Brad Pitt schools two young traders | The Big Short | CLIP
Vložit
- čas přidán 11. 08. 2022
- Brad Pitt sees the big picture of the trading business
🔥 Buy or rent the movie NOW ➤ www.amazon.com/Big-Short-Chri...
📢 Don't miss this video ➤ • 🔥 Don't miss this!
✔️ Follow us on Facebook ➤ / 204568612956950
© Paramount Pictures -
#BoxofficeMovies #GreatMoments - Krátké a kreslené filmy
Hi everyone! What grade (out of 10) would you give this video?
9
8
10
8
10
My headcanon is that Steve Carell didn't know how any of this happened, the script taught him it for the first time, and his character's shock and outrage is genuine.
I still dont get it, but thats the point right, bets on the bet on the bet wrapped up in a bet...50:1 from the base...what a poop show.
The CDO manager did great acting.
Those intermittent smirks are on point
5 if you use a helicopter
seems like Ryu fron Street Fighter got a business degree after helping to take down bison
He is brilliant at playing scum bags.
Just top notch chew talking
Brad PItt played his character so damn good in this movie.
He’s one of the greatest actors of our time.
He can play a plethora of roles and you forget it’s even Pitt playing the part, sure, he’ll always look like Brad Pitt, but his aura changes for each role.
@@shanedjoy8954 agree! But a lot of people neglect that only because he is too handsome ~_~
well, he played it well.
He is what i like to call a character actor with a main character face
I've watched this movie roughly 12 times over the years. I had genuinely no idea Brad Pitt played that character. Truly an amazing transformation.
Love this movie, I love how these conversations never happened they just invented them so stupid people like me can understand what’s going on 🤣 they way they talk to each other is like they are talking to idiots but really they are talking to the audience. Never felt so (rightly) patronised in my life, great movie.
Well I don't expect the average person to even know what a CDO is
I appreciate someone who can look through a film to understand what it's trying to portray without believing it's gospel- folks like you are rare.
Its a reason why this happened in the first place. Even the people that "understood" it, didn't or didn't want to because of the massive (temporary) moneybag.
Best explanation in the movie was given by marot Robbie
Ao true! I've read the book this movie is based on; have to say youre absolutely right.
All explanations in the movies simplified for understanding of a person bellow average. In reality it was much more complex
One thing the film doesn't touch on is the effect all this had on the Repo market which was even more devastating.
Banks loan each other money in exchange for "security" and the banks used these CDO's as security.
When it turned out they were all useless it left banks owning billions. It's how banks all across the world got hit by a US housing market collapse.
Did banks all over the world used CDOs?
how did it affect the banks across the world?
For a while it seemed like it would end Iceland.
@@abhinavn4555 banks of several countries had their money heavely invested on CDOs, and thos nations, like Portugal, Iceland, Greece and Spain were some of the European countries that suffered the most
Since when did the repo market start using structured finance obligations as collateral? The repo market I knew was run off U.S. treasuries, commercial paper and related cash instruments.
@@siddiqahmad5193
I think this explains it pretty well:
In recent years, the tri-party repo has allowed the repo market to accept a wide range of collateral, including mortgage-backed securities, CDOs, and almost any asset that the clearing banks could hold in custody. Hence, it has allowed investors in various securities to more easily secure financing in the repo market by simply putting up their positions as collateral. However, an important factor contributing to the loss of liquidity in fixed-income markets in February and March 2008 was the sudden refusal of lenders in the repo market to accept as collateral the same wide range of assets as before. This made it difficult to impossible for holders to value the instruments and led to a sharp worsening of the liquidity profile of institutions-in the case of Bear Stearns, which had a large quantity of these assets on its balance sheets
The best summary of this movie I've ever seen was something like this:
What's your favorite comedy movie? "The Big Short"
What's your favorite horror movie? Also "The Big Short"
What is your favorite documentary ?
'The Big Short'
What is your favorite thriller ?
'The Big Short'
What is your favorite character study ?
'The Big Short'
What is your favorite drama ?
'The Big Short'
😉
Tyler Durden working from the inside now
Funny
that economic News site writing gig really paid off
Zero Hedge
One thing I loved about this movie was the well done way they depicted the mid 00s zeitgeist. It was kinda the last pre social media era (the financial collapse happening nearly the exact same time modern era social media started)
Lol, I suppose in retrospect that was about the time that Myspace was officially dead and Facebook was king, 2008 financial crash.
