5 ms·

The Big Short - "It's possible that we are in a completely fraudulent system."

by bo1024 6y ago

bradleyjg 6y ago
I could live with the libertarian ideal of “regulation” via consequences imposed by market forces and I could live with the New Left ideal of regulation via, well, regulation. But no consequences and no regulations is insane. Our entire economy is like a mining company that steadily mines a gold seam, paying out healthy dividends and executive bonuses all the while and then as soon as the seam is mined out declares bankruptcy leaving toxic waste cleanup and employee pensions for the government to take care of. We don’t just allow ourselves to be exploited by sociopaths, we actively seek it out.
- Traster 6y ago
  I think what you're seeing is the implementation of the libertarian ideal. No regulation when companies are doing well, but no stomach to suffer losses when they aren't.
  - snikeris 6y ago
    Why would this be anyone’s ideal? You are not being charitable towards libertarians.
    - Traster 6y ago
      I'm not saying what's happening is the libertarian ideal, I'm saying what's happening is what happens when the libertarian ideal is implemented. A libertarian may want to not bail out big businesses when times are bad - they may truly believe that ideally you just let the bad businesses fail and the market is stronger for it. The problem is that in reality, you're talking about letting voters take a huge amount of pain a few months before an election. So as a result you end up in a situation where you can have a laissez faire approach to regulations when the economy is booming, but you can't actually allow all the people who vote for you to lose their jobs.
      - darepublic 6y ago
        That's fair but also fair to consider what practically happens when big government philosophy is implemented.
        FactolSarin 6y ago
        People get good quality healthcare and spend less doing it?
        Jotra7 6y ago
        Seems to work fine in Europe.
        take_a_breath 6y ago
        We could just study any other wealthy country, no?
    - kwhitefoot 6y ago
      > You are not being charitable towards libertarians. Why would anyone, including other libertarians, be charitable toward them?
    - whynotminot 6y ago
      Then they're being treated exactly as they prefer--no charity all bootstraps baby! :P
      - hirundo 6y ago
        Libertarians have no problem with voluntary charity, just with compulsory charity.
  - 34679 6y ago
    That's cronyism, and has no relation to Libertarianism whatsoever. Libertarians will never support government bailouts, as the only way they are possible is by taking money from someone more productive to give to someone less productive, backed by the threat of force. Nothing Libertarian about that.
    - Ididntdothis 6y ago
      Libertarianism is the free market version of Communism. Maybe it will be good if it reaches a pure implementation but in reality it has never been achieved and probably never will be. If Libertarianism isn’t implemented fully then it will almost for sure devolve into cronyism. It can only work if there is no way to influence government or courts to do things your way. It also can’t really deal with things like pandemics or probably even war. In a pandemic you would have a lot of people die before the truly free market figures out which treatments work and which are scam.
      - 34679 6y ago
        In the US, it was the catastrophic failure of government that led to inadequate testing and fears of ventilator shortages. Businesses stepped up with tests that work and factories shifted production to ventilators and PPE to rapidly make up the shortfall.
        Ididntdothis 6y ago
        Do you think business would have planned for this? I agree that government has failed but I doubt business would have done any better. Who would pay for stockpiling supplies?
        34679 6y ago
        The ones that did plan for this would have made an obscene profit, so that would lead me to believe that some businesses would indeed plan for this. But I'll admit I have no way of knowing.
  - bilbo0s 6y ago
    I would retort that real libertarians would be very much in favor of consequences, but of course that would be to fall victim to the No True Scotsman fallacy. I think the best we can say in the current environment is that libertarianism is a philosophy that a large number of elected officials promote for the purposes of getting votes, but also a philosophy that most don't really have the stomach for when the excrement hits the fan. Maybe there really are no libertarians in foxholes?
    - tekstar 6y ago
      If you look at the actions of the elected officials you will see a pattern. libertarianism for YOU socialism for ME
      - dantheman 6y ago
        No elected official is libertarian. So I don't know why you would think that. What we have is, those in power take from those that aren't.
  - qeternity 6y ago
    What you've described is the antithesis of libertarianism.
- apatters 6y ago
  Nothing in modern US politics comes even close to libertarianism. Libertarianism opposes all regulation of business unless it is in concert with the non-aggression principle (i.e. don't kill, steal, commit fraud, etc.). Libertarian thinking on antitrust is that it's unnecessary because there is no such thing as a natural monopoly; monopolies are the result of government regulation. Eliminate the regulations that privilege certain businesses over others, and competition will ensure an efficient market. In reality what we have in the US is a political class which constantly molds regulation to further benefit the shareholders of big businesses. Sometimes they remove regulations to this end, but much more frequently they create or alter them. There's no philosophical bent behind this at all, it's just the strong using government as a tool to oppress the weak (exactly what libertarianism warns us about). Nobody has ever pandered to libertarians when trying to justify their policies, so I have no idea why people like to blame them. To me a sign that the libertarians are on to something is that no government has ever dared to try it. Governments are comprised of powerful people and if they did they would lose all that power...
  - xtian 6y ago
    > In reality what we have in the US is a political class which constantly molds regulation to further benefit the shareholders of big businesses. The political class you are talking about serves specific masters. They also mold ideological discourse which is where modern libertarianism comes from in the first place. Go check who's funding all of these libertarian speakers and institutes.
    - dantheman 6y ago
      So libertarian are in power? Libertarians are non-interventionists, so clearly not effecting foreign policy. Against gov spending and gov debt, clearly not winning there. We are making progress on civil rights, gay marriage, ending the drug war. The size and scope of government continues to increase every year, so I don't see how anyone could call that libertarian.
      - xtian 6y ago
- paulryanrogers 6y ago
  Privatize profits and socialize costs
bo1024 6y ago
This quote was at the point in the film where banks were keeping prices artificially high until they sold their positions off. Similar is "Banks that bundled bad debt and bet against it" https://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/24/business/24trading.html https://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/24/business/24trading.html Basically my take-away was: don't bet against the house, even if it's crumbling. Because they won't agree you've won the bet until they resell it off to some other sucker; or they'll declare bankruptcy and you won't get paid; or they'll get bailed out and you'll be wrong even though you were right. [I'm not a finance person, so this is all a layperson's interpretation.]
amiga_500 6y ago
I like the bit where (and maybe it's in the same scene), he says: > You still believe in the system, don't you

