Robbing Peter to Pay Paul,
As a business strategy that does not work.
While researching this yesterday I read all of the details involved in one of Buffett's company purchases. It was actually an entanglement of two companies and it got rather complex because there was a lot of debt restructuring in the process, and there were no insurance companies visibly involved within the SEC filings.
If you really want to make your case then do it through SEC filings. They are all easy enough to obtain and contain all the pertinent information -- I've done it many times.
Moving currency or debt around in a shell game doesn't create wealth outside the game players. What does create wealth in an isolated entity is the selling of non-currency paper (stock) for currency (dollars) and arrange for those dollars to come from outside entities. You could call that 'debt restructuring'. What were shares of XYZ company could become shares of BRK but with a different valuation.
Berkshire Hathaway currently owns 64 companies, 11 of which have Insurance listed as their sector. BRK is also currently partially invested in 46 other companies, of which only 3 have insurance listed as their sector. You could pick one of those which is 100% owned by BRK, Geico for instance, and do a little research to see where Geico invests their money, then you would know something more about BRK. Would it make sense for Geico to invest its currency in other parts of BRK and receive less for their investment than if they invested elsewhere, outside of BRK? From a business point of view for Geico, and therefore Buffett, that makes absolutely no sense, as that is merely Peter paying Paul.
My philosophy is to not believe very much that is written by financial writers. That's because they became writers because they failed at being effective financial managers.
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