"Whoa, I just got really scared" is THE line in this movie.
It's a really powerful moment. One of the few times the film slows down its crazy editing, rapid dialogue, and chaotic sound effects and really lets you soak in what's actually going on.
Or, the worst acting job ever😆
Steve carrel did amazing
Fucking awesome, dude is legit
Steve carrel is amazing jeje
Lets put in a good word for all the other actors too - they all did amazing in this movie! Gosling is so different here - didnt even recognize him at first.
I am just glad Kendall Roy was able to pivot and jump to a career in finance after losing out on running his father's empire
“I don’t talk about that.”
“I’ve watched another show with this actor”
god this movie was so perfectly cast, from brad pitt to jeremy strong, every role had a great and fitting actor
And their doing it again this time 120x
That they are, figure out how to profit from that real quick and get paid
What do you mean brother?
No they arnt lol
Shits possibly coming again
Truth. The ants however now have various means of finding the grasshoppers that kicked over their mound..grasshoppers will be torn to shreds.
This move is great and terrifying and fills me with a seething rage.
Watch Margin Call afterward. The dismissive flippancy of the CEO deciding to destroy the financial world to save his own butt will make you seethe with the fire of a thousand suns. If the bubble bursting and destroying the American housing market didn't send all the Lehman and Goldman Sachs execs to jail (or up against a wall), nothing ever will.
Rage against who? Most of this mess is due to the almighty 401k. That's the poison no one wants to admit.
@@IdgaradLyracant Maybe the rampant fraud and the fact that nobody was held accountable for that fraud. The banks were bailed out, the C-suite execs got bonuses, and the taxpayer got screwed. If anything is going to make me a Lefty Communist it is crap like this.
Aight bludster calm down there
That ending scene is one of my favorites "short everthing that guy has touched, I want half a billion more in swaps" "The collateral alone could bankrupt you" 😂😂😂
Prime example of “experts” working jobs they had no understanding of. A worker is responsible for a certain job/result, but if his workmanship is poor, he is expected to understand how that result affects the finished product (value/safety).
Actions have consequences, but no one except a select few in the scenes here actually understood the bigger picture if things went poorly. No one even considered the “what if” scenario until it was too late.
they understood just fine they just didn't care. The wealthiest people weren't the ones hurt by the crash it was the poor people they treated as pawns.
They understand the risk of the product themselves, they just didn't care since the customer would take the loss, not them, they get the big fat fees out of it and called it a day. Even when the Subprime loan got rated AAA by Morgan Stanley and S&P, when the congress questioned them why the fuck they dare to rate those shit loan at AAA rating? They just answer: "Well it's our opinion on it. Trusting it is our customer problem, not ours". Then none of those fucker even get jailed for fucked over the entire world's Economy with their lies. They got the big fat fees from the banks to rate those shit loan triple A and when they got question by the people? Just brush it off.
no he understood perfectly
Why edit it at all? Why mess with two basically perfect scenes?
maybe that's the reason. what you just said.
Maybe they don't have the right to show Selena Gomez.
Copyright probably
The more this scene progresses, the more Steve starts to look exactly like Felonious Gru
"you're 20 minutes away"
"Five if you use the helicopter"
That _was_ funny
My favourite thing about this film is that 99% of viewers had no idea what these guys are talking about.
You are right about it in my case. What about you. What did you understand about this movie. Can you explain it to a layman who has no expertise in financial science.
Brad Pitts best roles are supporting roles. Change my mind.
Exhibits: True Romance, 12 Monkeys, Snatch, This
Fight club? Seven?
@@blackchuckstable I'm not a big fan of fight club tbh. Seven was good but was it good because of Pitt or his character or rather the story? With the movies I listed on the other hand, whenever Pitt came onscreen, he brought something unique to the movie.
Meet Joe Black?
Moneyball
@@themoderndog9202 Haven't seen it
Best character in the movie, and there were so many great characters.
I understand Ben's sentiment, but the economy was going to fail even without their bet against the housing market. But yeah, just don't celebrate it.
Dancing in a casino, already a massive symbol of greed and preying on the addictive-minded, after basically tricking a bunch of hedonistic banker types. It's weighted, for sure.
Ben wasn't saying their bet was responsible for collapsing the American economy; his willingness to help the two investors showed he also felt it was inevitable and all they could do was capitalize on it. He just wanted them to understand that they were making money off a tragedy and to not be so gleeful that it was happening.
