Tuesday, November 6, 2012

Inside Job: Response

Over the past two classes we have been watching a film produced by Charles Ferguson and Audrey Marrs, and narrated by Matt Damon. Instantly, red flags flew in my mind. Particularly, with Matt Damon, he has a long history of being exceptionally liberal so I knew the point of view that this documentary would be coming from. With that being said, I had never heard of the producers before so I did a little research on them and simply googled their names. This is what I found:

Learn More About Charles Ferguson

Looking at the site listed above it appears as though Mr. Ferguson is well educated and adds credibility to his work. Only, real suspicion to me is that where he was educated were some of the same schools that those who were caught with "their hands in the cookie jar" on Wall Street attended (MIT, University of California: Berkley).

Learn More About Audrey Marrs

What startles me is how a young punk rocker from Washington can go from mosh-pit to documentary so quickly blows my mind! Thus, in my mind I don't see her being qualified for helping create a detailed analysis on the financial economy.

Learn More About How Mr. Ferguson and Miss Marrs Met

This was interesting to me that they got together via craigslist!

 Now obviously I have some issues with this film already, but I watched it and I took what I could from it with caution. This is what I came away with: There is undeniable evidence about the corruption found in the financial machine on Wall Street. There needs to be more checks and balances to make sure that investors are truly purchasing AAA stock and not baited into it and then betted against by the companies they employ to find them quality investments. Agencies should not be able to spend money that isn't theres recklessly, that is wrong. I'm not suggesting more and more regulation, but I want a fool-proof checks and balances system employed where fraud would be near impossible to do.

Another issue is that these men who were overseeing these companies need not take any more bailouts without specific regulations on what they can and can't do with said monies, they also need to keep track of where that money goes. In such a field as this where the temptation is so great and the feeding ground so vast for greed, there needs to be tremendous checks and balances in place.

But, the Occupy Wall Street movement I do not endorse by any way shape or form! But, lets dig deeper than just the outside:

Occupy Wall Street Commercial

Sounds reasonable right?

What is the general thinking behind the Occupy Movement?

Occupy Movement: WSJ

Let's get back on track I want to share with you the trailer for the documentary but pay attention from 1:54-2:07 this is my favorite part of the documentary because the guy really nails the fallacy on the nose!

Inside Job

Now in closing there is just one more thing I want to share: Yes, we need checks and balances to regulate corruption in such a key part of our economy. But, making a bigger government is not the answer! But, let me close with this analogy:

Let's say that you have a 4.0 GPA, you work tremendously hard for this, late nights, long study hours, you even have a part time job on the side. Now, some of your fellow classmates are party animals, out late and sleep deprived not because there studying but because they are partying. Now, they aren't doing to well, in fact they have a 2.7 GPA. And one day the President of your school says: "Fellow Buckeyes, in the spirit of fairness and equality, there will no longer be 4.0's and 2.7's but their will be one GPA for all, a 3.0, this is only the right thing to do!"

I hope that made you upset! But, you see here, that's what the Occupy Movement is about! Where on earth does this 1% compared to the other 99% come from? What a bunch of bologna! I'm sorry but how about you stop protesting in the streets and do something with yourself, go get a job and stop wasting time being destructive. The American dream doesn't mean that anyone and everyone should get what they want when they want it. It doesn't mean that we should demand money from the wealthiest of our neighbors in the name of fairness.

1 comment:

  1. I completely agree. I feel like a lot of criticisms of the rich are born out of the spite and jealousy of the poor.


Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.