Has anyone watched this movie by Michael Moore? I realize that his movies are pretty one sided, but there were some interesting eye opening moments... Anyone else have any thoughts?

Please expand on your thoughts....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitalism_A_Love_Story#Synopsis

Has this movie come out on video yet?

I really wanted to see it. I've seen all of Moore's movies besides 9/11, but I liked what he had to say in them. Biased? Uh yea. However, if any of his information false?

If you only tell one perspective of 50% truth, you could technically be telling the truth. Just not the whole truth.

I have never watched a MM film. I have seen, and liked, his pink bus clip.
But, if I wanted to only watch 50% of a one sided perspective, I imagine I would watch people like Keith Olbermann or Glenn Beck.
Michael Moore, Keith Olbermann and Glenn Beck want people to see things how they see it. In their eyes, they are right about their point of view. And they target the people who most agree with them.

It's sort of like having the best meal of your life sitting in front of you, only you can't taste it because of a bad cold. You wish you have moore of your sense of taste back because you're just not getting any enjoyment out of it. The meal is flat.

LJ wrote: Please expand on your thoughts....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitalism_A_Love_Story#Synopsis

I just watched it today... I understand it is a one-sided point of view, but is that one side right, wrong, or half right and half wrong? Even if just one of the topics he touched on were true, it would repulse me.

To see some of the inside things that went on behind the big bank bail out, It absolutely sickens me. Especially when all this tax money that we gave them was supposed to help them financially and yet it went to private planes, yachts, and bonuses, meanwhile there are hardworking Americans being forced out of their homes by these very same banks we bailed out. They took our money and then took our homes.

To see how many people in congress are involved with Wall Street and its corruption is sickening. If you are in a position of power to make the banks more money, then you are rewarded with perks...

Thats just one of the many points Michael Moore touches on. The film absolutely made me hate the way some of the things in this country go down. I am a fan of Michael Moore, I know a lot of people cannot stand him but I applaud anyone who is willing to tackle America's problems and inform the public... Our government isn't doing enough.



The movie is available for rent on Comcast On-Demand...

Didn't watch the movie...but from your post, I think Moore probably hit the nail on the head. Companies like AIG and others had no incentive at all in watching their risk management. It was heads I win and tails I win too. Not only was the companies' equity replenished by future tax payers (deficit gifting) the fuggin execs walked away with millions of dollars because that's "what their contracts" spelled out.

Imagine working as a top doggie at AIG....amd no matter how horribly shitty you did, you made millions in bonus dollars.

Pretty good gig if you ask me. Conversely, if I own and employ 4 people in a little teeny, weeny industrial sales company that has a bad year, I, as the business owner, can lose everything I've put into it...and then some.

And yet, some the small business owners on this site will defend these bastards to the death, clamoring that "we need rich bankers".

What a head scratcher that is.

Footwedge wrote: Didn't watch the movie...but from your post, I think Moore probably hit the nail on the head. Companies like AIG and others had no incentive at all in watching their risk management. It was heads I win and tails I win too. Not only was the companies' equity replenished by future tax payers (deficit gifting) the fuggin execs walked away with millions of dollars because that's "what their contracts" spelled out.

Imagine working as a top doggie at AIG....amd no matter how horribly shitty you did, you made millions in bonus dollars.

Pretty good gig if you ask me. Conversely, if I own and employ 4 people in a little teeny, weeny industrial sales company that has a bad year, I, as the business owner, can lose everything I've put into it...and then some.

And yet, some the small business owners on this site will defend these bastards to the death, clamoring that "we need rich bankers".

What a head scratcher that is.

What really hit the nail on the head and drove home how corrupt the banks are was a letter from one of the big banks to its wealthy backers... It stated that the most wealthy people in the United States make up 1% of the total population. They went as far as to teach people how to react to questions they may receive, the outlook on their income growing, and mocked the other 99% of the population for not doing anything about their criminal activities . Wall Street has painted the picture that any person can achieve what the rich 1% population has and has used this angle to keep people from using their voting power to end big bank wealth.

I also liked how the movie ended... It ended with FDR talking about a second bill of rights that allowed every american to have a decent job, a quality education, and many other rights... The only issue was that FDR died before the war ended and most of the people who were in his administration were sent to Germany and Japan to rebuild. German women were given equal rights in 1944. Japanese people were given the right to a quality education and the ability for employees of every company to form a union... FDR's ideas of a changing point in America were implemented into those countries instead of ours... Now look at which countries are ruining our business....

