What does /pol/ think of this movie?
>>67740051
Exposes the kike bankers and wall street fucks.
>>67740051
idk haven't seen it, but i want to
>>67740112
Even the end where they say more government was the answer and that people blamed the whole thing on immigrants and poor people?
>>67740225
I would recommend giving it a watch. The editing and scene transitions are very odd and so are a lot of the random pic slides and things, but it's worth a watch.
>>67740051
IT WAS DA JEWS MANE
>>67740112
Butthurt faggot
>>67740051
Michael Lewis is a hack
Movie is wrong about a lot of things
t. finance guy
It's a big movie
>>67740756
>there is literally nothing wrong with banks
>>67740756
I'm not well versed but could you point at just something easy that this movie gets wrong in your mind?
I feel like the movie didn't place enough emphasis on the governments role, namely the fed.
>>67740756
Know-nothing with finances here.
What's the scoop?
MY DICK?
>>67740051
entirely missed the whole part where bill clinton set it on track by mandating loans for poor minorities
>>67741321
Are you talking about the CRA? That was carter, or am I being stupid and forgetting something?
Liberal Propaganda
>>67740051
I don't like it when filmmakers assume I am an idiot and so I need stupid intersections with explanations for simpletons by the most famous person of the month.
Except from that I think they did a very good at painting the people as idiots that went for all those loans. Mentioning the Fed in passing is a real affront though. They're the ones that went out said everything was save and they're doing the same thing right now while thinking negative interest rates.
Of course they neither explain how more regulations would have fixed the situation. Maybe they were thinking about George W. Bush's reforms after Enron went bankrupt and the whole was about to blow up right then.
>>67741680
I liked the explanations even though I thought how they were done was sort of cheesy. It is a McKay film though so I don't know what I expected.
I had a lot of problems wrapping my head around CDOs, especially when you go into "Synthetic" CDOs and all that shit. I still don't have a good grasp on them.
>>67740776
Crushing the market with no survivors
is this the same michael lewis who is a talking head on cnn
looks frail
>>67740051
Fucking loved it even though the sneaky kikes played it off as stupidity when we on /pol/ here know it was the nose
>>67742144
>first I want you to see it crash
>then you have my permission to sell
>>67742369
Nah man at the end the Jew says they knew it would crash but they knew the tax payers would bail them out.
At least that kike got it right
>>67742487
>the Jew
>carrell
Im pretty sure he isn't a kike, they also left the little tid-bit at the end of the film which insinuates that the banks are selling / dumping dirty bonds again.
>>67742793
>isn't a kike
Did you miss the scene of him studying the Talmud and his mom talking to the fucking rabbi about him not being able to go to the school because he questioned everything and looked for inconsistencies, even in his religion?
How did you miss that?
>>67740051
This is a shortposting thread now
>>67742992
>>67743024
>>67742913
>plays a kike
>is a Roman Catholic
Okay I see where you're coming from, from what I can find he isn't actually a kike.
Do you presume the film to be a classic misdirection or holding some truth to it?
>>67741943
>I liked the explanations even though I thought how they were done was sort of cheesy.
It broke the mood for me, but I guess they thought the could save themselves a lot exposition that way.
>I still don't have a good grasp on them.
It's a financial product your are unlikely to get your hand on since they are mostly used by the banks. The problem with synthetic CDOs as I understand is that you are not really purchasing bonds from the companies bundled in them but only derivatives. The good bonds get mixed with the risky ones that way, which actually is a good risk spread but only a few companies in them need to fold and you some problems on your hand.
>>67743054
>>67741680
>I don't like it when filmmakers assume I am an idiot and so I need stupid intersections with explanations for simpletons by the most famous person of the month
It was satire.
>>67743115
>>67743155
Out of all the articles, docs and movies it was the only one to touch on the real issue of the crisis:
>That Moody's and S&P were 'strongly encouraged' to rate this debt AAA (same level as US Treasury notes and Bonds) instead of BBB or BBB- (Baa2 or Baa3 if Moodys)
The scene where they go to vegas and discover strippers with 10 mortgaged properties is hilarious.