@@jbeshaysax Ben pretty much condenses the entire sentiment in his last sentence: "Just don't f*** dance".
It's more about the idea of the greed. I trade on a daily basis and it's astonishing the amount of people that pray every single day for a war or a catastrophe to happen just so their little position can go up a couple hundred or thousand bucks.
insider trading on mortgages by banks, basically..."awesome" means the banks make tons of legal money risk free, with a probable high rate of return and to top it all off they played it like a loss, the side bets against mortgages were gigantic, "oh you clued into the fact that we insured ourselves against loss? here's a few crumbs..." and the banks are so smart they made money off the crumbs, so the payout was covered...
good insight
Now we have a whole new housing market issue with AirBnB's threatening to crash the market. Now that everyone bought a BnB and saturated the market, BnB's become to expensive and people travel less, then people who were relying on short term rentals to pay the bills realize they have to cover it themselves, then try to sell in an inflated market with rising interest rates so no one can buy... Same recession, different cause....
No. airbnbs didnt revolutionize travel or anything. What you had was people hoping to make a passive income from something that doesnt exist: a highly mobile population constantly on the move.
No, what happened is the majority of homes right now have been purchased outright by investment firms so the actual supply of actual homes is tiny while the demand is high, so they control the prices now because they possess the supply.
Some argue it's the same cause. Some say the subprime narrative is really just a way to shift blame. The ones who really crashed the market were investors. They dumped all their real estate en masse in the year leading up to the collapse. If the economy were just teetering on a cliff's edge, they were the ones who pushed it over
Most Airbnb are vacation homes. Sure it's a problem in Florida and California those are the two states having the biggest issues right now, but realistically the landlords with one or two rental properties aren't really hurting the market. If anything they're helping keep it balanced. It's the investment firms buying up entire neighborhoods and refusing to lower the cost of rent so it's accurately adjusted for the market which leavies them empty, yet nobody can live in them.
@@eliwilson3902
Sounds like Evergrand in China
Corporations didn’t shouldn’t be allowed to buy a block of houses. That’s going to crash the market.
The writing is so clever with its exposition.
Yup, it had to be, given the subject matter. The whole thing plays like a heist movie - which in reality I guess it was
This is what happened at housig, Boeing too and Opiod crisis corrupt regulators. Corrupt buisness leaders and the end common man suffered
Yeah, people buying houses with 2 bucks and a paper clip, knowing they can't pay it back, are the real victims.
Turns out if you offer a home to someone who wants one bad enough, the fine print won't matter too much to them. Combine that with firms knowing full well who is capable and incapable of paying those mortgages, it starts to smell alot more like a scheme. Not even mentioning rating agencies selling ratings for fees, financial jargon being purposefully and needlessly complicated, and the intentional targeting of immigrant and low earning families for predatory loans without fixed rates and income verification. But sure, the families who lost homes are the crooks here, not the industry leaders who got bonuses for this shit. @@RandoBurner
...and they all walked away ...they knew what they were doing ...they were in a win/win situation...lose THEIR JOBS...nah....they retire to some sun kissed coastal town with zero homeless people...still makes my piss boil and bat so few went to prison.
welcome to the Human race, tried and tested since...
byron mann was sooo good here lol
Damn Brad Pitt himself schooled those kids. He’s not actually acting, that’s Brad Pitt for real.
The film doesn't talk about the role the government had from Easy Fed policy or the overtly risky subsidization of surprise lenders.
Now Oscar, explain this to me like I'm a 5 year old and next year, I ll be 6.