Makes you think a little bit. Even George W. Bush said that we are a country of capitolism... Where exactly is capitolism written in the Declaration of Independence?

No offense to the Moore haters, but this guy needs to be in politics. Too bad no one will let him be.

It has nothing to do with 'rich bankers'. What we don't need are banks that are so big that their failure would decimate the economy, and we also don't need scumbag Congressmen who are for sale to the highest bidding monopoly. I don't give a shit if a banker gets rich as long as his bank is allowed to fail if he fucks up.

This hasn't been a capitalist country in at least 100 years, if ever. You can't blame our mess on capitalism. And the communist European countries are just as fucked up as ours. They are no better off for it. True capitalism is probably the only economic system that is able to be sustained indefinitely. Communist/socialist economies throughout history have always crumbled. The Chinese realized this, so for some reason they are switching over to the American communofascist economic model that we have enjoyed over the past 100 years and will be paying for a lot longer than that.

Any entity deemed to big to fail is inherently not a capitalistic entity. Capitalism requires the raising of non-government generated capital to be placed at risk by its contributors, in the hope that the risk generates capital to the contributors, while benefiting its customers with a product worthy of private individuals or groups exchanging the benefit of receiving the product with their dollars.

An entity that is allowed to gain so great a share of the free market that the risk of its failure is so great that it threatens to bring down the entire market it operates in is not capitalistic. It becomes socialistic in nature because its risk is placed on the public in that its success becomes so vital in sustaining the free public market it operates in. Bailouts are failures of the government to insure the public's trust in the free market. Many times these failures are generated by the government's own interference by subsidizing or unjustly regulating free market activities. The government's job is simply to keep the market free by not allowing a free market entity to gain so much power over its market that it risks the public trust, thus becoming a socialistic entity.

Government's role should be that of the referee of the free market. Instead they have become one of the players in the game as well. They compete for power and influence just as the major corporate players do. The only difference is the trump card is in their deck.

sonofsam wrote:

LJ wrote: Please expand on your thoughts....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitalism_A_Love_Story#Synopsis

I just watched it today... I understand it is a one-sided point of view, but is that one side right, wrong, or half right and half wrong? Even if just one of the topics he touched on were true, it would repulse me.

To see some of the inside things that went on behind the big bank bail out, It absolutely sickens me. Especially when all this tax money that we gave them was supposed to help them financially and yet it went to private planes, yachts, and bonuses, meanwhile there are hardworking Americans being forced out of their homes by these very same banks we bailed out. They took our money and then took our homes.

To see how many people in congress are involved with Wall Street and its corruption is sickening. If you are in a position of power to make the banks more money, then you are rewarded with perks...

Thats just one of the many points Michael Moore touches on. The film absolutely made me hate the way some of the things in this country go down. I am a fan of Michael Moore, I know a lot of people cannot stand him but I applaud anyone who is willing to tackle America's problems and inform the public... Our government isn't doing enough.



The movie is available for rent on Comcast On-Demand...

I ran out and rented it tonight.

The one thing that killed me was the Dead Peasant policies. That is just sickening.

My wife (who is very smart, medically speaking) was shocked that some of these things were allowed to go on. She asked me "So Capitalism is basically I'm going to get as much as I possibly can and Fuck You?" Bluntly yes.

I too am a Moore fan, so I "liked" what he had to say and agree that he could do some good things in politics. Unless of course he turns into every other politician we have.

Cleveland Buck wrote: It has nothing to do with 'rich bankers'. What we don't need are banks that are so big that their failure would decimate the economy, and we also don't need scumbag Congressmen who are for sale to the highest bidding monopoly. I don't give a shit if a banker gets rich as long as his bank is allowed to fail if he fucks up.

How can you say it has nothing to do with the "rich bankers"???

1.) How much money does one person "need"?
2.) Capitolism- Take from bottom to increase the top.
3.) "WE" bail out banks that supposedly are in such horrible shape with money... (Check CEO Payroll)
4.) The bailout draft was THREE pagers long and included an idea (WE bail them out) in which congress passed even AFTER it was voted down. Oh, in that three pages the phrase "Cannot be contested in court of any kind".
5.) The banks have a VIP list of significant players in congress that get special treatment from these banks as long as these particular congress members are pro-banks.
6.) The mortgage companies that these banks own... The bright idea aimed toward homeowners in their mature to senior years pushing them to re-finance their homes because their "nest egg" or their "pension fund" may be in jeopardy... Then these ignorant pricks do not explain the fine print to the victims and raise their mortgage up to 400% more than the current payment... And thus, taking their house and making MORE money.
7.) Why didn't the "CEO's" put their money together, liquidate their assets, and use THAT money to bail themselves out? Gee, I don't see the tax payers of America knocking at my door offering to help get me ahead, buy me yachts, throw lavish parties at tropical resorts for my friends and I... So how did OUR money get tied up in doing this for them when they already have made more in ONE year than 100 of us will make in an entire life time???



Would you like to comment now? maybe offer some points for the "other" side?

bigkahuna wrote:

sonofsam wrote:

LJ wrote: Please expand on your thoughts....

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capitalism_A_Love_Story#Synopsis

I just watched it today... I understand it is a one-sided point of view, but is that one side right, wrong, or half right and half wrong? Even if just one of the topics he touched on were true, it would repulse me.

To see some of the inside things that went on behind the big bank bail out, It absolutely sickens me. Especially when all this tax money that we gave them was supposed to help them financially and yet it went to private planes, yachts, and bonuses, meanwhile there are hardworking Americans being forced out of their homes by these very same banks we bailed out. They took our money and then took our homes.

To see how many people in congress are involved with Wall Street and its corruption is sickening. If you are in a position of power to make the banks more money, then you are rewarded with perks...

Thats just one of the many points Michael Moore touches on. The film absolutely made me hate the way some of the things in this country go down. I am a fan of Michael Moore, I know a lot of people cannot stand him but I applaud anyone who is willing to tackle America's problems and inform the public... Our government isn't doing enough.



The movie is available for rent on Comcast On-Demand...

I ran out and rented it tonight.

The one thing that killed me was the Dead Peasant policies. That is just sickening.

My wife (who is very smart, medically speaking) was shocked that some of these things were allowed to go on. She asked me "So Capitalism is basically I'm going to get as much as I possibly can and Fuck You?" Bluntly yes.

I too am a Moore fan, so I "liked" what he had to say and agree that he could do some good things in politics. Unless of course he turns into every other politician we have.

I totally agree... I was so caught up in the banks I forgot to mention that. Absolutely Sickening. I will do everything I can never to set foot in a Wal-Mart again.

If Michael Moore wants to run for President, I will gladly be his V.P. I will not be bought. I have seen to many things happen to way to many people. Its honestly time THE PEOPLE get their country back.

Which is why I liked the part of Obama's State of the Union Address where he said something to the effect of
"Banks, if you can afford to give your CEOs big bonuses and what not, you can afford to pay back the American Tax Payers!"

Let's just hope this actually happens.

Another thing about the housing thing that kills me is this.

My wife and I just bought a house. I'll be honest, I have bad credit mainly because of Student Loans. Our Mortgage and all of that Jazz is soley under my wife's name because she has excellent credit. I think she made 39-40K according to her W2 and was approved for $120,000, which would have made a house payment right around $1,000/month. We could barely afford that with BOTH of our incomes let alone hers by itself.
The problem is that the Banks try to trick you into thinking that you can afford $$$$$ when you can really can only afford $$$. You take their advice, do a balloon payment because it will "save you money," and BAM foreclosure. Be honest with people...


sonofsam, I think we should hang out sometime. I we could possibly see eye-to-eye on a lot of things...

Personally I think Moore is a little "out there," but he is a brilliant filmmaker.

sonofsam wrote:

Cleveland Buck wrote: It has nothing to do with 'rich bankers'. What we don't need are banks that are so big that their failure would decimate the economy, and we also don't need scumbag Congressmen who are for sale to the highest bidding monopoly. I don't give a shit if a banker gets rich as long as his bank is allowed to fail if he fucks up.

How can you say it has nothing to do with the "rich bankers"???

1.) How much money does one person "need"?
2.) Capitolism- Take from bottom to increase the top.
3.) "WE" bail out banks that supposedly are in such horrible shape with money... (Check CEO Payroll)
4.) The bailout draft was THREE pagers long and included an idea (WE bail them out) in which congress passed even AFTER it was voted down. Oh, in that three pages the phrase "Cannot be contested in court of any kind".
5.) The banks have a VIP list of significant players in congress that get special treatment from these banks as long as these particular congress members are pro-banks.
6.) The mortgage companies that these banks own... The bright idea aimed toward homeowners in their mature to senior years pushing them to re-finance their homes because their "nest egg" or their "pension fund" may be in jeopardy... Then these ignorant pricks do not explain the fine print to the victims and raise their mortgage up to 400% more than the current payment... And thus, taking their house and making MORE money.
7.) Why didn't the "CEO's" put their money together, liquidate their assets, and use THAT money to bail themselves out? Gee, I don't see the tax payers of America knocking at my door offering to help get me ahead, buy me yachts, throw lavish parties at tropical resorts for my friends and I... So how did OUR money get tied up in doing this for them when they already have made more in ONE year than 100 of us will make in an entire life time???



Would you like to comment now? maybe offer some points for the "other" side?

Let me do my best :rolleyes:

1. How much does one person need? I don't know. It's not my decision. Who the fuck are you that you can make that decision?

2. The CEOs of government owned companies should have been paid whatever their bosses (the government) decided to pay them. If the government didn't want to pay them anything, I would have been fine with that. It's not my call. But you are worrying about a few million dollars like that would have saved the banks when they were billions and billions of dollars in the hole.

3. As far as I'm concerned, every single Congressmen is a worthless, scumbag, piece of shit. They are all bought and paid for by someone, if not banks, then the pharmaceutical monopolies or the oil monopolies or whatever the case may be. Neither you nor fat ass Moore have to convince me of the corruption the Congress.

4. This isn't the first time banks were bailed out. They knew they could do whatever they wanted to do to make as much money as they wanted no matter how risky because if the shit hit the fan the government would be there to bail them out. If there was no possibility of a bailout for them, they would have acted differently. The shitheads running the banks were greedy and reckless, but they did it because they knew they had the government bankrolling them.

5. As far as mortgage "victims", no one forced anyone to sign a bad loan with ridiculous terms. If someone is too stupid to read what they are signing, they should bring someone with a brain with them to look it over.

bigkahuna wrote: Which is why I liked the part of Obama's State of the Union Address where he said something to the effect of
"Banks, if you can afford to give your CEOs big bonuses and what not, you can afford to pay back the American Tax Payers!"

Let's just hope this actually happens.

Another thing about the housing thing that kills me is this.

My wife and I just bought a house. I'll be honest, I have bad credit mainly because of Student Loans. Our Mortgage and all of that Jazz is soley under my wife's name because she has excellent credit. I think she made 39-40K according to her W2 and was approved for $120,000, which would have made a house payment right around $1,000/month. We could barely afford that with BOTH of our incomes let alone hers by itself.
The problem is that the Banks try to trick you into thinking that you can afford $$$$$ when you can really can only afford $$$. You take their advice, do a balloon payment because it will "save you money," and BAM foreclosure. Be honest with people...


sonofsam, I think we should hang out sometime. I we could possibly see eye-to-eye on a lot of things...

Wow... Your situation and mine are almost identical. I live with my girlfriend. The reason I live wit her is because she had the credit to buy the house. I actually pay the house payment as well as the cars. She takes care of the utilities and the groceries. We just refinanced the house because the bank mysteriously miscalculated our ESCROW and our payment went up big time. They were also quick to offer the refinancing (which I told her to do without looking into it) and we called the bank today actually to fine comb the details of the contract (I thank Mr. Moore for prompting me to do this) and the "fine print" say that there is a grace period for a certain amount of money to be paid and if that amount is NOT paid them the payment increases $230 more than it was BEFORE we financed... I was lucky to catch them because we would have been evicted as well. To hell with the banks... You do not care about America OR its people. Wake up, because if you do not get out of dodge soon, the country that you don't care about will fight back.


bigkahuna,
I'll hang out anytime. In the Steubennville area, you?

I agree he is out there.

But, he does bring attention to things. You watch his movies, and a lot of it are interviews with credible people or actual video footage of what people have said/done.

try SE Michigan lol.... literally a stone's throw north of Toledo.

Cleveland Buck wrote:

sonofsam wrote:

Cleveland Buck wrote: It has nothing to do with 'rich bankers'. What we don't need are banks that are so big that their failure would decimate the economy, and we also don't need scumbag Congressmen who are for sale to the highest bidding monopoly. I don't give a shit if a banker gets rich as long as his bank is allowed to fail if he fucks up.

How can you say it has nothing to do with the "rich bankers"???