>>67741047
Basically, glass-steagal legislation gets repealed in 1999 (signed off by bill clinton). Then Banks get to do everything under one roof: Commercial Banking, Investment Banking, Private markets (Namely Derivitive instruments like Colatteral Debt Obligations and Credit Default Swaps. They explained it in the movie like making bets on other people bets (which is what it basically was). Then they started pumping out subprime loans like no other, where anybody who walked in to Washington Mutual in '07 could get a mortgage signed that same day. It was stupid, and tons of people default on loans in '08. Derivatives obligations were massive and caused AIG and Lehman Brothers to go insolvent. The fed bailed out AIG and some others. It was basically just wall street getting out of control. It's why weed need more regulation.
>>67743069
Wait what are you saying? I was calling his character a Jew, Steve Carrel is also a Jew yes?
>>67743235
And yes this movie was fantastic
>>67740756
>Dey was wrong but im not going to say about what
ok
>>67743241
I really liked that scene.
>>67743304
>>67741943
>"Synthetic" CDOs and all that shit. I still don't have a good grasp on them
Synthetic CDOs were essentially bets on the success of the actual underlying CDOs. They became increasingly popular as the market for CDOs reached its cap.
I mean the movie explained it pretty good and seeing that you didn't even bother doing your own research I'm not even sure why I'm explaining you this.
>>67740051
Even when Pitt tries to look like a complete dork, he can't change his voice.
He still sounds like a 20-something frathead so the character is fucked.
>>67743415
>I'm going to be a smartass for no reason
I clearly watched the movie you prick. I just didn't watch it alone and had a little trouble grasping that bit. Fucking asshole
there were three significant scenes that really get to the heart of what this movie was about.. the "real issues"
>the scene where a man finds out his landlord is scamming his rent with a fraudulent mortgage app
>the scene when the woman at the ratings agency explains that they have competition and must "play ball"
>the scene when Carrell is sitting with the CDO manager who explains to him the process of repackaging the CDOs knowing them to be bad investments..... more specifically when the CDO manager says that he has a "good relationship" with merrill-lynch (a financial firm)
there are a few other nuggets of golden truth in the movie but those three immediately come to mind
>>67743258
Can confirm. Everyone kinda knew 08 might happen but they didn't care coz muh profits
>>67740051
Here's a panel discussion with the movie's director and some economists and finance experts at the worlds #1 think tank.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e83a1ABh2h0
>>67743258
>It's why weed need more regulation.
The only regulation that we actually needed was incaeration, but when Obama had all these fuckers on their knees literally begging for taxpayer money in order to not be ripped limb from limb by the angry mob that would descend on them if they failed, he instead bailed them out, and nobody went to jail. And not just bailed them out, he gave them free money to basically play with.
>>67743385
bumping for more shortposting?
>>67743258
>It's why weed need more regulation.
Why? Clearly nobody cared about the ratings and in the end they got rewarded with tax money.
>>67740051
I read the book a few years ago. I didn't even think it could be made into a movie. There wasn't that much narrative.
>>67743100
>The problem with synthetic CDOs as I understand is that you are not really purchasing bonds from the companies bundled in them but only derivatives
No that was not their problem. Their problem was that the underlying assets ie the CDOs were absolute shit. Thus every synthetic CDO served as an additional catalyst to
crisis created essentially out of nothing.
The biggest question for me is that for every synthetic out there, there wee both people who were beiR the market, CDObeingmarketually there were those who were betting AGAINST it. What I'm interested in is who those people were and if there were so many of them, how didn't their info reach the mainstream before it was too late.
>>67743655
Dubs = checked
>>67743258
You're likely more well versed than I on this topic but I'm going to input regardless.
If the government largely was what caused this why would you want more?
Wouldn't it be the case that the big banks and guys wouldn't have done all of these things if they knew they were going to be held accountable? If they knew they weren't going to get bailed out?
I don't really see why we need any more government power, just less so we have less collusion.
>>67743595
>Obama
Uh, the Wall Street bail-out happened under Bush.
>>67743695
Ratings aren't regulations. Rating agencies aren't the government, they're private firms.
>>67743303
From my little bit of research the big 4 actors in the film are not kikes.
>carrel
>gosling
>bale
>Pitt
All white practicing some form of Christianity
>>67740267
They never said more government was the answer..
>>67743519
I didn't watch the movie alone either. I was with my mates in the cinema. What's your point? If you were curious, all the necessary pieces were handed to you on a silver platter. The movie actually satirized people like you but I'm guessing it went over your head like the rest of it.
