Capitalism: A Love Story
Discussion
Saw this on some news/review show last night. Kermode was looking at it. He said he didn't like Moore's film but was mildly surprised to come away like this and got an economist to review the facts and findings in it.
Economist said in the area of the banks being bailed out, Moore only told half a truth, in that if the banks had not been bailed out, then it would have been worse for a whole load more people. But the stuff Moore does get right is always worth listening to.
He also said that in the past 20 year the wealth of the average US citizen has not changed, but the wealth of the top 1% has rocketed thanks to it's system.
Economist said in the area of the banks being bailed out, Moore only told half a truth, in that if the banks had not been bailed out, then it would have been worse for a whole load more people. But the stuff Moore does get right is always worth listening to.
He also said that in the past 20 year the wealth of the average US citizen has not changed, but the wealth of the top 1% has rocketed thanks to it's system.
[quote=Halb]
Economist said in the area of the banks being bailed out, Moore only told half a truth, in that if the banks had not been bailed out, then it would have been worse for a whole load more people. quote]
How can anyone actually know the impact of letting failed banks collapse would have been? As they say economic is dismal science, it's open to debate what would have happened without a bailout.
Another good film on US economics is I.O.U.S.A.
Economist said in the area of the banks being bailed out, Moore only told half a truth, in that if the banks had not been bailed out, then it would have been worse for a whole load more people. quote]
How can anyone actually know the impact of letting failed banks collapse would have been? As they say economic is dismal science, it's open to debate what would have happened without a bailout.
Another good film on US economics is I.O.U.S.A.
Eric Mc said:
In the UK, the atitude is "destroy the wealth of the top 10 so they are more like us".
In the US, the atitude is, "What do I have to do to join the top 10?".
I was talking about this with my Dad a few weeks ago. I think it's terrible that our attitude is one of jealousy rather than holding up the "haves" and saying "Look at what these people have, look at their nice cars and houses, look at the holidays they go on, and that they don't have to worry about the next gas bill! Work hard, focus on your talents and you could have these things."In the US, the atitude is, "What do I have to do to join the top 10?".
crofty1984 said:
Eric Mc said:
In the UK, the atitude is "destroy the wealth of the top 10 so they are more like us".
In the US, the atitude is, "What do I have to do to join the top 10?".
I was talking about this with my Dad a few weeks ago. I think it's terrible that our attitude is one of jealousy rather than holding up the "haves" and saying "Look at what these people have, look at their nice cars and houses, look at the holidays they go on, and that they don't have to worry about the next gas bill! Work hard, focus on your talents and you could have these things."In the US, the atitude is, "What do I have to do to join the top 10?".
On the other hand, people should be far more personally ambitious than they appear to be and should make a much bigger effort to "better their lot" than many appear to do.
Edited by Eric Mc on Friday 5th February 11:09
Eric Mc said:
I am not at all an out and out materialist money grabber and I definitely have major issues with an over materialistic society.
On the other hand, people should be far more personally ambitious than they appear to be and should make a much bigger effort to "better their lot" than many appear to do.
I agree with that. But a system which allows the top 1% to rocket away like mad whilst keeping everyone else static, isn't a good one.On the other hand, people should be far more personally ambitious than they appear to be and should make a much bigger effort to "better their lot" than many appear to do.
sa_20v said:
JacksHereR said:
the sin is that people try to pull the ladders up with them.
Not convinced by that.I'm not debating the pros and cons of student grants v' student loans. What I am raising is the hypocrisy of politicians.
Most entrepeneurs are fairly neutral to what others are up to, as long as those others are not trying to hold back the entrepeneur's ambitions. On the other hand, there are many entrepenueurs who provide grants, bursaries and foundations to assist the less well off better themselves.
Halb said:
Eric Mc said:
I am not at all an out and out materialist money grabber and I definitely have major issues with an over materialistic society.
On the other hand, people should be far more personally ambitious than they appear to be and should make a much bigger effort to "better their lot" than many appear to do.
I agree with that. But a system which allows the top 1% to rocket away like mad whilst keeping everyone else static, isn't a good one.On the other hand, people should be far more personally ambitious than they appear to be and should make a much bigger effort to "better their lot" than many appear to do.
Gassing Station | TV, Film, Streaming & Radio | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff