Capitalism: A Love Story

[southsider2k5]

Apparently no one in our country is qualified to make a film criticizing capitalism since we are a capitalistic country.

 

And I guess that also means a meat eater cannot make a documentary about factory farming, someone who doesn't own a car cannot make a film about cars, etc.

 

And yet you seem to revel in the religious right being taken down for not being able to keep it in their pants. OK, I guess you won't be doing that from now on, right?

[BigSqwert]

And yet you seem to revel in the religious right being taken down for not being able to keep it in their pants. OK, I guess you won't be doing that from now on, right?

I haven't been. If you've paid attention I called out athomeboy for doing it recently.

[FlaSoxxJim]

If you like movies, you should at least watch "Roger & Me". No political biasness in it.

 

Outstanding film.

[Texsox]

So if he keeps some of his profit in a socially responsible sort of way, does that make it ok? Would any of his detractors really suddenly accept his film if he donated 110% of his profits? Any business reporter who reports corporate fraud could only work as a volunteer.

[southsider2k5]

So if he keeps some of his profit in a socially responsible sort of way, does that make it ok? Would any of his detractors really suddenly accept his film if he donated 110% of his profits? Any business reporter who reports corporate fraud could only work as a volunteer.

 

I didn't say it before, but that is a terrible example. A reporter who reports fraud, probably shouldn't break laws. That would be more apt.

[BigSqwert]

I guess I'm just struggling to comprehend the issue here. No one in a capitalist society is allowed to create a film criticizing capitalist society because they live in one? Is he supposed to create his own nation that doesn't employ capitalism, perhaps on an island, in order to create a film criticizing the concept?

[southsider2k5]

I guess I'm just struggling to comprehend the issue here. No one in a capitalist society is allowed to create a film criticizing capitalist society because they live in one? Is he supposed to create his own nation that doesn't employ capitalism, perhaps on an island, in order to create a film criticizing the concept?

 

If he is going to slam his society, he probably shouldn't get rich doing the very thing he is saying is so wrong. Why is that so complex? We ask that of people all of the time. People who hold up their high moral standards and family, probably shouldn't be having affairs. People who fight for the environment most likely shouldn't be the biggest user of electricity in their state. People who preach on the ills of drug usage, most likely shouldn't have a meth lab at their house.

[3E8]

Did anyone see the film? Is he saying capitalism as a whole doesn't work? The impression I got from his interview on Howard Stern was that he focused on certain aspects of capitalism which aren't in America's best interest and that too many resources are being wasted. I think the title is being taken too literally. There's a difference between trying to make money by writing/directing a film and buying billions in derivatives contracts

[lostfan]

Did anyone see the film? Is he saying capitalism as a whole doesn't work? The impression I got from his interview on Howard Stern was that he focused on certain aspects of capitalism which aren't in America's best interest and that too many resources are being wasted. I think the title is being taken too literally. There's a difference between trying to make money by writing/directing a film and buying billions in derivatives contracts

^^thank you, I don't have any plans on seeing this movie but that's the impression I get. People criticize the film and I can tell the only thing they know about it is the title has "capitalism" in it.

[BigSqwert]

Furthermore, when I think capitalist pig I don't think of the Wall Street CEOs. I think of Micheal Moore and the $5K suits he wears, the Ferrarris he's always seen driving in, and the entourage of strippers surrounding him at all times.

[NorthSideSox72]

I personally could care less of Moore makes big bucks on his films, or if Al Gore makes big bucks on promoting alt energy, or if Mel Gibson made big bucks by producing The Passion of Christ, etc., etc. So the hell what? I don't watch Moore's films because he stretches or even just plain demolishes the truth at times to get his point across, and further, he's just an annoying character on the screen. If he makes money at it, great. If he donates some of that to a worth cause, even better.

 

But its not hypocrisy, because Moore's point is CLEARLY not that making money is bad. I don't even have to see the film to understand that. He is criticizing the way certain people made that money, and the negative impact that had on others. The only way Moore is a hypocrite is if his making of the film somehow screwed other people out of money in the way he is accusing others of doing. And I don't see how that is the case here.

 

[NorthSideSox72]

There's a difference between trying to make money by writing/directing a film and buying billions in derivatives contracts

I really hate that people (due mostly to the media) have now got this idea that "derivatives" is a dirty word. Nevermind that the most commonly traded derivatives, futures, are highly liquid, regulated and transparent. AIG and others didn't go down because of "derivatives". They went down because they stepped into a non-core business of trading swaps, these swaps are UNREGULATED, UNCLEARED, OTC instruments, which AIG and others daisy chained into oblivion, reflected laughably low levels of risk and collateral against in their books, and took on enormous counterparty risk with firms that were highly likely to be unable to cover their calls. More than anything, it was a failure in compliance, risk and accounting - not the fact that they traded derivatives.