The Big Short - "It's possible that we are in a completely fraudulent system."

by bo1024 6y ago

The Big Short - "It's possible that we are in a completely fraudulent system."

I could live with the libertarian ideal of “regulation” via consequences imposed by market forces and I could live with the New Left ideal of regulation via, well, regulation. But no consequences and no regulations is insane. Our entire economy is like a mining company that steadily mines a gold seam, paying out healthy dividends and executive bonuses all the while and then as soon as the seam is mined out declares bankruptcy leaving toxic waste cleanup and employee pensions for the government to take care of. We don’t just allow ourselves to be exploited by sociopaths, we actively seek it out.

Traster 6y ago
I think what you're seeing is the implementation of the libertarian ideal. No regulation when companies are doing well, but no stomach to suffer losses when they aren't.
- snikeris 6y ago
  Why would this be anyone’s ideal? You are not being charitable towards libertarians.
  - Traster 6y ago
    I'm not saying what's happening is the libertarian ideal, I'm saying what's happening is what happens when the libertarian ideal is implemented. A libertarian may want to not bail out big businesses when times are bad - they may truly believe that ideally you just let the bad businesses fail and the market is stronger for it. The problem is that in reality, you're talking about letting voters take a huge amount of pain a few months before an election. So as a result you end up in a situation where you can have a laissez faire approach to regulations when the economy is booming, but you can't actually allow all the people who vote for you to lose their jobs.
    - darepublic 6y ago
      That's fair but also fair to consider what practically happens when big government philosophy is implemented.
      - FactolSarin 6y ago
        People get good quality healthcare and spend less doing it?
      - Jotra7 6y ago
        Seems to work fine in Europe.
      - take_a_breath 6y ago
        We could just study any other wealthy country, no?
  - kwhitefoot 6y ago
    > You are not being charitable towards libertarians. Why would anyone, including other libertarians, be charitable toward them?
  - whynotminot 6y ago
    Then they're being treated exactly as they prefer--no charity all bootstraps baby! :P
    - hirundo 6y ago
      Libertarians have no problem with voluntary charity, just with compulsory charity.
- 34679 6y ago
  That's cronyism, and has no relation to Libertarianism whatsoever. Libertarians will never support government bailouts, as the only way they are possible is by taking money from someone more productive to give to someone less productive, backed by the threat of force. Nothing Libertarian about that.
  - Ididntdothis 6y ago
    Libertarianism is the free market version of Communism. Maybe it will be good if it reaches a pure implementation but in reality it has never been achieved and probably never will be. If Libertarianism isn’t implemented fully then it will almost for sure devolve into cronyism. It can only work if there is no way to influence government or courts to do things your way. It also can’t really deal with things like pandemics or probably even war. In a pandemic you would have a lot of people die before the truly free market figures out which treatments work and which are scam.
    - 34679 6y ago
      In the US, it was the catastrophic failure of government that led to inadequate testing and fears of ventilator shortages. Businesses stepped up with tests that work and factories shifted production to ventilators and PPE to rapidly make up the shortfall.
      - Ididntdothis 6y ago
        Do you think business would have planned for this? I agree that government has failed but I doubt business would have done any better. Who would pay for stockpiling supplies?
        34679 6y ago
