Arguably the guy did nothing worthy of admiration. Sure he managed to multiply cashflow, but on my books that doesn't stand nearly to definition of hero.
Don't get me wrong - I enjoy his books and interviews perhaps like everyone else. He was incredibly smart character, no doubt about that. But hero?
Not trolling, genuinely curious.
And they've stayed course since the 60s!
For that alone they've become (cult) legends among small time investors. As a small time investor myself born in the 90s it is insane the amount of bullsh*t social media will push onto you regarding finance.
Their annual meetings where they answer questions are some of the only sane financial advice to be found on YouTube.
They did't do anything with the cash except piling it up and multiplying. By all means they could do that - don't get me wrong again, but that doesn't make them heroes, does it?
Their videos are by far _not only_ sane advice out there. They are good, but any decent book on the subject value much more.
If you are looking for positive externalities to qualify "hero", he probably played a part in creating a large number of the companies you have ever heard of, employing millions and large part of the success of US markets today.
Would you kindly clarify what “defacto investment hero” means? Hopefully not in cult-like definitions.
To be clear, i am not looking for any positive externalities, just wondering what he did to warrant being called a hero. That’s it.
"a person who is admired for their courage, outstanding achievements, or noble qualities. "a war hero" ".
With not much imagination I bet you could place him in one of the categories.
Nothing wrong in that at all.
Same with certain actors (Alan Rickman springs to mind), chess legends like Gary Kasparov, albeit on a smaller scale.
I think I understand what you're getting at - Charlie Munger didn't change the world the way, say, Jonas Salk did - but that doesn't mean that people aren't going to idolize him. He was at the top of his game, and incredibly bright and witty.
It’s understandable some people will idolise him - pretty much like they can do same for anyone else, no matter how big or small, benevolent or malevolent his/her impact is.
Was just wondering if there is objectively something justifying the definition or it’s deeply subjective.
Guess I grasped the answer by now
Moreover, he taught and inspired many others do the same.
That's a hero in my book. Not some sports player, actor or worse - some politician - people are usually worshipping.
RIP Charlie Munger.
They gave a lot of the cash to effective charities, thereby saving tens of thousands of lives. (I'd need to look up the exact number.)
Hm, isn't that a purely subjective thing? And did he really did nothing worthy of admiration? Isn't it admirable to be great at your job? To write books that people read and enjoy, and draw inspiration from?
Clever and smart scammer is extremely great at his job sending people into poverty. Absolutely great at the job. Is it admirable? I’ll leave the judgment to you.
I feel like you're just trying to understand someone else's position, but you're coming across as very militant. Tangential: do you disagree that someone could consider an athlete a personal hero?
You did the opposite of leaving the judgement for me.
You wanted to argue that he did nothing worthy of admiration - so it would be interesting to hear the reasoning (if any) behind that. He lived 99 years, are you sure he did nothing worthy of admiration in his life? I know nothing about the guy but I can see on wikipedia that he was at the top of his class at Harvard. Isn't that potentially admirable? What about him providing free legal aid while being a student? Nothing worthy of admiration? Are you sure that none of his family members didn't find him admirable? His neighbours or colleagues?
Again, saying that he never have done anything admirable is a pretty strong claim that you have failed to argue for.
Genuinely wondering who your heroes are?
Could be a case of mismatched focuses. If someone is focused on tech, they might idealize Musk or Jobs. If someone has roots in the financial realm, they might thing Buffet is their hero.
That’s why I’m asking. Is it possible you can’t understand why Munger is a hero to some because you don’t live in that world?
For the record my heroes are Steve Irwin and my Aunt Patty, so it’s also completely subjective and highly contextual.
Absolutely so. That’s why i am wondering if those people who consider him as a hero can explain reasons. Loving making money is a legitimate reason - no problem with that, everyone has own goals in life.
My heroes, if you will, happen to be regular people, whose names won’t tell you anything, so I hope you kindly excuse me on that.
Again, there’s arguably nothing wrong with idealising, however by definition it rarely has anything to do with real life qualities. Again, nothing wrong with it.
Specifically, this paragraph is the general way I was thinking about: "Munger’s hero was Benjamin Franklin, whom he admired for his curiosity, ingenuity and wit. Munger’s own common sense, biting humor, pathological bluntness and disdain for conventional wisdom made him a celebrity among investors"
For me, personally, it was the way that he lived his life, was extraordinary brilliant, a polymath, and changed multiple fields of study (investing and arguably behavioral psychology.) He has not only directly created jobs, as others have stated, of millions, but has also indirectly altered the lives of millions for the better. He is one of the greatest minds in investing and he freely educated millions on his methods.
At the same time, he had some incredibly rough times and bore it with grace. For me, setting this type of example is also noteworthy. There are also the small things -- people who have been around him, he's incredibly respectful on an individual basis, always showed up early, and in general, lived in a way that I aspire to living.
Being. Being well is an achievement.
What you come up to be is something you do - you develop it.
Now I am doing much better. And seems to be an achievement per your statement.
Does that make me a hero? Or even just a decent human being?
Being well is not much of achievement if we don't look at bigger picture - how it was made and if it was put to work at greater good.
Miles away from what you seem to have understood. Re-read that statement, and make an effort to understand it. It is very simple really: Charlie Munger was admirable after his wisdom - intentionally and purposely built.
Incidentally, your (delirious and disconnected - I speak of Being, "Being" which is opposed to "having" after at least Fromm, and you are there attempting to adapt what I wrote into concepts of theft) process seems to fall into that bias that Charlie Munger insisted on, of having embraced some judgement so tightly that it blinds you.
Returning to what I expressed: people «not well off», in wisdom, they met somebody «way better», in wisdom - which is a core point in the «achievement» in question -, and through their own effort, facilitated by gifts, «take part of the wealth». With a collective gain.
My original reply was faithful to your question: "what did he do in life worth of admiration", to which you have been replied: "he built himself well". And he shared that achievement generously. Other matters like faults are contextual to different questions.