[Texsox]

If he is going to slam his society, he probably shouldn't get rich doing the very thing he is saying is so wrong. Why is that so complex? We ask that of people all of the time. People who hold up their high moral standards and family, probably shouldn't be having affairs. People who fight for the environment most likely shouldn't be the biggest user of electricity in their state. People who preach on the ills of drug usage, most likely shouldn't have a meth lab at their house.

 

Of course you are correct phrased that way. But I have not read or heard where he says getting rich is bad. From what I read the movie is not that it is bad getting rich, but there are some things in the pursuit for riches that are wrong and should be examined. So unless he is doing something specific that he rails against in the film, it seems to me he is on firm footing.

[Texsox]

I didn't say it before, but that is a terrible example. A reporter who reports fraud, probably shouldn't break laws. That would be more apt.

 

Thank you, those examples make a lot more sense. I believe we can bet there are many reporters trying to expose the hypocrisies in the film.

[CanOfCorn]

And PURE capitalism doesn't work. I don't think any pure form of economy works. Capitalism as the MAIN TENET of an economy is still having a rough time, obviously...but it's better than bread lines and/or 80% income taxes.

[EvilMonkey]

I think I heard he paid off a couple of those people bills. Not too mention at the end of the movie he anonymously paid off the medical bill of the wife of the guy who owned the number 1 anti-Moore website at the time.

Yeah, he 'anonymously' paid off the bills, and then put that fact into the movie. No publicitystunt there. The site is called Moorewatch.com. Here is a link to the post omn that site detailing some of the history around that donation.

 

http://www.moorewatch.com/index.php/weblog...ecord_straight/

[Texsox]

Yeah, he 'anonymously' paid off the bills, and then put that fact into the movie. No publicitystunt there. The site is called Moorewatch.com. Here is a link to the post omn that site detailing some of the history around that donation.

 

http://www.moorewatch.com/index.php/weblog...ecord_straight/

 

So let's see, if he doesn't tell anyone, we hear from Kap and SS he doesn't practice what he preaches, if he does, it is a publicity stunt. I have to hand it to the GOP, they sure know how to discredit someone. Brilliant strategy.

[EvilMonkey]

So let's see, if he doesn't tell anyone, we hear from Kap and SS he doesn't practice what he preaches, if he does, it is a publicity stunt. I have to hand it to the GOP, they sure know how to discredit someone. Brilliant strategy.

if he does it, puts it in his movie and writes it off as a business expense, what else can it be?

[ChiSox_Sonix]

So let's see, if he doesn't tell anyone, we hear from Kap and SS he doesn't practice what he preaches, if he does, it is a publicity stunt. I have to hand it to the GOP, they sure know how to discredit someone. Brilliant strategy.

 

Uhhh, someone claimed he did it anonymously. Yet it was in his movie that he did it. How can that be anonymous or anything other than a publicity stunt. If he wanted it to be truly anonymous it would not have been in the movie. But he wanted people to know, hence why it was in his movie.

[Texsox]

if he does it, puts it in his movie and writes it off as a business expense, what else can it be?

 

Like I said, the GOP is awesome at this. If he donates anonymously, Kap and SS can slam him for being a hypocrite. If he lets people know, Alpha can slam him for using it as a publicity stunt. Awesome No matter what the poor bastard did, he was wrong

[southsider2k5]

Like I said, the GOP is awesome at this. If he donates anonymously, Kap and SS can slam him for being a hypocrite. If he lets people know, Alpha can slam him for using it as a publicity stunt. Awesome No matter what the poor bastard did, he was wrong

 

Forget it, he's rolling...

[Texsox]

Forget it, he's rolling...

 

And I should have added, the Dems would do the same thing. I don't like propaganda, and my impression of Moore's films are at about the same level as 1950s era Cold War propaganda films. So I will stay away.

[Pants Rowland]

And I should have added, the Dems would do the same thing. I don't like propaganda, and my impression of Moore's films are at about the same level as 1950s era Cold War propaganda films. So I will stay away.

 

The sad thing about Moore's films, is they actually make some compelling points but have increasingly employed spin and manipulation of the facts. That has given the opposition plenty of ammunition to discredit his entire argument. He can't help himself and just goes so far overboard to get his point across. With that said, I really liked Bowling For Columbine and thought Marilyn Manson's interview was priceless. I have not seen any of his films since then.

[Cknolls]

And I should have added, the Dems would do the same thing. I don't like propaganda, and my impression of Moore's films are at about the same level as 1950s era Cold War propaganda films. So I will stay away.

 

 

You didn't know his grandmother was Leni Riefenstahl

[knightni]

I'd just like to add: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=49jKeGyUCJE