I wouldn't expect that it would change your world view (you have quite strong conviction already) but you actually might enjoy the movie and appreciate (as many do here on SS, myself included) that it can contribute to some growing awareness of issues in the financial sector. Personally I think the fact it is getting some mainstream exposure is fantastic and contributing to "the conversation" about these bigger issues. I took my wife to see it and she was shocked (and saddened) by it, but she suddenly started to understand why I have been banging on about the broken system for the last 6 months. Similarly my parents saw it and it gave me an opening to question why they trusted their financial "advisor" so explicitly - even though he's never really provided them any advice (just skimmed his commissions) and sat on his ar$e while their significant BHP shareholding dropped over 40% in 5 months.... At the risk of triggering a religious debate, I am curious about whether there is any regulation against fraud in your version of utopia? What about conflict of interest? I agree with your free market views for the most part, but in my book cronyism develops and thrives when there is nothing in place to stop, or deter it. There has to be some kind of rule of law to protect the freedom of the markets.
Firstly, if you think I am promoting a Utopian system, then you are mistaken. There is no such thing. Of course there would be rules and laws, and there would be structures that would police these rules and laws and courts to pass rulings on disputes. Start here: http://forums.silverstackers.com/topic-62314-anything-that-s-peaceful.html And if you join as a paid member of SilverStacker, you'll have the pleasure of being able to read through this, which touches on the issue of government v anarchy: http://forums.silverstackers.com/to...cracy-by-frank-karsten-and-karel-beckman.html You could also do a search for anything by forum member "newtosilver" who is an anti-Libertarian and read what he posts and the responses by the libertarians on this forum. Some of the discussions are a hoot, especially the ones about ice cream, hyenas and taking your flame-thrower shopping. But start with the first link. :lol:
Utopia was probably not the right word for me to use. I should have stuck with world view It sure does sound like some form of regulation I'll have a read of that thread. It looks like 5 pages of hard slog but I'll see how far I get...
I saw this yesterday and completely agree with your wife. I felt like I was being slapped, and it was, I thought, a rather shocking film. More brutal than Margin Call and it made me furious, depressed and worried that I might not have prepared enough. I'm recommending it all over the place. We, as society, seem inured to massive theft and psychopathic behaviours. The financial 'industry' is a blight upon society. At one point Brad Pitt's character says, in effect, 'stop cheering you've made yourself rich and now 40,000 people will die for every one percent rise in unemployment rates'. The human cost conveyed in this film is horrifying. The final slap was that the Christian Bale's character is trying to looking at 'water' as his next investment vehicle, by my reading it means 'food' since that is where the water mostly ends up for his purposes. Shocking and required viewing for everyone with a jot of concern for their financial future. and p.s. if it's correct concerning 40,000 die for each one percent in employment and employment is estimated to be, in real terms 20-30 percent in USA and quite a few other countries....... I now understand why Max Keiser refers to Dimon of JPMorgan as a mass murderer.
How does it compare with THE WOLF OF WALL ST??? I really enjoyed the big bad wolf movie. Regards Errol 43
I'm going to have to watch it and then argue with you about the privatisation of water rights that would inevitably lead to the enhancement of the value of water resources and an accompanying transferrable quota system that encourages sustainable use and conservation practices with regard to the future in mind. Moving in that direction: http://www.waterfind.com.au/water-trading-explained/
My concern is not him investing, but the potentials inherent in his reasons for being so sure water is an issue that has the sort of inevitability he foresaw in the housing crisis.
I enjoyed Margin Call more than WOWS and Big Short more than Margin Call, even as I watched as one watches a particularly repellent something crawl from a drain. I think you'll enjoy this one. A few quotes will show the differences: Mark Baum has just had the subprime loan creations explained to him. On the consequences of their short bet winning: and the 'message'
They tried that in South America. It was so disastrous that half a dozen countries re-wrote their constitutions to prevent it from happening again.
The South American examples that I know had corrupt processes that stole pre-existing water rights from locals without compensation.
http://www.alternet.org/story/84145/latin_america%3A_why_there's_a_water_crisis_in_the_most_water-rich_region
Watched it and enjoyed, very entertaining, especially Christian Bale's "emotionally detached investor" character. Am I outraged, annoyed, mildly shocked? No. I got over that in regards to the market traders a long time ago. I save those emotions for the perpetrators of more heinous crimes and their supporters.
Most of the more intricate details of the financials went over my head, and I'm no Selena Gomez, so I'm struggling to see what could possibly be the counter investment? :/
Food is where the water is the most immediate return I'd say. If he's investing heavily into food production (land with water) drought and famine from the climate change issue combined with pollution might be what he's seen. Either way it's unpleasant.
Water is a key component to energy production, both electrical and bio-chemical. Beyond our need for it to quench thirst and grow food, very few (if any) sources of electrical energy don't need water to manufacture, maintain cooling or transport. http://www.ucsusa.org/clean_energy/...er-use/water-energy-electricity-overview.html It's not a renewable resource, though it is reusable, in a way. Radioactively contaminated water can continue to be reused for cooling in a nuclear power plant, but isn't much good for making coffee anymore. Some forms of pollution are possible to clean out of the water. Like poo. https://www.choice.com.au/food-and-drink/drinks/water/articles/recycled-drinking-water Desalination is also possible, and we have plenty of salt water to spare. But it takes energy to purify the water. So the questions are, -what percentage of our water supply is able to be purified for use in agriculture and consumption? -how much of it do we need to generate the electricity required for purification? -how badly polluted will the water used in this energy generation be? Most importantly, can we purify it faster than we pollute it with the current energy technology in use? Beyond the petrodollar will be the hydro-dollar.
