It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Capitalism: A love Story

page: 1
2
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 12:06 AM
link   
i just watched the michael moore movie capitalism and it really makes this system seem horrible.. banks and companys making millions off their employees life insurace. they called them "dead peasents". everyone was spending the bailout money on spas and #..some guys all just got to pocket a million of the bailout money. so many things wrong with the system..and almost nearly have the young adults they polled were for socialism. so when are things going to change?

it was a great movie though.




posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 12:11 AM
link   
Many people with intelligence don't bother watching Micheal Moore "documentaries" (crap) because they are incredibly biased and one-sided.



posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 12:16 AM
link   
Michael Moore focuses on the criminal corporations, which has at least some merit.

What Michael Moore ardently refuses to focus on are the regulations, mandates, and other federal laws that make our current system possible.

For example, the health insurance industry is a creature of government's own creation.

Michael Moore refuses to accept this fact.

Health insurance agents are forbidden from selling policies across state lines for Christ sake. I bet Moore doesn't cover that in his movie.

The insurance industry is one of the most heavily regulated sectors of our economy. As Michael Moore points out in his movies, the absolutely epic amounts of regulation have done nothing to prevent fraud and abuse. In most cases the laws are written to make the abuse possible in the first place.

Government's job is to PUNISH fraud, not prevent it. The market will make sure the bad people go out of business all on its own. It is government that makes it possible for them to be in business in the first place.



posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 12:30 AM
link   
Roger and Me
The Big One
Sicko
Capitalism A Love Stoy

those are his best and most truthful films. The Big One is as depressing as ever as nothing has changed since the Clinton/Bush election

Also, I notice most folks who tend to bash Moore never actually sat down and watched his films.



posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 12:35 AM
link   
I thought the movie took a while to warm up but it is worth watching for the end scene involving an armored car and police tape.
2nd


 
Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com
 



posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 01:10 AM
link   
That movie was much better than the rest of the mindless dreck that is out there passing for entertainment these days...

The lady rep from Ohio that told residents to be squatters in their homes, right on the House Floor... I found myself wishing she was my Rep.

Also, I have to say that I was truly appalled to find out that Airline pilots make less money than my daughter did when she worked at Dunkin' Donuts on base. Goodness Sakes!!

All I could think of was how I always thought pilots made bank... it made me want to cry for them, as I know they have a huge pile of student loan debt....

It really makes me not want to get on a plane again, wondering if the poor pilot has a second, or even a third, job so he doesn't have to get Food Stamps like some of them do. I was shocked!! As much as airline tickets cost, that is utter crap!! Pennies for Pilots?????



posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 01:18 AM
link   
"Michael Moore" has sadly become one of those "hot button" words. Simply mention the name and suddenly you are spiralling end-over-end into a one-dimensional, punch-and-judy-style ideological argument.

I agree with those who say he's a bit one-sided. I also agree with those who find some truth in his movies.

Regarding that particular film, perhaps the best concrete outcome is that it drew attention to a hideous for-profit child incarceration program, and at least some of the psychopaths in charge have been brought to justice. Simply knowing that is worth the price of admission or rental many times over, IMHO.

He's also correct that capitalism is broken. It is. Now, as to what should be done about it, that's a thornier issue. Still, if the movie makes people think, then its worthwhile in my opinion, even if you end up disagreeing. Sure beats two wasted hours watching Beverly Hills Cop III or whatever.



posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 01:26 AM
link   
post removed because the user has no concept of manners

Click here for more information.



posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 01:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by thegoodearth
All I could think of was how I always thought pilots made bank... it made me want to cry for them, as I know they have a huge pile of student loan debt....

It really makes me not want to get on a plane again, wondering if the poor pilot has a second, or even a third, job so he doesn't have to get Food Stamps like some of them do. I was shocked!! As much as airline tickets cost, that is utter crap!! Pennies for Pilots?????


Just wait until doctors and surgeons start making less than taxi-cab drivers, like in many ex-Eastern Bloc nations.



posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 01:45 AM
link   
reply to post by SeventhSeal
 


Micheal Moore, in fact lied about not being able to get an interview with Roger Smith in the film Roger and Me. I clearly remember reading a transcript Premier Magazine printed years ago of a stockholders meeting where Micheal Moore was granted an interview. One of the things I remember about that transcript is that when Micheal Moore asked Roger Smith why he abandoned the people of Flint Michigan, Smith answered that GM was not accountable to the people of Flint Michigan, that GM was accountable to their stockholders, and that the employees of the plant in Flint, Michigan were bleeding GM dry. Is it any wonder that this interview wound up on the cutting room floor?

videosift.com...

Here is an interesting Fact sheet regarding the lies that Micheal Moore tells:

www.businessandmedia.org...



posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 01:48 AM
link   
reply to post by silent thunder
 


Thankfully we never go to the doctor around here. I use herbal remedies from the Health food store if the kids actually catch a cold, which is rare, and we use lavender, tea tree, and eucalyptus essential oils, blessed incense, etc... Very rarely ever get sick in this house.

Surgery. No thank you.



posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 01:50 AM
link   
reply to post by thegoodearth
 


So let me get this straight: If your kid broke his/her leg, or got pancreatic cancer, you would use a herbal remedy instead of going to a doctor?

