's picture

Don't of england's hamster is still running

Napoleon's french bank's wheels are still running


US is making chinese hamsters run the chinese wheel.



capital and power centers always move.

Talk to the Jew who stayed behind and ask how well that turned out (Egypt, Germany, Italy, England, etc.)


Smart Rich Jews like that Facebook guy are always running away from USA to Asia namely Singapore.

Future is Asia. and the circle is complete.


new game's picture

ah, minmalism- plus a zillion-beat um at their game and rules-now that the "way i like it"...

11b40's picture

Before $8/gal gas happens, why don't we try a few little adjustments in the futures if you can't take possession, you can't buy contracts?

Take out the manipulation and gambling, and only allow those who have a true need to hedge a commodity buy the options.  Kick out the trading desks and banks who spend all day running prices up & down, skimming and ripping off all the rest of us on the basic necessities of life.  There are not many alternatives to basic commodities, now are there?  We spout off all the time about Wall Street, but too often forget about the whores in Chicago.

HurricaneSeason's picture

They don't screw with it because government worker pensions would be next. 3 times the monthly pension check with less than half the years served with smaller contributions if any. They were allowed to opt out of social security, put them back in and put their pensions in the social security trust fund and make them work at least 40 years and that problem is solved so we can get back to the military industrial complex et al.

darkpool2's picture

What a bunch of crap. First if you have to think in terms of surviving on SS payments then count yourself in the LOSERS corner. Second, yes, SS will get bailed out......but with confetti money. ( so back to point 1 again) . When the chips are up in this game, your VOTE isnt going to count for anything. Not many options......working longer is a given, living far more modestly in retirement is another.....Not what you were promised????.....but surely you didnt really believe in the tooth fairy did you???

crazyjsmith's picture

It's 3 - 1 ratio of workers to recipients - we're not quite hitting reverse with this Ponzi - still have time as long as people stay (cough) employed -
But it does seem to be a mathematical certainty - could probably start a social security clock - like the debt clock

Pure Demographics - like fighting gravity

Sorynn's picture

Some bespectled liar once said that he could guarantee social security payments would be made, but that he could not guarantee their purchasing power.

Oldwood's picture

Fine. Its all gone. What is left is called welfare, so call it what it is. Stop deducting from payroll and calling it social security. Raise taxes, eliminate SS as a line deduction, and call it welfare, paid out of general revenues. I've been paying into a fund for 45 years that is now capput! Lying asswipes robbed us blind. The least they can do is own up to it. But of course not. Never. They love and care for us and would never ever screw us over. Its all just a missunderstanding. Really...the checks in the mail. Bastards!

Yes_Questions's picture



You'll get your SS if we have to sell Alaska.


Oil, Caribou Barbie, Caribou and all.

mt paul's picture

eskimo barbie

would be homeless

hhabana2112's picture

I agree with you. This fucking Jew and his goyim finance/business pals talk about raising social security age and you working longer so you die before you reap anything or a little of what you paid while the welfare bums reaped your hard work early in their lives or when they were born. How about the pensions for Presidents, congressmen, fed employees? What about them? What about their great health care benefits? I piss on Hannity, Rush and all those fuckers along with this guy saying I should have to give my social security payments (I'm 49 and curious to see if I make it and will I get anything). What about all the fuckers that immigrate to this country, never paid anything to social security or medicare and get put on it. Do they drain the system? Hell yes they do. The time for a revolution the likes of Che and Castro will come here too. When someone shits on you long enough and they are a dictator, so called democracy bullshitter or communist, people rise and purge. I hear/read how they they denigrate those guys from the Cuban revolution, but they were cleaning house setting up another system until the human corruption percolates and you start anew. Who supported Batista? Our fucking government, corporations and mafia. Rotten bastards all of them. That's why our Founding Fathers were leagues above the garbage we have in office and instilled the 2nd Amendment. Cleaning house, starting anew, and wait another 100 years to clean house again.

Shizzmoney's picture

The money is gone. 

It's Full Tilt Poker all over again.

