MovieChat Forums > Capitalism: A Love Story (2009) Discussion > Who is to blame: Stupid people or greedy...

Who is to blame: Stupid people or greedy people?

posted 13 years ago by RicemanDan
22 replies | jump to latest

The question that really rouses me from watching this film, is who is more to blame for the economic meltdown. The people who re-mortgaged and were too stupid to understand that borrowing what you can't afford to pay back is simply not a good option, or those who preyed off such stupidity to make money, yet only in the short-term, with an obvious impending back-lash from such pseudo-economics.

Can you have a democracy if the representation are mostly incapable of making simple correct/fundamental decisions? In the meltdowns case, the regulators for the banks seemed key. I found William Black (the ex bank-regulator) to be the most incisive and articulate in the film and feel that if more people like he were at the heart of the decision making regarding finance/wall-street, things could not have spiralled. I think his dam analogy was spot on as well.

It is a shame Moore is so biased, because, whilst he is clearly correct in the main assertions, they lose credibility with his doctrinaire approach (such as repeatedly asking bishops/men of the cloth about capitalism). Mention that large proportions of people are simply not equipped to make financial decisions/resist propaganda and come up with solutions to that.

[–] Druff 13 years ago

The stupid people were simply operating the assumption that the system was still set up the way it always had been in the past, ever since regulations were put in place to protect the economy after The Great Depression: that banks were careful to only give loans to people who could pay them back. The banks never made a public announcement that they weren't doing that any more and that instead they were giving loans to anybody who asked for them, no matter what, period. "Ignorant" is more apt than stupid.

The greedy people purposefully made this change to the system knowing full well that it would open the floodgates of ignorant people taking out loans that they wouldn't have taken if they knew the details. The details were not forthcoming. It was a calculated predatory act by the greedy.

[–] estocade 12 years ago

RicemanDan,
People borrowing not thinking about the future is very natural, people want to live NOW and not wait till another year or even tomorrow.
An animal gains weight so that it could feel safe about the future TODAY.
It is natural to be AFRAID that the future might not come. As the saying goes "Do not put off till tomorrow what you can do TODAY".
This is something that is HARDWIRED into our brains.
It is not even significant whether the creditors were aware of the outcome. Deceitfulness is a proverbial trait of our nature and one must be aware of this.

Blaming the person next to you won't solve anything. In fact it will only exacerbate things even more.

The real issue is that we are blind to see the faults inside ourselves. If we do not know who we are the how can we plan further than today?

[–] royu2 11 years ago

American's are totally blinded by their patriotism, there really needs to be another movement like in the 60's to balance it out but as far as I know none exist.

If the people give Wall Street a free pass to do whatever they want, can you blame them for taking it? The American people need to stand up for themselves but they won't because they are so brainwashed.

I'm Australian and while Australia is no where near as corrupt as America it could end up that way. And it's the same problem, Australians are really bad at standing up for themselves politically, it's only a matter of time before big business exploit it here too.

[–] marka99-1 11 years ago

I'll add the saying that with great power comes great responsibility. Those in power today have no interest in responsibility. We're in a sad era of the money grab no matter the consequences.

"Apes don't read philosophy." "Yes they do, Otto. They just don't understand it."

[–] gabby_bm 11 years ago

Nothing wrong with a money-grab. I like money as much as the next person. With more power I'd get more of it for myself. But it's this business about having "no interest in responsibility" that is concerning and it extends from the bottom of the pyramid all the way to the top. Not only personal responsibility and responsibility toward our families, but responsibility within society and for our planet.

money is no substitute for humanity.

"De gustibus non disputandum est"
#3

[–] evildead2099 9 years ago

Both.

Banks acted in a greedy and irresponsible manner because they knew they would be bailed out. There have been numerous instances in the past where the American government stole from the public to prop up failing commercial banks, so the banks internalized the idea that they were 'too big to fail.' They also reinforced that mentality in politicians by bribing them.

Way too many people buy more things that they can't afford, and way more than they truly need. That's simple irresponsibility on the public's part. If you can't afford to pay off a home in reasonable time, DON'T MORTGAGE ONE!

Some organizations that claimed to lobby on behalf of the public, such as A.C.O.R.N., are to blame for pressuring the government into passing laws that literally forced banks into giving mortgages to people who were blatantly 'high risk' homebuyers.

[–] cineastFGD 8 years ago

Well, as excessive greed is a form of stupidity, in the end it will always bite back, the question is self-evident.

However, I think what you are asking is whether or not we should regulate markets with asymmetric information more or less. And the answer from an economist's point of view is a clear YES. Markets where access to information is so biased - like on the lenders market described in the film - do fail eventually, as we saw in 2008. They simply collapse at some point when enough market participants start to loose trust in the product(s).

Hence, contrary to what the Golden Saxons try to tell people, state regulations are necessary in order for mortgage markets to work properly. The only reason banks try to repeal all regulations again is because they think they are going to be bailed out by tax payers' money again when they have *beep* up things again. Simple as that.