I think the editing in this movie helps emphasize spectacle and the lack of attention on the actual scene. Much like how the banks, investors, resl estate mortgage people were not paying attention to what actually is going on. What is a critic but someone who reads quickly, arrogantly, but never wisely. There is plenty of different aspects directors like to play around with to communicate with the audience. To name a few, composition, editing, cinematography, structure, cuts, etc. Take Kubrick for example, in the shining he was famous for moving objects in the hotel to different locations or removing them entirely between takes. He did this for the viewer because he knew people were going to watch his movie multiple times. It's like playing a game with your audience and leaving little breadcrumbs through out the movie. They're just begging the viewer to notice them. One must consider that a good movie uses every opportunity to communicate with the audience. Time is very limited in films, a good director knows this and will deliberately use subtle ways of communicating to the audience without sacrificing quality in other areas of the film. I think Martin Scorsese was right about the MCU. I wouldn't consider anything made by marvel for cinemas films. I would consider them movies. I think the worst thing anything like a story, book, movie etc can be is okay. Like if you saw a movie and some asked you what you thought of it, and you just said,"eh, it was okay." What that means is that it was boring. There was nothing of substance to it. Either it had nothing new or creative to offer, or what it did offer has already been done before and much better. I dislike marvel movies because they do not bring anything new or creative to offer the medium through which they create. They're boring and lazy movies. They're okay.... Movies i would consider to be of the variety of being unimaginative and offering nothing new or interesting or experimental to the medium through which they operate. Films i would describe as bringing something new, experimental, risk taking, or nuanced to the medium. I would even consider the room with Tommy Wisea, i probably spelled his name wrong, but i would consider the room a film. Because he tried something, sure it wasn't successful but at least he tried. But ill tell you what it wasn't, it wasn't boring. I'm sorry for going on a long ass rant. But i am tired of people who are unwilling to engage with the material and actually analyze and study it, who then go on to claim that the work is bad or terrible. It's upsetting because it's very dismissive and arrogant. If you're not willing to engage with the material and give it a fair chance then i believe you you have no leg to stand on, so to speak. You did not do your due diligence as the audience and watch/observe. It's like talking to someone who isn't listening to what you have to say. They're just waiting till it's their turn to speak. My point is, you're not giving the person the opportunity to be understood. Often in debates, negotiations, and arguments, being understood is far more important than winning. It is extremely frustrating when someone is arrogant and unwilling to even try to understand what you are trying to communicate. I can tell you i would be very upset if i were to make anything only for it to be dismissed. I dislike movies like the MCU because whatever they have to offer has already been done before and far better by someone else. Movies like that are not art, it's escapism, it's the desire to be sedated, the unwillingness to meet reality on reality's terms
Yap
How is any of that related to this scene? What are you trying to say?
@@danielsappore3423 My criticism was not pertaining to the subject of of scene. My criticism was directed to those in the comments section. I saw several comments expressing the opinion that the editing in the scene was objectively bad. My post was in response to those comments. Upon reviewing my response I recognize my failure to establish this clearly and concisely. Thank you for asking for clarification. I'll be making an effort to avoid making this mistake in the future. Does this help recontextualize my original comment?
@@danielsappore3423 also I would like to note that In my original comment I was upset and admit I went off topic. I definitely see how i can tighten my argument up. I was not criticizing the scene. I love the movie, in fact I just bought it. My criticism has nothing to do with the scene.
i aint readin allat
I
DECLARE
BANKRUPTCY!!!!
very powerful scene
I love the laughing track on the "synthethic CDO's" at 4:14. It's like you cant ff'in make this up they had to specifically design this sh*t to f everybody over.
the spot in the casino where the military guy is playing slots would not happen because he can't be in that attire gamboling.
Explain this to me as you would a small boy or a golden retriever.
This is a super super simplification. I don't fully understand it myself. But I'll do my best to explain it in a nutshell:
Imagine you have a piggy bank (personal savings), and you've been saving up to buy a toy (house). But the toy is expensive, and you don't have enough money yet. So, your friend (bank) says, "I'll lend you the money to buy the toy now, and you can pay me back later, a little bit at a time." You're really excited, so you agree (take out a mortgage).
Now, let's say lots of kids in your neighbourhood want expensive toys, but like you, they don't have enough money. So, many friends (banks) start lending money to buy these toys, thinking it's a good way to get a little extra money in return from the payments (because of interest). And if you can't pay back you have to give the toy back to the friend that loaned you the money (security), since he thinks he can sell it for more than you bought it for (asset appreciation).
But there's a problem. Some of the kids who borrowed money find out they can't pay it back (defaults). Maybe they spent their allowance on other things, or they didn't get as much allowance as they thought they would. When they can't pay back, the friends who lent the money get worried because they were counting on getting that money back or the toy that is worth more now. But since there are so many toys that are studently for sale (supply and demand), the price goes down and not up as he expected (asset depreciation) which leads to your friend losing all his money.
except that kids lending the money knew that the rates would go up cause the people to lose mortgages and the banks thought they would just get the houses back and resell them to the next person. I did not get it at first, but it was all planed. when it did not go the way, the banks thought it would the American people got stuck with the bill as usual. @@erik10030
"That is fucking crazy."
