The Inside Job
I saw the Inside Job last year during the International Film festival, and it was largely ignored then, but it has had a second life with a wider release and the true enormity of the corrupt fiasco that brought down the global economy is now getting traction the way the Inconvenient Truth did, here was my review
Inside Job
Directors: Charles Ferguson
This is the doco of the year. The stock market collapsed of 2008 has sparked a crises of capitalism on the scale of the 1929 stock market collapse and Keynesian managed capitalism created to prevent such rampant unregulated capitalism has been swept aside by neo liberal Milton Friedman low tax, deregulation, free market dogma.
This doco is a jaw clenching journey behind the scenes of the 2008 financial crises with historical contextualization of the differing political theories focusing on the rise and rise and rise of unregulated financial institutions. The revolving door between financial regulator and financial abuser has to be seen to be believed.
The cast of interviews is vast. Singapore's leader, the French Finance Minister, Wall St Journal, the bank of China plus all the domestic political and economic interests. It is a quality documentary and the reactions of regulators caught asleep at the wheel is hilarious and deeply worrying at the same time.
This should get an Academy nod.
Prepare to get angry.
5 stars
The Labour Party should be holding film review fundraisers using this film the way the Greens did with An Inconvenient Truth. It spikes the right wing's faith in the deregulation that John Key is trying to implement right now and the sense of fury one has when they leave the doco can be easily transferred to this Government for adopting the same free market dogma.
After viewing the doco, you too will be demanding to know why the weakest and most vulnerable in society should be forced to do with less when they had no hand in the greedy corruption that brought the global economy crashing down.
posted by Bomber @ 8:41 am
7 comments
7 Comments:
"After viewing the doco, you too will be demanding to know why the weakest and most vulnerable in society should be forced to do with less when they had no hand in the greedy corruption that brought the global economy crashing down."
Ummmmmm....
Who were the recipients of all that Sub-prime Mortgage cash that built up the housing bubble in the US?
You are commenting about a doco you haven't even seen!
I think you should see it, you should see what the free market you worship has actually done and repent like Bernard Hickey has.
As for your comment, you are a banker and attacking those who you gave cheap credit to is like a pusher blaming an addict for the P problem.
For a start, in case you have failed to notice, the New Zealand and Australian banking industry is in rather good shape so I'm not sure why you are attempting to link me with Sub-prime Mortgages in the U.S.
I'm also not directly involved with any banking decision in my role and I work on contract. Trying to link me with the lending decisions of International Investment banks is as illogical as trying to blame them on the cleaning company at Bear Stearns head office.
Your view about the P addict does highlight a typical leftist view point though. The lack of any personal responsibility for bad decisions. Can't afford the mortgage on your house? Then it must be the fault of the 'Evil' Bank that lent you the money in the first place.
The problem with the Global Financial crisis was the Bank's that stupidly lent the money to these people weren't allowed to fully learn the valuable lesson that doing so was a dumb idea. That's not the Free market at work though, that is politics.
I'm sorry Gosman, through all that apologist crap I couldn't actually hear you say if you have actually seen the Inside Job because this paragraph here...The problem with the Global Financial crisis was the Bank's that stupidly lent the money to these people weren't allowed to fully learn the valuable lesson that doing so was a dumb idea. That's not the Free market at work though, that is politics....shows you know nothing, utterly nothing about the collapse and are in fact exposing a massive amount of ignorance.
So again, gosman, for everyones sake - are you commenting on a documentary you haven't actually seen?
I think it was quite clear what I was commenting on which was the statement made at the end of the post
"After viewing the doco, you too will be demanding to know why the weakest and most vulnerable in society should be forced to do with less when they had no hand in the greedy corruption that brought the global economy crashing down."
Now, as far as I can tell, that is YOUR view not that of the film makers. Hence I am commenting on your view that the less fortunate in society played no part in the Global financial crisis.
That view is plainly incorrect as it was the decision to lend large amounts to people who previously were unable to get credit to buy their own homes which caused the Housing bubble and their failure to service their debts when the economy slowed that led to the inevitable bust.
You might argue that the Banks shouldn't have been allowed to lend to these people and it is largely the Bank's own fault, (I won't disagree with you on that last point), but you can't argue they had no hand in the problem when it was the less wealthy in society who were the targets of the glut of cheap credit.
I'm sorry, I can't hear you - are you commenting on a documentary you haven't actually seen.
Just a yes or no would be great Gosman.
Who were the recipients of all that Sub-prime Mortgage cash that built up the housing bubble in the US?
An outfit called Countrywide Financial wrote the most Subprime mortgages in the US, they were not covered by the Community Reinvestment Act. Stop dog whistling up your inner bigot, poor brown people are not to blame.
Federal Reserve Governor Randall Kroszner and FDIC Chairman Sheila Bair have stated their belief that the CRA was not to blame for the crisis.
http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2008/12/03/feds-kroszner-defends-community-reinvestment-act/
Fed economists found that about 60% of higher-priced loan originations — the technical definition of subrpime — went to middle- or higher-income borrowers or neighborhoods who aren’t targeted by CRA. More than 20% of the higher-priced loans were extended to lower-income borrowers or borrowers in lower-income areas by institutions that aren’t banks — and aren’t covered by CRA.
I saw 'Inside Job' this morning, well worth 2 hours. Saddening and maddening at the same time.
Post a Comment
<< Home