BTW, fuck people who hate on Social Security.  Sure, it's a flawed government construct that has been raped over and over again to fuel covert operations in Iran, Panama, Grenada, etc........but the idea of it was sound.  If it was run correctly, it wouldn't "bankrupt" the country - it would actually run a surplus. 

It was just the greedy assholes who came after it was created and that run our corporate government, who fucked it all up.

The money will be gone though in 10-15 years. 

That's the problem with "welfare" solutions like SS and Single Payer Healthcare: while noble in nature, man is too flawed to not keep his hands out of the cookie jar.  See: Adam and Eve. 


itstippy's picture

"The money is gone.  It's already been spent.  The SS Trust Fund Treasuries are just worthless paper IOUs.  So sorry"

Phooey.  ALL money raised by selling Treasuries is gone.  That's the essence of Treasuries - to allow the Government to borrow money and spend it today with the promise of paying it back later.  Tell the other US Treasury holders that we're sorry but their money's already been spent.  See how that goes over.

Do you think a U.S. politician will be able to reneg on the SS Trust Fund Treasuries held by America's seniors, but make good on Treasuries held by the Chinese & Japanese?

gaoptimize's picture

As much as any politician is too cowardly to do that by any overt act, that will be the effect of the coming bond-pocalypse and hyper-inflation.  Whether you think it is politically viable or not, I'd start preparing like it will happen.

new game's picture

eyeing the next pile of money (19.4) trillion-401(not a college class) is clearly centered in the crosshairs...

NoDebt's picture

"but the idea of it was sound."

No, it wasn't.  Look who you're wagging your finger at:  "It was just the greedy assholes who came after it was created and that run our corporate government, who fucked it all up."

It's a ponzi scheme run by politicians.  You expected a good outcome from this toxic mix of money and corruption?  It was DOOMED to failure. 

Like the Thanksgiving turkey left on the kitchen floor in front of the dog, it was only a matter of time before the inevitable happened and then everyone wants to blame the dog.  Go right ahead, if you feel the need.  Beat that dog unti it's dead, but the turkey is still gone and it was YOUR fault for putting it down on the floor in the first place.


Spigot's picture

Ayup. Already been spent by big SugarD. "Lock Box" is filled with US.GOV "Bonds" (IOUs for past spending).

IMO the most salient qutoe:

"The bond market is a funny thing. In Greece the bond market was perfectly fine until February of 2010. Not moving, not doing anything, and then in two weeks it was over."

Everything else he said was a mis-direction. First, there is no budget and has been none for the past 4 years. Second, he forgot the sum total Federal Expenditures, which would include the costs of wars, and many other "not on the budget" outlays. Third, He forgot to mention the $14 trillion of liquidity that the FED injected to save his ilks asses which allowed him to gracefully close his hedges, and become a nattering magpie, rather than one of a long list of bancrupted failures. Fourth, he fails to mention that US spending was increase by $1-2 trillion so that the economy would not cave in on his sorry ass. Fifth, forgets to mention that persistent inflation (generated by the FED) over the past 50 years has destroyed the ability of almost all working class citizens to SAVE. Sixth, forgot to mention that he and his cronies made gobs and gobs of money while running the largest real estate and credit con game the world has ever seen, thereby debt encumbering and financially submerging anyone who bought a home in the orgy of illusion prior to 2008.

But, yeah, other than THAT, it was a great interview...

slightlyskeptical's picture

The solution is easy. Use the social security funds to finance the future primary housing market. Let social security fund itself instead of relying on future tax dollars. Make the loans recoursable against future social security benefits. Lets the banks continue in their role of origination and servicing. Problem solved. 


401K of Dooom's picture

Hey Shizzmoney?  How come the gubbermint can send out all dem checks?  Are they paying it with fairy gold? 

Omen IV's picture

'where would this tax money to repay them come from?'

From getting out of the war business - the DoD and CIA can be cut by $800 Billion which will balance the budget - the USA can make more friends and money by the re-establishment  of a Peace Corp than a war machine

SS and Medicare are not entitlements and subject to the whims of Peterson et al and his trolls  - there is plenty of money to fund especially if Pharma prices are cut to world levels and insurance cos as well

there is no problem -  just propaganda - Stanley and those like him take turns on the air and assigned a speaking point - by Peterson's machine - all lies like WMD's  - you are either a rube or a troll

there is no SS problem !


Anusocracy's picture

Give SS recipients a choice.

Either they get their SS check and that amount is deducted from the defense budget, or the DoD gets it for its budget.


Charles Wilson's picture

The other case in this Kabuki Play is Helvering vs. Davis.

Bless you, "Encroaching Darkness".

The SCOTUS ruled that SS is NOT an Insurance Plan as long as Congress can conceivably make the Law sound as if it  addressed the "General Welfare". As you state, as long as the funds are paid into the General Revenues, there is nothing else implied.  One Congress may not obligate any future Congress to spend Jack divided by Squat about anything.

Until the day some Congress actually guts some part of SS.  Then, other New!, Improved! Supreme Court rules will apply.

Into the Darkness, into the Abyss.



FischerBlack's picture

Encroching Darkness, welcome to the short list of people who I sense to be relatively sane. Everyone should read his comment, should re-read it, should internalize it, should broadcast it, should post it on billboards all over the country. It's perfectly utterly true.

SS payments are made in cash. The IOUs in the so-called trust fund are nonmarketable treasuries, which means they aren't convertible to cash at any price. They cannot be used to pay benefits. No, the cash to pay benefits must be borrowed or taxed.

I promise to pay myself $1 trillion dollars next month. I intend to keep that promise just as soon as I figure out where the fuck I'm going to get the cash to pay me.

Welcome to accounting fictions between agencies of the USG.

sgorem's picture

you're quite right, and the cartridge box will do just fine. "everybody's gotta die sometime, Red".....

boogerbently's picture

Ha, Ha, Ha

YOU don't get it.

Those IOU's WILL be repaid. If you (and your children) don't want to repay them, you better start figuring out where to get the $$$.

(I'd start with welfare, disability, food DO realize welfare costs more than SS, Medicare OR defense???)

You could always defund the programs that were started with MY stolen SS surplus.

new game's picture

E.D.(nice handle-we know what comes out at nite!)plus so much, i am wordless for a number.

yup-each man and woman for themselves

prep up...

prains's picture



exactly it's an OLIGARCH problem first then once that's taken care of let's talk entitlements

401K of Dooom's picture

You were never entitled to that money!  You are the victim of a lie that was promoted by the Roosevelt administration to enable the passage of the Social Security Act!  That lie was promoted and spread by the liberal media back in the 1930's!  You are taking away money from my children!  I demand that you give it back!  Don't worry, I will not ask for the money that you took from me!  That was gone a long time ago.  Oh and just a side question.  Under the Social Security Act, how much money are you entitled to receive in total?  To help, let me ask this:   If you work for fourty-five years (from the age of twenty) and retire at the age of sixty five and live to the age of one thousand years.  Are you eligible to collect monthly paychecks from the government for nine hundred, thirty-five years?   Just asking.

boogerbently's picture

Suck it up, whiner.

Better your children get screwed than me. It was MY money, you WILL repay it.


TruthInSunshine's picture

Massive kudos to ZH because for about a year and half I've been trying to remember the name of this guy, and recall information about his performance and (most importantly) the reason he closed his fund.

This guy was either the 2nd or 1st all time most successful money manager until he suddenly closed shop (not because of any financial/liquidity issues, but because he refused to participate in what he identified as a corrupt racketeering system).

I remember reading an article about him a while ago, and his central point was that you can't win over any long or even intermediate time frame in what had become absolutely rigged markets (something that the average sheeple are realizing now) and you're literally better off to do anything but touch anything equity market related with a 1000 foot pole (he made a point to his limited partners who were bewildered when he closed his fund - whom he had consistently made money for during a very long stretch - that he was an investor, not a gambler, and that he wouldn't gamble their money, since it was no longer possible to be an investor).


11b40's picture

That may well be the case, and good on him for it....but I did not notice too much specific criticism of the financial system in his article.  Some vague generalities, but nothing that suggest reform and punishment.  Except for little people, that is.