>>67743595
Bailing out was the right short term solution. But I agree his handling of the aftermath was terrible
>>67743972
They flat out said more regulation was the answer. When the narration towards the end goes to the "what could've been" talking about regulation, jailing people responsible etc.
>>67743779
>the nose knows
>>67743258
>It was basically just wall street getting out of control. It's why weed need more regulation.
Or why we should have just let them failed. Last time I checked capitalism is about risk and reward, profit and loss; not about rent-seeking crony faggots. Goldman-Sachs paid Moody's to give the AAA, they ended up going bust, but then ended up getting bailed out.
Nothing they did was illegal, per say, but because they had more freedom to "abuse the system" that inherently comes with more risk. Obviously, paying credit rating agencies to give an as-good-as-the-USA-government AAA rating to a shit security is dicey. It backfired.
But, don't worry, Jew Bernanke came to the rescue.
A lot of people forget the economy has a lot of inherent knowledge in it. Even if Wall St. got fucked hard and wasn't bailed out in the end, the knowledge these people retained can now be better allocated to different areas of the economy; new businesses, hedge funds, insurance companies, who can now pick up the scraps and extra talent for extremely under-market value prices.
But, nah. Let's save the banks, lower interest rates to 0% for a decade, and extend unlimited amounts of credit to people who should have lost in the end.
We don't need more regulation. We need less. And we need to let banks and various firms take responsibility for the risks they chose to engage in.
t. economics guy
>I'm gonna get a bank to make me one
>>67743783
>Wouldn't it be the case that the big banks and guys wouldn't have done all of these things if they knew they were going to be held accountable? If they knew they weren't going to get bailed out?
You need to understand that the people responsible for this didn't make their money from the bail-outs, they made their money with the CDOs. The bail-outs just kept the banks afloat, the actual bankers had already raked in their money. Whether or not the banks got their bail-out was irrelevant for these guys, they don't care about the bank.
>>67743378
me too
>>67743773
Wow thank you Huawei for butchering my post. Whatever, I'm out.
>>67743990
I was talking to one guy and mentioned in passing that I didn't quite understand CDOs. Not that I didn't get anything out of the explanation, just that I didn't fully grasp them.
It didn't even have shit to do with you. I know when you see someone you have to immediately degrade them to try and make your pathetic self feel better but no one fucking cares you rude prick.
>>67744139
Oooh another shortposter!
cheers brother
>>67743595
>Obama
I think you need to check your dates, Senpai.
>>67744145
In the end the bank is just a collection of these sorts of employees that were fucking the system, why not let it collapse? Isn't it also true that not every single person left these banks? Surely many that did this dirty stuff we're still with the bank after and during the bailouts.
>>67740051
good concept, mediocre execution. if it wasnt for Dubsman it would be trash
>>67744268
>I know but he is so transparent in his self interest that I kinda respect him. Would I buy a car from him? No.
>>67744131
>Or why we should have just let them failed.
2 big
2 fail
lrn2economies
>>67744131
Banks aren't people. The people in charge of making these decisions, the people who made the most out of this debacle, they aren't hurt all that much by the bank going under. They've made their money.
The people hurt by banks going under are the people who put their savings there, and the lower echelon of employees.
I understand wanting to just let it all tumble down out of revanchism, but practically, it won't improve anything.
>>67744409
>>67744409
oops forgot to add pic.
>>67744363
>In the end the bank is just a collection of these sorts of employees that were fucking the system
It's a lot more than that; savings, pensions, mortgages etc.
>Isn't it also true that not every single person left these banks? Surely many that did this dirty stuff we're still with the bank after and during the bailouts.
Of course. And if the bank had failed, they'd be at another bank, doing the same thing. Because on the short term, they made a lot of money for the bank (and themselves). And the market is incredibly short-sighted.
>>67744455
>fucking A jared!
>>67744413
I have a masters degree in economics.
>2 big 2 fail
Keep believing the Jew hype from Bernanke. I bet you love sucking that AIG cock too?
What did I just say nigger? They fail, the knowledge is retained within the economy, survivors and new businesses pick up scraps for under-market value prices.
Learn to actually economics instead of just repeating verbatim what Bernanke, Yellen, and Obongo tell you.