I read it as "Brad shoots...", I haven't seen this movie
Brad Pitt's character: How bankers and traders and "investor" bros should think
The kids: How they are (except with no remorse)
Why is there a stock audio of a cat screaming at 1:24? Who was the editor that went, "yeah this scene needs a cat screaming in the casino"?
could be from the slot machines, but I hear what you're saying
One of the best movies made.
The so called save investments became risky because of leverage.
He was right
My newsfeed is promoting Big Short heavily today!!
Is that Ryu??
I really wish I could understand this movie. This is why my wife handles the finances.
yeah, they are selling these "products" again, if they ever stopped the first time...
took him a while to calculate 50 million times 20
The big questions to the problem are, why is there a rise in default rate? And why Banks have assets that are unreliable? These are questions that can only be found at National Level. Ultimately the government are complicit in contributing to the crash.
The government is definitely complicit. They passed the Community Reinvestment Act that pushed banks to meets the needs of borrowers in low-income neighborhoods. It was designed to reduce discriminatory credit practices in low income neighborhoods. Ron Paul said the CRA forced banks to lend to people who would normally be rejected due to poor credit. How stupid!
@@justinm1200 There's a reason why the media are called the fourth estate. And apparently they are very good at it. I know a friend of mine who treat these films like the Big Short, Margin Call, Too big to fail etc... as some sort of Gospel, yet he couldn't explain the root cause of such high default rates and irresponsible lending. Facts that played very small part in their narrative and are easily forgettable for their lack of emphasis and misdirection. Sure, Corporation could be irresponsible and run out of control, but it wouldn't be that easy without the blessing of government. Bailing Banks out and enacting CRA is like giving the Gambler a no limit credit.
Because banks are greedy as hell and know the taxpayer will bail them out.
@@mattlittlej Well yea. The Human condition are not unknown to us. People are always greedy. And people run the Banks and the Corporation. It's something I heard over and over again. But who even forces taxpayers to bail out banks? And who encourages or pushes Banks to make risky or irrational business decision? Those are the questions not often discussed.
@@metamorphorsis Lots or less regulations, the end result always comes from the same issue. No system can work properly if its parts are corrupted. Sure, forcing banks to lessen restrictions on money lending can have bad results, but the finance sector did nothing to prevent them, they prayed on it. Adjustable absurd prime rates, lazy fact checking and tracking of the products (so complicated that it took too long to layer), using housing bonus as securities and creating artifical money out of those bets, did not have anything to do with the original said restriction. Fraud in money applications is not equal to "lessening requirements for credit". If anything you could argue that these types of bets should not be allowed, because they elevate the risk of default relying only on the fact that the products are mortages.
And credit rating agencies had a conflict of interest problem and decided to go with it and not really try to fix it. Instead of trying to better the system, they got greedy and lost track of what they were doing , because it was making them lots of money. That is irresponsible, and does not have to do with government only. It is tiring blaming always the government for the greedy and corrupt actions.
The world seems to have forgotten that this was a thing
And the banks got bailed out while the little guy lost everything. Don't ever tell me the rich don't need to pay their fair share in taxes.
Good movie but I didn’t understand shit😂😂
I loved how the Big Short pretended bankers and traders have an iota of sympathy for poor people.
There was no pretending, the entire point of the movie was that they don’t. That was Ben Rickerts whole deal. He couldn’t stay a trader and still care about people and the earth because it was just too corrupt. Did you watch the movie?
that’s the movie talking to you, not the characters
It’s trying to educate the audience
The people shown in this movie that took advantage of the situation to make money didn't create the situation and nothing they did could have prevented the housing crisis. They just recognized what was about to happen and took that opportunity to make money. So they could have had plenty of sympathy for the people who were going to be hurt by the crash. They still couldn't have done anything to stop it from happening.
Hell, I can remember watching CNBC and hearing people point out the issue with credit default swaps and credit default obligations and how complex the system was. It was obvious that it was so complex that no one could fully understand it and as such was risky, but when even someone like me could see there was a problem no one in power did a thing to stop it. To me it seemed obvious that someone should have acted to either limit or prevent CDOs/CDS from being sold. Though in all likelihood it was too late to prevent the housing crisis by that point.
Did you actually see the film?
I'm pretty sure the film portrayed exactly that, that the banks and financial institutions only care about cash.
just because it's a tragedy doesn't mean you support the tragedy when you take a position that it's going to happen
People are numbers in today's time.