1.) How much money does one person "need"?
2.) Capitolism- Take from bottom to increase the top.
3.) "WE" bail out banks that supposedly are in such horrible shape with money... (Check CEO Payroll)
4.) The bailout draft was THREE pagers long and included an idea (WE bail them out) in which congress passed even AFTER it was voted down. Oh, in that three pages the phrase "Cannot be contested in court of any kind".
5.) The banks have a VIP list of significant players in congress that get special treatment from these banks as long as these particular congress members are pro-banks.
6.) The mortgage companies that these banks own... The bright idea aimed toward homeowners in their mature to senior years pushing them to re-finance their homes because their "nest egg" or their "pension fund" may be in jeopardy... Then these ignorant pricks do not explain the fine print to the victims and raise their mortgage up to 400% more than the current payment... And thus, taking their house and making MORE money.
7.) Why didn't the "CEO's" put their money together, liquidate their assets, and use THAT money to bail themselves out? Gee, I don't see the tax payers of America knocking at my door offering to help get me ahead, buy me yachts, throw lavish parties at tropical resorts for my friends and I... So how did OUR money get tied up in doing this for them when they already have made more in ONE year than 100 of us will make in an entire life time???



Would you like to comment now? maybe offer some points for the "other" side?

Let me do my best :rolleyes:

1. How much does one person need? I don't know. It's not my decision. Who the fuck are you that you can make that decision? The OTHER 99% of the voting population that CAN break you

2. The CEOs of government owned companies should have been paid whatever their bosses (the government) decided to pay them. If the government didn't want to pay them anything, I would have been fine with that. It's not my call. But you are worrying about a few million dollars like that would have saved the banks when they were billions and billions of dollars in the hole.Am I seeing a pattern here already on the second fact? Who am I, and Its not my call? So basically you are still one of those believers that think there is still a chance for you to make your 100 million

3. As far as I'm concerned, every single Congressmen is a worthless, scumbag, piece of shit. They are all bought and paid for by someone, if not banks, then the pharmaceutical monopolies or the oil monopolies or whatever the case may be. Neither you nor fat ass Moore have to convince me of the corruption the Congress. Hey Bush... Wake up. The oil companies are ALSO controlled by the banks. You have to look a little further back than Bush to the beginning of the end.

4. This isn't the first time banks were bailed out. They knew they could do whatever they wanted to do to make as much money as they wanted no matter how risky because if the shit hit the fan the government would be there to bail them out. If there was no possibility of a bailout for them, they would have acted differently. The shitheads running the banks were greedy and reckless, but they did it because they knew they had the government bankrolling them. So get involved... and bring 100 people with you. Ask them to bring people with you... Make a difference.

5. As far as mortgage "victims", no one forced anyone to sign a bad loan with ridiculous terms. If someone is too stupid to read what they are signing, they should bring someone with a brain with them to look it over.I guess you are calling me stupid for trusting my girlfriend who asked for ALL the details of our remortgage? She was LIED to. Signature superceeds a lie.

removed name calling- LJ

bigkahuna wrote: I agree he is out there.

But, he does bring attention to things. You watch his movies, and a lot of it are interviews with credible people or actual video footage of what people have said/done.

try SE Michigan lol.... literally a stone's throw north of Toledo.

I have friends in Toledo. Keep in touch. never now what the future holds

Some of you guys need to learn a lesson that many don't seem to know; businessmen DO NOT like capitalism. Businessmen like whatever system allows them to make more money. Capitalism keeps the best check on business through competition, given the laws of the land promote competition and not hinder competition. Our policies over the last 100 years have not promoted competition, and therefore you get those huge, corrupt businesses who can profit off of "paying" the politicians. In true capitalism, a government would have no say in the market except in areas where private industry cannot profitably provide the service or to construct laws to promote competition (i.e. monopoly and anti-trust matters) in the private sector. People saying we have capitalism here and it's failed need to look again, because it's not our capitalist principals failing us, it's the collectivist policies we've adopted that hinder true capitalism from prevailing.

"The vice of capitalism is that it stands for the unequal sharing of blessings; whereas the virtue of socialism is that it stands for the equal sharing of misery." Winston Churchill

sonofsam, this is your only warning about name calling. I suggest you re-read the forum rules.

LJ wrote: sonofsam, this is your only warning about name calling. I suggest you re-read the forum rules.

I aplogize. I will refrain.

Michael Moore, Keith Olbermann and Glenn Beck want people to see things how they see it. In their eyes, they are right about their point of view. And they target the people who most agree with them.

I was right, looks like MM did his job!

So easy, even a Caveman can do it