>>67744573
Kek'd
>>67744145
But none of those bailouts went into the market. They didn't pay any debts or changed their rates. The bad banks still failed.
>>67744641
And an Aussie babe for you m8
>>67741554
>Are you talking about the CRA? That was carter, or am I being stupid and forgetting something?
It was Carter, Clinton and GW expanded the original program.
Mistake right from the beginning.
>>67744570
So you continue propping up the same backs that fuck people like this because the alternative of having people lose their savings is worse?
>at another bank doing the same thing
Wouldn't the banks after seeing such horrid repercussion for doing that dirty shit then act more respectable and not allow their employees to do such things? After all then if the bank wants to stay in business they would need to play fairly and play the right way.
>>67743319
>>67740872
>>67741047
Just off the top of my head the movie ends with Lewis acting like nothing was done afterwards
It's like the retard hasn't heard of Dodd Frank or Basel III
Studies have shown too big to fail subsidy is non-existent at this point
Also the guy loves smearing finance guys - how about blaming the fucking idiots signing on to ARMs to buy houses they couldn't afford
Like I said - Lewis is a hack who likes to appeal to the hoi polloi and sheep of the world who are resentful of the wealth of successful people
t. buysider
>>67744736
>Oooh I'm jacked. I'M JACKED TO THE TITS!
>>67742434
HEY HEY HEY, I SAY WHEN WE SELL! I SAY WHEN WE SELL!
>>67744710
>But none of those bailouts went into the market.
They went into people not losing their savings, for instance.
>The bad banks still failed.
Some did, yes. Depends on what you define as a "bad bank".
>>67744805
This scene was a good laugh
>>67744790
Kek this thread is great we have gotten input already from pretty much every side of this argument.
>>67744451
>People hurt
>Approximately 62% of Americans have less than $1,000 in their savings accounts and 21% don’t even have a savings account, according to a new survey of more than 5,000 adults conducted this month by Google Consumer Survey
>People who lost homes
Shouldn't have believed the "owning a house" American dream meme. Subprime goes both ways. In the end, consumers put their name on the dotted line.
>employees
Labor inputs are are replaceable and easily cycled in and out
>people in charge and at the top
They are hurt by having their banks fail. Now they have to start from square one in a repressed economy with lower rates of return, if any at all instead of back at the top where Bernanke kept them
>>67744805
>it's like I'm financially inside of you right now
>>67744765
>So you continue propping up the same backs that fuck people like this because the alternative of having people lose their savings is worse?
Yes, because the alternative is worse.
>Wouldn't the banks after seeing such horrid repercussion for doing that dirty shit then act more respectable and not allow their employees to do such things?
Ha.
No, banks aren't people. Banks don't make decisions. People do. For the people making these decisions, the bank going under is irrelevant, because they've made their money already.
>>67744829
Top tier post
>>67744008
the bailout was 100% wrong, the system needed that crash and it was artificially prevented. Businesses would shutter, people would starve, and the fraudulent system would be forced to reset under the correct confidence of existent assets. Instead, they propped up fraud with more fraud, so it will inevitably collapse in the same manner but w/ greater effect.
They decided to build in an area prone to landslides, thinking bigger and thicker poles will push the houses high enough. You shouldn't invest in that city, and you can't throw money at it and build skyward forever. You fucking move.
>>67740051
"theyll blame it on the poor and immigrants" oy vey nice try shekelstein
as someone who worked in the morgage business, for a small bank, i saw first hand how they loan out to niggers and spics with 580 FICOs and play hot potato with thr loan
movie was kinda on point, but neglected the huge fed influence, didnt really like how it was just a plot of people repeating things trying to explain it but oh well americans...
>>67743728
>book
Typical, only 1 /pol/ in 100 reads
>>67744955
>Approximately 62% of Americans have less than $1,000 in their savings accounts and 21% don’t even have a savings account, according to a new survey of more than 5,000 adults conducted this month by Google Consumer Survey
Fine, forget savings. That account you get your paycheck deposited into each month? Gone, empty.
>Now they have to start from square one
Having millions upon millions of dollars is hardly "square one".
>>67744984
But from the ceo down you have a list of people who's job it is to keep up and maintain the bank?
