Inside Job: Unraveling the Economic Crisis

The documentary Inside Task does a great task of discussing what took place in a relatively brief time period and in an available method. The movie also has compelling bad guys and outrageous habits that is bound to engage and enrage viewers. It's generally an introduction of the monetary crisis of current years, which we are still recovering from. The thesis appears to be that the policies that were put in location after the Great Anxiety have been methodically dismantled considering that the Reagan years (powered by Wall Street lobbyists) which played a pivotal role in this crisis and lower ones in previous years.

And very little is being done to repair this malfunctioning system and the ones who need to be held responsible are not and still unclean, dirty rich and very powerful. The most breathtaking fact is that the arrogance, greed and corruption that these individuals show and the fact that none have been arraigned for fraud and offense.

Get quality help now

WriterBelle

Verified writer

Proficient in: Job

4.7 (657)

“ Really polite, and a great writer! Task done as described and better, responded to all my questions promptly too! ”

+84 relevant experts are online

Hire writer

This film not just makes me mad however also furious.

This shows principle of capitalism at its worst. It is not about right, left, democrat or republican nor the failure of capitalism, it had to do with pure greed and corruption. What took place and continues to this day is not capitalism. It is corporatism I believe which is also referred to as fascism. If it were really capitalism, there would be no such thing as "too huge to stop working" and there would be numerous fines and jail sentences handed down it would extremely dwarf the cost savings and loan scandal.

This film represents great deals of psychopaths that only care about something: enhancing their own individual gain and the ends justifies the method is their mantra. Over here psychopaths means individuals who are over obsessed with money and they simply desire more and more. There is a lot of wrong doing which is not ethical but legal due to the fact that the American federal government helped them to make it legal like CitiGroup getting Tourist. Why does the monetary system need to grow more complex, in the sense of permitting high leverage, ethical threat, opaqueness, and brittle affiliations to grow? Naturally panic will continue to exist and be unpredictable.

But the system itself needs to be transparent, properly capitalized, compartmentalized, and policed, so bankers don't extract mountains of money in good times and then have it go down in flames in bad times every few years. If we can build a robust Internet or electrical grid, we can build a robust financial system. They should all be able to get bigger and more capable without being at risk of constant collapse. You can't eliminate risk of failure, but you can keep it reasonably small. There is simply no excuse for building a system which can collapse in its entirety without government bailouts.

And ultimately, that’s what makes the financial crisis so scary. The complexity of the system far exceeded the capacity of the participants, experts and watchdogs. Even after the crisis happened, it was devilishly hard to understand what was going on. Some people managed to connect the right dots, in the right ways and at the right times, but not so many, and not through such reproducible methods, that it’s clear how we can make their success the norm. What makes me sad is that our key systems are going to continue growing more complex, and we’re not getting any smarter, or any less able to ignore risks that we know we should be preparing for.

In my opinion, the movie has a bright side and a dark side. I enjoyed seeing known people talk about the economical crisis and giving their side of the story. I enjoyed seeing witnesses given in Washington by bankers accused of their shameful practices. I think the movie put my attention on the deep problem of lobbying, which results in inefficient regulation and creates a threat for the whole system. The big problem with the movie, however, is black and white approach it takes. It presents 10% of a complicated picture and makes one to believe that it is 100%. For example, deregulation is widely accepted as one of reasons for the economical crisis. In the movie, it is represented in such a way that it looks ridiculous how a law on deregulation could pass - corrupted officials is a hint.

The facts are well presented in the movie. Some of them are true like: 1) Banks want to be Too Big To Fail because they know that if they're too big, they'll be bailed out. 2) The progressive deregulation of the financial sector since the 1980s gave rise to an increasingly criminal industry. 3) The industry has made more money since the crisis. 4) The average salary of a Goldman Sachs employee is $600,000. 5) AIG paid Goldman Sachs $13 billion in taxpayer money. 6) AIG's Joe Cassano made $315 million after the company took at least $85 billion from taxpayers. But some of the facts shown were not true.

Like the one where it says Dick Fuld earned $485 million, on the other hand it was less than $310 million. It also says that in 2008, the collapse of Lehman Brothers and AIG triggered the crisis. But that is not true as the origins of the crisis can be traced back even further, to the implosion of two Bear Stearns hedge funds run by Ralph Cioffi and Matthew Tannin, the Bear Stearns High Grade Structured Credit Strategies Fund and the Bear Stearns High Grade Structured Credit Strategies Enhanced Fund. It actually all started back in early 90’s.

I don’t fully understand the working of the derivatives and credit swaps we’ve heard so much about. But I’m learning. These are ingenious, computer-driven schemes in which good money can be earned from bad debt, and Wall Street’s Masters of the Universe pocket untold millions while they bankrupt their investors and their companies. The crucial error was to allow financial institutions to trade on their own behalf. Today, many large trading banks are betting against their own customers.

In the real estate market, banks aggressively promoted mortgages to people who could not afford them. These were assembled in packages. They were carried on the books as tangible assets when they were worthless. The institutions assembling them hedged their loans by betting against them. When the mortgages failed, profits were made despite and because of their failure. There is no moral justification for how Wall Street functions today.

One of the most fascinating aspects of “Inside Job” involves the chatty on-camera insights of Kristin Davis, a Wall Street madam, who says the Street operated in a climate of abundant sex and cocaine for valued clients and the traders themselves showing themselves as psychopaths. She says it was accepted parts of the corporate culture that hookers at $1,000 an hour and up were kept on retainer and that cocaine was the fuel.

There’s a lot to dislike about Wall Street that I have generated after watching this film mainly the pay, the culture and in many cases, the people. A lot of observers understood we had a housing bubble — Dean Baker, for instance, had been sounding the alarm for years — but few of the housing skeptics saw everything going on behind the bubble: That the subprime mortgages had been packaged into bonds, that the bonds had been sliced into tranches, that the formulas being used to price and rate the tranches got the variable expressing correlation wrong, that an extraordinary number of banks had purchased an extraordinary amount of insurance against getting that correlation wrong from AIG, that AIG had also priced the correlation wrong and would be unable to pay its debts in the event of a meltdown, that a meltdown would freeze the mostly unregulated shadow market that major financial institutions and players used to fund themselves, that the modern financial system was so fragile that an uptick in delinquent subprime mortgages could effectively crash the global economy.

What’s remarkable about the financial crisis isn’t just how many people got it wrong, but how many people who got it wrong had an incentive to get it right: journalists, hedge funds, independent investors and academics regulators. Even traders, many of whom had most of their money tied up in their soon-tobe-worthless firms.

I don’t think anything can change my views about US markets. After watching this movie and my own views from reading day by day news articles and after President Barack Obama again reelecting those people to run the government who got us into this mess.