Wealth management is a client-centered business. Yes, capital markets play a huge role, but the relational skills are centered around an authentic and genuine care for helping people are at the center. What I see from folks in investment banking, M&A Tax, real estate, or other financial services fields that fail to succeed is a failure to understand what wealth management is about: people. Capital markets, financial analysis, financial modeling and planning, taxation, estate, insurance and all those fields have a certain sexy allure (at least to me), but ultimately, it’s the application of them to solving clients’ goals, concerns, and objectives at its core. It’s a career in financial services that caters to supporting and solving problems that exist from the human condition. Money is the second most important thing to people outside of health/family so if you’re going into this field thinking it’s all about the markets and not the strong emotional human need for folks wanting a better life for their kids and their own financial independence and stability in their retirement years, then I think you would be disappointed. Also, the awesome responsibility to steward what is so important to people comes with a level of accountability that not everyone wants. To those fascinated and drawn to financial markets but operate with a love for serving others – it's simply the best career in the world.
~ Brian T. Szytel, March 27, 2025

It’s a more defensive posture for the company historically, but no, I do not think you need to be concerned about this in and of itself.  Remember, Berkshire is now running a $1.1T balance sheet, $700B worth of which is retained earnings and invested in a concentrated equity/debt portfolio.  Two-thirds of the equity portfolio is in the top 6 holdings alone.   The remainder is in non-liquid balance sheet items like property, receivables and intangibles.  Having 30% in cash and short-term treasuries earning 4.5% for diversification, liquidity and dry powder, should markets decline, is honestly about the same positioning I would probably have, roles reversed. Come to think of it, a high-conviction value-oriented equity portfolio combined with some alternatives and an allocation to cash/fixed income IS how I manage many client portfolios and resembles the make up TBG as a whole! =)
~ Brian T. Szytel 

I guess I am lucky that I came to the realization early in my adult life that my convictions and beliefs were reinforced and enhanced when I challenged them and when I read material outside the comfort zone and echo chamber of constant agreement. I do make an effort to know the perspective that people are coming from when I read them, whether it be research-intensive, macroeconomic, or broadly philosophical – but I seek to understand what someone is saying from their perspective the best I can, even when I disagree with it. That exercise forces me to know the right arguments in defense of my position, something I cannot do if I have not made an effort to understand the arguments that exist against my own position. I do not believe people have to feign neutrality when they read material they disagree with, but investment analysis and macroeconomic commentary require humility, objectivity, and teachability.
~ David L. Bahnsen, March 25, 2025

There is a lot to say here, and I have done entire Dividend Cafe commentaries dedicated to the subject. No, I do not believe there is any world in which tariffs will be good for the economy or domestic manufacturing. The one argument that I have tried to be open-minded about is that the threat of tariffs would lead to certain outcomes that would be useful for various policy objectives. But the threat of tariffs and the implementation of tariffs are two different things. Tariffs do not drive up domestic manufacturing – they impede total trade. And where they allegedly decrease U.S. imports to enable more domestic manufacturing they also decrease U.S. exports, which puts downward pressure on domestic manufacturing. There are other reasons proposed for tariffs (i.e. “fairness,” “reciprocity,” “revenge,” “fentanyl,” “human rights,” etc.), but the idea that tariffs drive higher domestic manufacturing has not been demonstrated in history by either select, targeted tariffs or by mass, universal tariffs.

I will likely be covering this topic yet again this coming Friday.
~ David L. Bahnsen, March, 24, 2025