If an employee is jeopardizing the stability of your bank you then would want to get rid of him if your bank collapses and you as a ceo (and other positions) then lose jobs.
>>67744790
its on the banks to tell people what they can and can't afford, though, my dad was an investment banker and has shit tons of stories from this whole crisis, and would talk about how they would steer people with 500k income away from million+ houses, apparently greedy fucks didn't care though and just let the economy collapse instead
>>67745015
>>67744869
>>67744455
You guys have no idea how many big short reaction memes I have at my disposal, and how long I have been waiting to dump them.
>feels good man
>>67745174
>But from the ceo down you have a list of people who's job it is to keep up and maintain the bank?
No, you have a lot of people whose job it is to make the bank money.
>If an employee is jeopardizing the stability of your bank you then would want to get rid of him if your bank collapses and you as a ceo (and other positions) then lose jobs.
Why get rid of him if he makes you a lot of money? Sure, maybe in a couple of years the bank collapses, but by then you, the CEO, have already moved on.
>>67745187
Fukn sick cunt m8, the film had some good moments to capture
>>67745294
The bank is going to retain many employees (and as far as I know) a ceo for more than a couple of years, it cannot be so simple as to walk across the street and start back with your same old salary.
It is the ceo and many others job to keep the bank up, that is their money, so even if you have lower or other employees trying to fuck people for some extra would you not have the ceo and other employees who's job is to keep the bank up, telling them to cut it out? Because then they know the bank won't get saved if they start fucking everyone.
>>67745179
What in the fuck is an investment banker doing advising upper middle class income people on their real estate purchases?
I'm being trolled right?
>>67745336
>aussie calling me a cunt
I feel like a true shitposter now!
>>67745506
>my quant
God dammit anon my sides
>>67744868
>They went into people not losing their savings, for instance.
Because the big banks surviving the crash took over the small ones. They didn't use the bailout to lend those banks money as proposed. None of that money left their safe.
>Some did, yes. Depends on what you define as a "bad bank".
Not the ones they created to share the debt. I mean the banks completely fucking their shits up in the game.
YOU HAVE 1 NEW MESSAGE
>i'm suing
I guess you'd say I'm left wing, believe in strong financial regulations, social programs, unions, etc
I did not like the film
Its just a lot of hot air about nothing
To try to make entertaining something very boring they substitute a dramatic presentation with a lot of shouting and obscenities and pop culture references
>>67745506
>My math specialist look at him!
>I'll gibs you a hint, his name is Yen!
>he won a national math competition in CHYNA
>he can't even poo in the loo!
>yes, I'm sure of the memes
>>67745640
i got that one too bby gurl
>tfw no short memes to shortpost
>>67745888
just collect the rare shortposts before this thread is archived
>>67745888
all hail kek
>>67745064
But blacks and Mexicans don't have poor time-future orientation, they defaulted because the banks preyed on them by raising the rates.
>>67745678
>And eveyone's walking around like they're in a goddamn enya video!
>>67746198
I am saving some of these memes my friend
Without permission
JP MORGAN-CHASE!
>I go in for a scan, and it turn out I have a very large....
>>67746382
Epididymus
>>67745481
>it cannot be so simple as to walk across the street and start back with your same old salary
>it cannot be
I'm sorry anon.
>>67745888
And still you get the trips.
>>67746420
Do you have any pictures of it?
>>67740051
watched the screener
was gud
>>67740051
the real problem is with globalization
we're slowly but surely advancing towards postmodern civilization and the ride there isn't going to look pretty
not in economics, not in social relations, not in politics, not in war
>>67746420
I got that. It's no fun.
>>67745888
Late, but I checked
>>67746154
Lmao, as someone who worked with spics and niggers in LA giving loans out at 580, it takes two to tango. I've gotten my comeuppance since then for it, but fuck they're retarded.
>alright your fico is 565
>your income is mostly cash and shoddy
>your debt is high
>you have child support
Ay u rayciss or sumthn? I can pay fo my shit
>well you qualify for this loan but you can't afford it
i don't give a fuk hook me up
You would be surprised how often this happened, 2012 btw.
>>67746700
Checked.
Is it big or short?