        The ones that did plan for this would have made an obscene profit, so that would lead me to believe that some businesses would indeed plan for this. But I'll admit I have no way of knowing.
- bilbo0s 6y ago
  I would retort that real libertarians would be very much in favor of consequences, but of course that would be to fall victim to the No True Scotsman fallacy. I think the best we can say in the current environment is that libertarianism is a philosophy that a large number of elected officials promote for the purposes of getting votes, but also a philosophy that most don't really have the stomach for when the excrement hits the fan. Maybe there really are no libertarians in foxholes?
  - tekstar 6y ago
    If you look at the actions of the elected officials you will see a pattern. libertarianism for YOU socialism for ME
    - dantheman 6y ago
      No elected official is libertarian. So I don't know why you would think that. What we have is, those in power take from those that aren't.
- qeternity 6y ago
  What you've described is the antithesis of libertarianism.
apatters 6y ago
Nothing in modern US politics comes even close to libertarianism. Libertarianism opposes all regulation of business unless it is in concert with the non-aggression principle (i.e. don't kill, steal, commit fraud, etc.). Libertarian thinking on antitrust is that it's unnecessary because there is no such thing as a natural monopoly; monopolies are the result of government regulation. Eliminate the regulations that privilege certain businesses over others, and competition will ensure an efficient market. In reality what we have in the US is a political class which constantly molds regulation to further benefit the shareholders of big businesses. Sometimes they remove regulations to this end, but much more frequently they create or alter them. There's no philosophical bent behind this at all, it's just the strong using government as a tool to oppress the weak (exactly what libertarianism warns us about). Nobody has ever pandered to libertarians when trying to justify their policies, so I have no idea why people like to blame them. To me a sign that the libertarians are on to something is that no government has ever dared to try it. Governments are comprised of powerful people and if they did they would lose all that power...
- xtian 6y ago
  > In reality what we have in the US is a political class which constantly molds regulation to further benefit the shareholders of big businesses. The political class you are talking about serves specific masters. They also mold ideological discourse which is where modern libertarianism comes from in the first place. Go check who's funding all of these libertarian speakers and institutes.
  - dantheman 6y ago
    So libertarian are in power? Libertarians are non-interventionists, so clearly not effecting foreign policy. Against gov spending and gov debt, clearly not winning there. We are making progress on civil rights, gay marriage, ending the drug war. The size and scope of government continues to increase every year, so I don't see how anyone could call that libertarian.
    - xtian 6y ago
paulryanrogers 6y ago
Privatize profits and socialize costs

bo1024 6y ago

This quote was at the point in the film where banks were keeping prices artificially high until they sold their positions off. Similar is "Banks that bundled bad debt and bet against it" https://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/24/business/24trading.html https://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/24/business/24trading.html Basically my take-away was: don't bet against the house, even if it's crumbling. Because they won't agree you've won the bet until they resell it off to some other sucker; or they'll declare bankruptcy and you won't get paid; or they'll get bailed out and you'll be wrong even though you were right. [I'm not a finance person, so this is all a layperson's interpretation.]

amiga_500 6y ago

I like the bit where (and maybe it's in the same scene), he says: > You still believe in the system, don't you