This is terribly edited
For the record, this film cemented what I hate about capitalism, financial services and, importantly, American as the absolute shit scow it is. Thank you Hollywood.
Fake News: This is from a movie called "The Big Short" and they are all actors. Kind of ridiculous to suggest Brad Pitt has a side-hustle as a trader. He doesn't need that kind of money.
And all these guys bet against the system, even Brad Pitt's character, and in the end they made a killing.
I still don't get it and I've watched this movie several times.
It really is gambling, only these people were fixing the game several different ways and the stakes were economies of several nations.
@@keithupton86ku (sigh) that sounds very well put. I believe you.
Housing bonds were seen as a very safe investment because people are usually reliable with their mortgage payments. Since they were so safe they could be leveraged (invested in the market i.e. gambled) heavily by the banks without much risk of losing money.
This went on for years. People made a lot of money. They kept coming up with different ways to gamble with the bonds, and because they were so safe they could keep twisting them into more risky and complex deals to get bigger payout.
Then investors wanted more, but there's a finite number people who can afford to buy a house. So cheaper (sub-prime) mortgages were offered so more people could afford them. They sold these to anybody with a pulse, no matter their income, and these mortgages went into the whole mortgage bond apparatus that had been running for years.
What made these mortgages so cheap was their low interest rate, _but that wasn't a fixed rate._ After a number of years the rates went up and suddenly people couldn't afford their mortgage payments. They started defaulting. The mortgages started to lose their value, and suddenly the investments made with the bonds were no longer propped up by the value of the mortgages. The market based on the mortgage bonds collapsed. The value of the bonds plummeted as everyone tried to get rid of their bonds first.
In essence, the gamblers found out the chips they were playing with could no longer be cashed out -- they were worthless. Some found out first and sold their chips at a loss to other gamblers.
Put easily and how i understand it, a CDO is just a lot of mortgages put together. This is adventagious because if you put 100 together and 1 defaults (doesn't or cannot pay) the other 99 would cover the payment still. but given a certain % of profit on the product, say 5%, if 5% or more of the mortgages dont get paid the entire CDO is suddenly useless.
The AA, BB, CC is the credit rating they are referring to. the lower the rating the lower the income from the home buyer. but because so many houses were sold to essentially everyone that the standards for getting a mortgage got lowered to the point you didnt need an income. to still sell these CC mortgages they bundled them together with AA. on paper this is great because it lowers risk. In actuality there is still only (for example) 5% profit on the CDO, and altough its A rated it has more than 5% CC rated mortgages in there, more than covering the profit. people with no income or with a low income and 3 houses are forced to liquidate their homes to cover depts even if the housing prices go down temporarily.
Now if at some point enough people dont pay their mortgage all the CDO's go to 0 (profit is 0 so no one buys the CDO of of each other anymore) from AA - CC.
the synthetic CDO's just consist of a lot of the regular CDO's together, on paper lowering risk, in the real world only making it so more money is "bet" on the same product in a different place.
Because the mindset was "this cannot go tits up" we build our entire economy around CDO's. This was great for the economy because a person without money could buy a house, establish equity in the home, and become a richer citizen. Essentially we just created 300.000 dollars out of nothing.
now the bank sells the mortgage on to an investment bank, they bundle all of them together and sell it off to the public.
how could the investment bank afford so many mortgages? they couldn't, but because the mindset was "this cannot go tits up" the investment bank essentially took out a gigantic loan to buy up as many mortgages they could, bundle them together and sell them off to the public.
just as in the last example the bank just created money out of nothing, this time not 300.000 but BIllions.
This was all considered low risk because everyone always pays their mortgage, but the exponentional loaning of money on the same product made us so leveraged that if it were to go bust everyone would lose. People lose houses, banks go out of business forcing standing out loans to liquidate. Spreading this to everything, small business cant loan money because the banks are gone. Growth slows.
essentially, banks got greedy normal man gets shafted
You don't get it? That's literally the entire point. Expert mathematicians couldn't figure out how all this was going to work.
Look, it's simple. You don't @!#$ with equilibrium. This is true for everything that you know, and don't know that exists. It doesn't matter what Wall Street called it. CDO, synthetic CDO, whatever. You can't just make wealth happen out of thin air. It has to come from somewhere. All you need to understand is all the people in this movie are making the "somewhere" so complicated, that no one knows what's going on.
