One moment, please dutasteride use WB: It depends on how the whole tax code is set up. In terms of the really wealthy people, I don't think it makes much difference whether or not they're deductible. Less than 1 percent of the money I have given away has been deductible. My carry-forward is $11 billion or something like that. It doesn't mean anything. And I know some other pretty wealthy people who have given away a lot of money and tax deductions actually had nothing to do with it. And then I'm sure it does with some people. What the total sensitivity to deductibility is, it's hard to tell. Some people don't itemize deductions at all obviously. I don't have a strong feeling. Of course, everybody who runs a philanthropic organization doesn't want it touched. I do not have a strong feeling that it's sacred that they be fully deductible or what portion of income. The code says to me if I give appreciated securities to a controlled foundation I like, I can't deduct more than 20 percent of my adjusted gross income. If I give cash to public charities, I can deduct 50 percent. So we've got a lot of policy already built into the code. Do I think that 20 percent versus 50 percent has changed the mix of how people behave? I don't think so very much. Q: You're a contrarian investor. Today, we had Tiger21, a group of U.S. and Canadian multimillionaire investors, choosing Berkshire Hathaway as their top pick, displacing Apple. To use your own famous phrase, should other investors be fearful as these buyers get greedy?
|