4 days till the greatest movie of all time!!

[CryGlennCry]

And here we are 9 pages into this thread without one "Quote From A Movie" and an irrefutable fact(a link to a reputable site would be nice) proving said quote to be a lie.
C'mon people...
Micheal Moore is a fat load and can be pretentious and annoying, but PROVE to me that he is a liar.
That's all I'm asking..

hey Glenn....Columbine was Bullshit......he will say that 8 people were killed by a crazed gunman....and then try and Spin why a gun ban would have stopped this from happening....meanwhile, never showing why gun bans just dont seem to keep guns out of the crazed gunman's hands.....why is this?

I guess it's because there are just too many guns out there. And anyone who really wants one in going to get one. Especially the criminal type.
Hey look, this is actually an issue I disagree with Moore on. I think it's a fundamental American right and I would never want it infringed.
I don't think private citizens should need M-16s... but I digress...
From a MM documentary, name me a SPECIFIC QUOTED FACT AND A REBUTTAL LINK PROVING THE QUOTED FACT IS A LIE.
Shit! How many times do I have to ask the same question?

 

[garyd]

So political corruption is now the fall of the free market? The very notion is so pathetic as to defy comprehension.

 

[midcan5]

I suppose morons (and you) don't read their own sources (just the first one): ... maintain that the fault lies principally with the federal government, which since the 1990s and even earlier has been actively promoting mortgages for low-income Americans. This, he argues, led to the unsustainable frenzy of sub-prime mortgages in the 2000s.....

WTF - do you read? did you read any of them? The next sentence addressed you brain dead corporate tools who spout slogans over substance. Is your mini mind lost so quickly or did the wingnut telepathic thinker break down and you shutdown?

"Charles Morris's informed and unusual book, The Trillion Dollar Meltdown, provides a decisive rebuttal to all such excuse-making and blame of "government." Morris makes it clear that it was an unquenchable thirst for easy profits that led commercial and investment banks in the US and around the world—as well as hedge funds, insurance companies, private equity firms, and other financial institutions—to take unjustifiable risks for their own gain, and in so doing jeopardize the future of the nation's credit system and now the economy itself. In fact, government-sponsored entities, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, did have a part in the crisis, but not because they were principally trying to help the poor buy homes. Rather, they were also trying to maximize their profits and justify large salaries and bonuses for their executives. They had been made into publicly traded companies in 1989."

from first link

 

[midcan5]

I suppose morons (and you) don't read their own sources (just the first one):

Well done - you dispatched some quick truth found within that libs own post.

Almost all of Moore's rants had nothing to do with actual capitalism but rather the effects of government regulatory abortions that caused the mess.

If anything, it is a testimony to how the government's role needs to be downsized considerably, not increased to the bloated proportions of Moore himself...

In addition, I do believe some are unclear on what 'but for' actually means. Oh well.

If anyone is interested in an excellent (non-partisan) analysis of the crash of the economy (I realize that is likely a pipe dream in a Michael Moore groupie thread), this is one of the best analyses I have seen: Recipe for Disaster: The Formula that Killed Wall Street

How weird that the article you post defeats your own position. Michael Moore, while simplistic, is correct in his basic assessments. If there is fault with government it is the fault caused by the lack of regulatory structure. A close friend was a banking regulator years ago before the Greed Revolution, then they would inspect closely the books of the banking and investment firms. Sad that came to an end under Reagan / Clinton / Bush, the so called Contract with America. Only one word needs to change 'with' to 'on' to reflect the real story.

from piece

"Road Map for Financial Recovery: Radical Transparency Now!"

"As a result, just about anything could be bundled and turned into a triple-A bond—corporate bonds, bank loans, mortgage-backed securities, whatever you liked. The consequent pools were often known as collateralized debt obligations, or CDOs. You could tranche that pool and create a triple-A security even if none of the components were themselves triple-A. You could even take lower-rated tranches of other CDOs, put them in a pool, and tranche them—an instrument known as a CDO-squared, which at that point was so far removed from any actual underlying bond or loan or mortgage that no one really had a clue what it included. But it didn't matter. All you needed was Li's copula function...."

In hindsight, ignoring those warnings looks foolhardy. But at the time, it was easy. Banks dismissed them, partly because the managers empowered to apply the brakes didn't understand the arguments between various arms of the quant universe. Besides, they were making too much money to stop....

Nassim Nicholas Taleb, hedge fund manager and author of The Black Swan, is particularly harsh when it comes to the copula. "People got very excited about the Gaussian copula because of its mathematical elegance, but the thing never worked," he says. "Co-association between securities is not measurable using correlation," because past history can never prepare you for that one day when everything goes south. "Anything that relies on correlation is charlatanism...."


"On the day when Saddam was caught, the bond market went up in the morning, and it went down in the afternoon. So here we had two headlines — "Bond Market Up on Saddam News," and in the afternoon, "Bond Market Down on Saddam News" — and then they had in both cases very convincing explanations of the moves. Basically if you can explain one thing and its opposite using the same data you don't have an explanation. It takes a lot of courage to keep silent." Nassim Nicholas Taleb

 

[Alpha1]

Capitalism: A love story is out on Friday. I am seeing it on Friday. Anyone else ready to watch the end of Croney Capitalism on friday?

Can you say.... FLOP !

Guess that s puts YOU in the imbecile area of the intelligence pie chart....

 

[Si modo]

Well done - you dispatched some quick truth found within that libs own post.

Almost all of Moore's rants had nothing to do with actual capitalism but rather the effects of government regulatory abortions that caused the mess.

If anything, it is a testimony to how the government's role needs to be downsized considerably, not increased to the bloated proportions of Moore himself...

In addition, I do believe some are unclear on what 'but for' actually means. Oh well.

If anyone is interested in an excellent (non-partisan) analysis of the crash of the economy (I realize that is likely a pipe dream in a Michael Moore groupie thread), this is one of the best analyses I have seen: Recipe for Disaster: The Formula that Killed Wall Street

How weird that the article you post defeats your own position. ....

As you are obviously clueless of what 'but for' means, no doubt you would think this.

 

[Si modo]

I suppose morons (and you) don't read their own sources (just the first one): ... maintain that the fault lies principally with the federal government, which since the 1990s and even earlier has been actively promoting mortgages for low-income Americans. This, he argues, led to the unsustainable frenzy of sub-prime mortgages in the 2000s.....

WTF - do you read? did you read any of them? The next sentence addressed you brain dead corporate tools who spout slogans over substance. Is your mini mind lost so quickly or did the wingnut telepathic thinker break down and you shutdown? ....

WTF do you think "but for" means?

*shaking my head in disbelief*

 

[Harry Dresden]

I suppose morons (and you) don't read their own sources (just the first one): ... maintain that the fault lies principally with the federal government, which since the 1990s and even earlier has been actively promoting mortgages for low-income Americans. This, he argues, led to the unsustainable frenzy of sub-prime mortgages in the 2000s.....

WTF - do you read? did you read any of them? The next sentence addressed you brain dead corporate tools who spout slogans over substance. Is your mini mind lost so quickly or did the wingnut telepathic thinker break down and you shutdown? ....

WTF do you think "but for" means?

*shaking my head in disbelief*

watch it Mondo....Midcant thinks he is the smartest guy around....just ask him....