For example, take your paycheck. I used to get it attached to the check. Then Kroger forced direct deposit, but you still got the paystub. Then they forced us to go to a website to see that paystub. Then they changed it so it's hidden and hard to find (you have to click several links to find it). Guess what's happening now? People are getting screwed out of their pay because no one is going to constantly keep track of their pay every week. Wall Street did this, but to a whole new level. And since everyone was getting rich on it, no one was bothering to keep track.
what's the payoff here? 20-1? 100-1?
And the economy of the western world DID collapse. But like most really big things, it takes time.
I tried finding figures on that 1% 40,000 people die figure. I couldn't find anything to support that claim. It's a cool movie but maybe we should all stop pretending it's super accurate portrait of economic banking.
Did we ever recover?
We printed $ to pay off the debt and then sold those bonds to SS trust fund and now we are considering raising retirement age. You get the idea.
@@neelp9433 kinda, what are the lasting effects that I should be feeling on a daily basis?
Our government at this moment is creating a disaster we will never recover from
Nice, but that happens when you go for CONFLICT instead of COOPERATION, you create the Jungle , I think they want the Chaos, prob all shorting the Market now since Jan 2024
Just think: there are scumbags, I mean financial personnel who dream up shit like this who can make it appealing to others and make a $ off of it. Freaking brilliant!
Just dont f'ing dance.
Just wait…. This shit’ll look like child’s play in 2 years
I'll never understand why people actually like any of these people. It's like, even when you're all staring into the face that capitalism is a failure, you all force yourself to find something, ANYTHING that justifies it works if you're just smart enough, you can still make a lot of money. For every penny these guys made, the world lost incalculable amounts of money and lives.
Personally, you all disgust me.
the best part of this movie is that it tried to make a bunch of banker money a**holes look like the good guys
I wish for a recession, to make the president I don't like unpopular.
-Bill Maher
"Here's some numbers for ya: every 1% unemployment goes up 40,000 people die."
For reference, during Covid the national unemployment level rose to 14.7% and roughly one million Americans died.
Jaber-wochy played, is playing, a big roll
If you swap the word investors to chumps who about to lose their money then it'll make more sense
Let say you small house. Buy another house take credits to banks. and some savings 😢 take big house...the big house with that take another credits in bank for another biggest house.....and so on.......whats is real 😢of house is little house. Others. Are debts like chain. That never go back ..that cop^cop^cop..just chain of debts 😢😢😢
2.72 million subscribers and your editing skills are this bad?
Hahahahaha Nice
Robert Redford been deepfaked? All this new fangled A.I. jiggery pockery.
hahahahahahahahahahahahaha
They learned nothing from this and are doing it again because they just got bailed out with our money
Bitcoin Ravencoin Neoxa Etc buy ok
Oh hi! By the way.
If you get paid just few dollars more an hour the whole economy will collapse!
See you again some time! Bye!
Do you think Biden knows anything about this?
Nothing immoral or unethical about Shorting a Stock.
You borrow stocks from a Broker, sell them immediately on the market, and buy the same amount back before you return them to the Broker.
You sell stocks to people that are already looking to buy and you buy stocks that have fallen that people are trying to get rid of.
If this was unethical then buying stocks from someone when it’s low and selling when to someone when it’s high would be equally unethical. Meaning the entire market is unethical. Which it isn’t because liquidity in the open market allows businesses to grow, make money, pay employees, give healthcare and create goods and services that benefits our lives.
He's not saying shorting is unethical. He's saying celebrating the money you're going to make when others are going to be losing their homes isn't the right thing to do.
so close to getting it
I'm not sure i would trust someone named "Lying Cat" explaining morality or ethics...
Human labor is what does all of that. Corporations create nothing. They are simply a mechanism for siphoning the value that workers produce and putting it in the pockets of the people who do nothing but hold a scrap of paper that says owner on it.
Crazy to think goods and services have never been provided outside of capitalism.
this movie is so worthless to me its like politics, big business big money who cares. cant believe people are fascinated by greed
Whats great is that despite this massive illegal fraud, there were no repercussions to the people who caused it...
COLLATERALIZED DEBT OBLIGATION MARKET REPORT OVERVIEW
global collateralized debt obligation market size was USD 23319.13 million in 2021 and market is projected to touch USD 56536.1 million by 2031 at CAGR 9.26% during the forecast period