4 ms·

Shows the problem of capitalism. Eventually it all ends up as a big pozi scheme where it is all about artifically inflating bubbles and make sure you are the no

Shows the problem of capitalism. Eventually it all ends up as a big pozi scheme where it is all about artifically inflating bubbles and make sure you are the not the last one out when it bursts. Afterwards tax payers can pickup the bill. I gues the movie executives can pick some tax payer paid bonuses like American bankers in 2008.

mojomark 8y ago
Concur 100%. This story is just another indicator of a decades-old deeper global corporate philisophical crisis that's leading the global economy down a deep dark rabbit hole. Please see my comment; I feel strongly that this is an important conversation that HN (and other leaders building pur future) need to be having.
Dylan16807 8y ago
Even without capitalism, even without money at all, if you want your day job to continue to be "making movies" then there is an incentive to cheat the numbers. And it's not really 'tax payers' that pay the bill here, it's 'stock owners'. There's no reason to bail out a movie company.
- mojomark 8y ago
  > Even without capitalism, even without money at all, if you want your day job to continue to be "making movies" then there is an incentive to cheat the numbers. One probably shouldn't be 'making movies' if fake sales are necessary because nobody wants to watch. > And it's not really 'tax payers' that pay the bill here, it's 'stock owners'. There's no reason to bail out a movie company. I don't know how it works in China, but often in the U.S., when people put their life savings into junk bonds (or an overly risky house mortgage) that inevitably go bust, they declare banckruptcy and ultimately tax debt is forgiven or severely cut, or tex revenues are funneled to them in the form of wellfare to help them stay afloat. So, yes, when a commercial entity fails for whatever reason (even criminally bad decisions), the tax payers are the ones left paying for the social safety net to keep the afloat.

mojomark 8y ago

Concur 100%. This story is just another indicator of a decades-old deeper global corporate philisophical crisis that's leading the global economy down a deep dark rabbit hole. Please see my comment; I feel strongly that this is an important conversation that HN (and other leaders building pur future) need to be having.

Dylan16807 8y ago

Even without capitalism, even without money at all, if you want your day job to continue to be "making movies" then there is an incentive to cheat the numbers. And it's not really 'tax payers' that pay the bill here, it's 'stock owners'. There's no reason to bail out a movie company.

mojomark 8y ago
> Even without capitalism, even without money at all, if you want your day job to continue to be "making movies" then there is an incentive to cheat the numbers. One probably shouldn't be 'making movies' if fake sales are necessary because nobody wants to watch. > And it's not really 'tax payers' that pay the bill here, it's 'stock owners'. There's no reason to bail out a movie company. I don't know how it works in China, but often in the U.S., when people put their life savings into junk bonds (or an overly risky house mortgage) that inevitably go bust, they declare banckruptcy and ultimately tax debt is forgiven or severely cut, or tex revenues are funneled to them in the form of wellfare to help them stay afloat. So, yes, when a commercial entity fails for whatever reason (even criminally bad decisions), the tax payers are the ones left paying for the social safety net to keep the afloat.