Inside Job

[PIE-GUY]

So, this is what a good friend of mine had to say. I read it and immediately added Inside Job to my Netflix queue.

I've read "Too Big to Fail", "House of Cards", "The Big Short", and countless newspaper and magazine articles written before, during, and after the financial crisis of 2008. This movie, "Inside Job," perhaps does the best job of documenting this most recent and fetid skid-mark left on society by the greed, arrogance, and downright incompetence of the rich and powerful.

The root cause of this depressing and infuriating tale are all too well known by now: shady mortgage dealers pushed bad loans on unsophisticated folks desperate for a chunk of the American dream in the form of a 3500 square foot McMansion. These festering, putrid loans were pooled together by big investment banks, sliced and diced a thousand which ways into "collateralized debt obligations", insured by AIG (and others) via credit default swaps, and given investment grade ratings by the hapless ratings agencies. Where "Inside Job" really shines is showing how this was all brought on by a rabid, foaming-at-the-mouth desire to deregulate the banking industry. This movement began in the Reagan years, accelerated furiously during Clinton's presidency, and completely flew off the rails during George W Bush's dismal 8 years in office.

The greedy fat-cat bankers and coke-addled Wall Street traders are probably the villains most well known to anybody with even a passing interest in economics and financial markets. And while these cretins are certainly anything but innocent in having caused the crisis, "Inside Job" shows how they were really just acting out their part on a stage set by the very people and institutions who were supposed to be regulating and monitoring the financial and housing industries as a whole. "Inside Job" director Charles Ferguson pulls back the curtain on those that have as much blood on their hands as anybody--namely Alan Greenspan, Larry Summers, Robert Rubin, economists Martin Feldstein, Frederick Mishkin, and Glenn Hubbard. Ferguson is particularly ruthless in his interview with Miskin. He sticks the dagger in and twists it hard. Mishkin comes across as an incompetent schmuck willing to whore himself out to anybody willing to pay him for his so-called "expert" advice. Note to Columbia Business school students: Don't waste your money taking any classes from this fraud. Hubbard reveals just how small his dick actually is when he gets testy with Ferguson and yelps "Give it your best shot" during his interview. Okay, tough guy. Guess you're so in love with yourself you didn't actually notice how stupid your responses have been. Feldstein says little and contributes almost nothing during his interview. I wish he'd take that approach with his economic advice, because when he does open his mouth and contribute, bad shit seems to happen. Greenspan, not surprisingly refuses to give an interview. He's been in full "rewrite history to salvage my career" mode for a while now. Either that or he was too busy whacking off to Ayn Rand. Greenspan's an arrogant prick who thought he was smart but in actuality was nothing more than a mindless ideologue doing the bidding of his "free market" masters. Larry Summers doesn't give an interview either, and yet he still comes across as a small-minded pig. Robert Rubin is a money-grubbing whore. After becoming filthy rich at Goldman, he spent a stint in Clinton's administration, only to get even richer after that as vice-chairman at Citigroup--a bank that stuffed it's balance sheet full of toxic assets at the expense of the shareholders Rubin and the board should have been looking after.

The conclusion of "Inside Job" is not uplifting. Several years out, many of the same cast of characters are still in place. Some, like Hubbard and Mishkin, have retreated back to the ivory tower of academia where they can freely jerk each other off and publish their written diarrhea and call it "research." Others, like Feldstein and Summers, remain in place. None of the fat-cat bankers have had to repay their ill-gotten gains. And with the election of 2010 we now have an even more anti-regulatory sentiment in Washington. It has been said that insanity is doing the same thing over and over again while expecting a different result each time. If that's the case, then our approach to regulation in the financial industry is truly insane, and the worst mental cases have taken over the hospital.

[gah]

I actually just watched this Sunday night, and then again last night. Some of the technical stuff was a little tough to follow, but made more sense on a 2nd viewing. Anyhow, that's an excellent summary, and expresses the disgust I felt watching it, especially at the end, when you realize most of these players are still in place, and Obama really hasn't done much in terms of setting regulatory restrictions in place. But the whole thing is so big, and so beyond our individual influence, not a whole lot to do but  :shakehead:

[sls.stormyrider]

I want to see this, but I will need to put something in front of my tv so it won't break when I throw things at it.

What continues to be angering, is that I agree that "wall st reform" bill passed last year is inadequate, the new members of the House want to repeal what little regulation we have because it is anti business and will therefore ruin the economy that Wall St already ruined. Either they didn't read the newspaper between 2006 and 2009, were subject to repeated head trauma or amnestic inducing drugs, or are being heavily payed off in a major way.

[susep]

great documentary by the same dir. as No End In Sight.
Everyone at the 'paug and their extended families should see this movie!!!