>>67746700
Im riveted, do you have any pictures
>>67746420
>>67740051
1. The Anti-Racist, Le Evil Republicans, Pro-Bernie Shit at the end was retarded (the director is a Bernie donor).
2. They STILL emphasized the "man, they were just soooo dumb" angle over the "No, these people are fucking criminal thieves" angle. I know it was fairly balanced in the film, but I'd wager irl that it was a whole lot more fraud and a lot less stupidity.
3. They don't name the jew enough.
4. They make a weird assumption in that the general audience for this film has zero idea about wall street or the crash, which is weird, because I can't imagine people who have zero interest in said topics being a huge audience for the film. Even with Brad Pitt etc etc.
>>67743972
Yeah they do. At the end. More Government regulation, and that everyone would blame the poor brown folk.
>>67746888
Kek is ITT what is his meme magick trying to say?
>>67746287
Don't you fucking steal my rare mark baum memes!
>>67746970
I LOVE MY JOB
>>67746897
>>67746293
>>67746293
JP MORGAN-CHASE!!
JP MORGAN-CHUSS!!
>>67744131
Either/Or.
In Australia we had more regulation (hilariously during the crash, Australian banks were screaming to have regulation lifted because "OY VEY FIRE SALE PRICES ON WORTHLESS COMMODITIES!").
But failing that, not letting them collapse was a mistake.
Japan's banks are basically state welfare cases now, and will remain that way forever.
>>67744139
This was one of the most perplexing parts of the film. I could see this making sense with the Gosling/Carrell story line since he was literally selling his own bank out, but Goldman Sachs and friends creating this option for him, without doing any due diligence...It's either beyond retarded and I mean I-Wouldn't-Hire-These-Guys-To-Flip-Burgers, or the banks were already aware of the situation and knew turning him down would risk exposure.
>>67746907
People still like to be spoon fed.
>>67747170
NO NO NO NO
>>67744790
>how about blaming the fucking idiots signing on to ARMs to buy houses they couldn't afford
how about blaming the fucking idiot banks for giving those mortgages to people who obviously could never afford a house?
>EXCUSE ME
>ZERO
>THERE IS A ZERO PERCENT CHANCE THAT YOUR SUBPRIME LOSSES WILL STOP AT 5%
>>67747218
I dont think many people in the industry even knew about CDO's and synthetic derivatives. 99% of the industry looked no further than the ratings agency's analysis.
>Pic related
>>67744078
>/b/
Cancer
>>67743241
>>67743241
>>67743241
>>67743241
>"strongly encouraged"
By who?
>>67747484
I'm surprized you can still talk with all that kebabian cock shoved down your throat
>>67747475
I just find that impossible to believe.
That's like owning a used car lot and not having your mechanic once over a vehicle, just because a guy brings in a car with a certificate from another mechanic stating it's in great condition.
Furthermore, once a guy comes in asking for a very unique financial product, how would the banks not have looked into what he was pitching?
My thoughts are that they did. And they knew.
The general consensus, or at least the line they push, is that when the mortgages started failing, the banks realized they held turds and then fraudulently began offloading them to customers.
I think they knew long, long, long before the collapse they had turds, and just sold them for as long as they could until the collapse came in.
I think the fraud element started right back when Clinton took the brakes off the mortgage train.
Which is why I think the immigrants crap at the end is letting Democrats off the hook for something they were fully complicit in.
http://imgur.com/a/J4fs4
It's time to go, here is everything I have fellow shortposters
>>67747709
The film makes it clear, as does anyone who watched the collapse happen live.
Although "strongly encouraged" is a very strange/incorrect way of putting it.
The ratings agencies weren't strong armed. They were simply fraudulent. They rated dog shit with AAA's because they were paid to by the sellers.
The banks buying them knew they were dog shit and didn't care, because the slapped on rating meant they could push them onto clients with their hands nominally clean.
>>67740756
Uh, although the characters are embelished, that movie isn't really wrong. The drivel at the end is BS but as far as how finance works, it's mostly accurate.
Do you have any of the jew that invented the loans in the beginning of the movie?
>>67747709
>>"strongly encouraged"
>By who?
The investment banks literally suggested to S&P and Moody's that they rate then AAA. Also the agencies literally take money from them to operate.
Good movie, actually it shows how fucking stupid people are in the real world and how a few became rich out of other people's stupidity at the right time. If you are coherent enough in economics and play around the market you will know something will fail, I bet there are a few couple people who made millions of the oil.