Not to derail the thread, but...



posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 02:44 AM
link   
Why are we blaming capitalism when its really corporatism ?

Hey Kids are you ready for communism ? I think that is the issue the movie is leading peoples to accept as a solution...in the future, even if it does not spell this out.

Hegelian Dialectics being played out in the movies.

The same argument could be made about Sicko, paving the way for Obamacare.



posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 02:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by State of Mind
Many people with intelligence don't bother watching Micheal Moore "documentaries" (crap) because they are incredibly biased and one-sided.


No, intelligent people dont disregard things based on their label. They disregard based on its content. So you actually have to watch it to have an opinion about it.

You are welcome to join us.



[edit on 4-8-2010 by Copernicus]



posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 03:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by zzombie
Why are we blaming capitalism when its really corporatism ?

.






Corporatism doesn't exist in a vacum, it needed capitalism to get it to the point where the capitalist could centralize more power and buy off your elected officials. I can't understand why people can't grasp the concept that corporations are just the natural evolution of Capitalism. Corporations are capitalist entities run by capitalists to gain more capital.



posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 03:45 AM
link   
reply to post by woodwardjnr
 



The fact that the politicians are bought off is exactly what makes corporatism. Also corporatism existed prior to the 18th century, before the classical liberal movement more or less started by Adam Smith. Except back then it was known as "Mercantilism."

Also Corporations are a creation of the state. They are legal/contractual mechanisms for the creation and operation of a firm where the capital invested is managed on behalf of the shareholders by directors and officers. I suspect such arrangements would arise in a true free market, however as they currently stand a State charter is required to form one.



posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 03:55 AM
link   
reply to post by woodwardjnr
 





Corporatism doesn't exist in a vacum, it needed capitalism to get it to the point


Corporatism existed long before capitalism did. Stora Enso is one of the first chartered companies known to history, and was formed in 1347.


The Swedish copper mining company Stora Kopparberg ("great copper mountain") in Falun was granted a charter from King Magnus IV of Sweden in 1347, although the first share in the company (granting the Bishop of Västerås 12.5% ownership) dates from 1288. Some claim this to be the oldest existing corporation or limited liability company in the world.


The Dutch East India Company was established in 1602.


The Dutch East India Company (Vereenigde Oost-Indische Compagnie or VOC in Dutch, literally "United East Indian Company") was a chartered company established in 1602, when the States-General of the Netherlands granted it a 21-year monopoly to carry out colonial activities in Asia. It was the first multinational corporation in the world and the first company to issue stock.[1] It was also arguably the world's first megacorporation, possessing quasi-governmental powers, including the ability to wage war, negotiate treaties, coin money, and establish colonies


Capitalism certainly did not exist in 1347, and by 1602 when The Dutch India East Company was first chartered, it was mercantilism not capitalism that was beginning to take root:


Mercantilism is an economic theory, thought to be a form of economic nationalism,[1] that holds that the prosperity of a nation is dependent upon its supply of capital, and that the global volume of international trade is "unchangeable". Economic assets (or capital) are represented by bullion (gold, silver, and trade value) held by the state, which is best increased through a positive balance of trade with other nations (exports minus imports).


Economic nationalism is not capitalism, and the monopoly that was guaranteed to The Dutch East India Company is not at all a part of capitalist theory. One of the primary tenets of capitalism is massive competition, and monopolies are antithetical to capitalist theory. Corporatism is not capitalism, nor did it ever need capitalism in order to exist. What corporatism needs in order to exist are charters. Charters are granted by governments. In a free market system, such as capitalism, no one needs a grant from government in order to do business.



posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 04:07 AM
link   
reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux
 


So how has Corporatism established itself in The United States? Surely Wal- Mart, Exxon Mobil, General Electric, some of America's leading Corps are Capitalist in nature?



posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 04:29 AM
link   
reply to post by woodwardjnr
 





So how has Corporatism established itself in The United States? Surely Wal- Mart, Exxon Mobil, General Electric, some of America's leading Corps are Capitalist in nature?


Corporatism in the United States of America has been established in the same way it is anywhere else, through a grant of charter. Wal-Mart, Exxon Mobil, General Electric, and America's leading corporations are not at all capitalist in nature. These corporations hate competition, they expect all free marketeers to be licensed just like they, they lobby Congress for continual regulations, in spite of what the corporate media likes to portray. Corporations love regulation because regulation halts massive competition.

There are three basic tenets to capitalism:

1.) A free and unregulated market.

2.) Massive competition.

3.) A currency backed by wealth that all can agree upon its value.

Not one of these tenets is in play in the so called "free market system" being enforced in The United States of America. Corporatism is not capitalism, but I assure you corporations love that you think so. Anything the corporatist can do to undermine the belief in capitalism they will surely do, because if the majority of the people actually embraced free market principles, corporations would have a hell of time competing.



posted on Aug, 4 2010 @ 04:42 AM
link   
But if I were a capitalist and wanted to own more capital then I would buy more business's, Then with the influence my capital brings I would influence those in power (the government), so they would allow me to make more capital.



new topics

top topics



 
2
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join