[gah]

great documentary by the same dir. as No End In Sight.
Everyone at the 'paug and their extended families should see this movie!!!

Added to my queue, thanks.

I want to see this, but I will need to put something in front of my tv so it won't break when I throw things at it.

What continues to be angering, is that I agree that "wall st reform" bill passed last year is inadequate, the new members of the House want to repeal what little regulation we have because it is anti business and will therefore ruin the economy that Wall St already ruined. Either they didn't read the newspaper between 2006 and 2009, were subject to repeated head trauma or amnestic inducing drugs, or are being heavily payed off in a major way.

I think you'll find that to be the case.

[Superfreakie]

A lot of good literature has come out as well. I advise you all to read The Big Short. I could send my copy to one of you if you would like and we could pass it around. Presently a friend is reading it and they should be done with it soon.

[mattstick]

Matt Taibbi's article was great too.

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/why-isnt-wall-street-in-jail-20110216

[Hicks]

Matt Taibbi's article was great too.

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/why-isnt-wall-street-in-jail-20110216

Yeah I don't need to see the movie, Taibbi has already educated me.

[gah]

A lot of good literature has come out as well. I advise you all to read The Big Short. I could send my copy to one of you if you would like and we could pass it around. Presently a friend is reading it and they should be done with it soon.

I'll take it next if you wouldn't mind, and then I can pass it along to anyone else that wants to read it or send it back.

[mehead]

it's been sitting in my netflix queue for a while but haven't watched it yet

[Superfreakie]

A lot of good literature has come out as well. I advise you all to read The Big Short. I could send my copy to one of you if you would like and we could pass it around. Presently a friend is reading it and they should be done with it soon.

I'll take it next if you wouldn't mind, and then I can pass it along to anyone else that wants to read it or send it back.

no problem. will send it in a week or two.

[gah]

A lot of good literature has come out as well. I advise you all to read The Big Short. I could send my copy to one of you if you would like and we could pass it around. Presently a friend is reading it and they should be done with it soon.

I'll take it next if you wouldn't mind, and then I can pass it along to anyone else that wants to read it or send it back.

no problem. will send it in a week or two.

Thanks man!

Also,

Matt Taibbi's article was great too.

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/why-isnt-wall-street-in-jail-20110216

This is a great read! Thanks for the link.

[runawayjimbo]

Taibbi skewers Goldman Sachs. Again

The People vs. Goldman Sachs

Two of my favorite lines:

Defenders of Goldman have been quick to insist that while the bank may have had a few ethical slips here and there, its only real offense was being too good at making money. We now know, unequivocally, that this is bullshit. Goldman isn't a pudgy housewife who broke her diet with a few Nilla Wafers between meals — it's an advanced-stage, 1,100-pound medical emergency who hasn't left his apartment in six years, and is found by paramedics buried up to his eyes in cupcake wrappers and pizza boxes. If the evidence in the Levin report is ignored, then Goldman will have achieved a kind of corrupt-enterprise nirvana. Caught, but still free: above the law.

And, from everybody's favorite john:

"This is the dog that didn't bark," says Eliot Spitzer, who tangled with Goldman during his years as New York's attorney general. "Their whole political argument for a decade was 'Leave us alone, trust us to regulate ourselves.' They not only abdicated that responsibility, they affirmatively traded against the entire market."

[gah]

Another good one:

In other words, the bank needed to find suckers to buy as much of its risky inventory as possible. Goldman was like a car dealership that realized it had a whole lot full of cars with faulty brakes. Instead of announcing a recall, it surged ahead with a two-fold plan to make a fortune: first, by dumping the dangerous products on other people, and second, by taking out life insurance against the fools who bought the deadly cars.

[Hicks]

Taibbi skewers Goldman Sachs. Again

The People vs. Goldman Sachs

Two of my favorite lines:

Defenders of Goldman have been quick to insist that while the bank may have had a few ethical slips here and there, its only real offense was being too good at making money. We now know, unequivocally, that this is bullshit. Goldman isn't a pudgy housewife who broke her diet with a few Nilla Wafers between meals — it's an advanced-stage, 1,100-pound medical emergency who hasn't left his apartment in six years, and is found by paramedics buried up to his eyes in cupcake wrappers and pizza boxes. If the evidence in the Levin report is ignored, then Goldman will have achieved a kind of corrupt-enterprise nirvana. Caught, but still free: above the law.

And, from everybody's favorite john:

"This is the dog that didn't bark," says Eliot Spitzer, who tangled with Goldman during his years as New York's attorney general. "Their whole political argument for a decade was 'Leave us alone, trust us to regulate ourselves.' They not only abdicated that responsibility, they affirmatively traded against the entire market."

Those scumbags make me sick.