The Big Short Movie Online (2015)


R | 2h 10min |
Biography, Drama |
23 December 2015 (USA)

Four denizens in the world of high-finance predict the credit and housing bubble collapse of the mid-2000s, and decide to take on the big banks for their greed and lack of foresight.

Director: Adam McKay
“The corrupt are winning”: Why these reformers want to make politicians wear their donors on their sleeves — literally
By Elias Isquith

You know how every driver and car in NASCAR is plastered with brand logos? So if and when Dale Earnhardt, Jr., for example, wins a race in 2016, millions upon millions of NASCAR diehards will suddenly have the Nationwide logo — or Siemens’, or Mountain Dew’s — lodged at least in the back of their minds? Well, what if politicians had to do the same thing?

Picture it: There’s a big bill coming to the floor. It’s a bill that would impose a new tax on financial transactions. It’s vigorously opposed by Wall Street. And then a politician takes to the rostrum and explains at length why his conscience and sense of responsibility to the Constitution and liberty will not allow him to support this measure…but it’s hard to pay attention to anything he’s saying, because his suit is plastered with the logo of every big bank and hedge fund you can imagine. You might not take that guy’s words too seriously, right? Maybe he’d reconsider and skip the vote instead.

It sounds like a skit from “Saturday Night Live,” I know. But in a post-Citizens United America, one in which the laws governing campaign finance are tissue-thin (at best), some are starting to think that exposing the system as parody-proof might be galvanizing. If nothing else, it would be strange, different, amusing — and, in a gallows humor way, kind of fun. So one group out in California is taking advantage of the state’s ballot initiative system and giving it a shot. And the public’s response thus far, they say, has been more enthusiastic than they imagined.

We know many politicians are owned by their donors. This ballot initiative would make make it impossible to miss
The truth about the Dem civil war: Bernie vs. Hillary might seem life-and-death — but it could always be much, much worse
By Nico Lang

The Kerry-Bush election was one in which voters were faced with a choice between two men no one liked that much, a Massachusetts ice prince and a buffoon. This year is, by contrast, an embarrassment of riches — for Democrats, at least. While the GOP is flooded with politicians who appear to be running to increase their book sales, the Democratic Party offers two of the most experienced, compelling candidates in its history: Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton.

Sanders represents one of the most exciting challenges to the political establishment since FDR. The Vermont senator’s New Deal for America targets widening inequality while holding the big banks that caused our current financial crisis responsible. He represents the promise of the young activists who marched on the streets in the name of the Occupy movement three years ago, those who looked to a future in which they would die in debt and decided to do something about it. If the American Dream has become rigged, Sanders is a sign that voters may be waking up.

Clinton, meanwhile, was recently endorsed by the New York Times as “one of the most broadly and deeply qualified presidential candidates in modern history.” Indeed, her résumé is impeccable: She served as both a senator for New York and then secretary of state. Prior to that, she spent eight years in the White House as perhaps the most politically engaged first lady in modern memory. She also weathered one of the most deeply invasive and painful scandals in recent history, her husband’s affair with his intern, Monica Lewinsky. Her ability to remain calm in the face of crisis—whether her husband’s infidelities or partisan opposition to her handling of Benghazi—has proven her a strong, capable leader. She would be ready on day one.

Sanders & Clinton partisans are waging increasingly ferocious campaigns. We must not lose sight of recent history

ancyforth asked:

bernmeister, who will be your vice president?

I am going to add diversity to my ticket, so I will be asking female Native American minority, Elizabeth Warren. 

She agrees with me on virtually everything except she doesn’t call herself a socialist. She is my ideological soulmate. If I had met those cheekbones 30 years ago she’d be Elizabeth Sanders today. Instead I am happily married to another Mrs. Sanders.

Besides bringing a new youthful and diverse perspective, there are many other reasons I think she would make a great VP. She helped organize a foundation Occupy Wallstreet. She’s worked in bureaucracy for a long enough time to be considered experienced. Most importantly she holds most of the views I have. Here are a few I find important: 

-believes churches should fund abortions

-agrees fast food workers should make as much as managers and C.E.O.s

-blames banks, big oil, and republicans for all world problems. 

-personally understands the struggles that minorities face every day. 

-agrees there’s no issues resulting from Muslim migration in Europe; wants  twice as many Syrian refugees in America

If she says no to me again I’ll ask the lovely and intelligent Mrs. Clinton. If she’s still mad at me I’m not sure who I’ll ask. If Trump is up for being Vice, I guess I could always ask him since we agree on a few things. 

Thank you for the question!
Worst Super Bowl Ad Of 2016 Forgets The Housing Crash Of 2008

There were some terrible Super Bowl ads this year, but this one wins my prize for worst ad of the Big Game.

A nation of consumers consumering all over the place, because they got their mortgages by pressing a button on their phone. So easy a child can do it. Oh.

The disconnect between Manhattan ad agencies and the rest of us couldn’t be more clear. But still, you’d think at least a couple hyper-employed, sleeping on a bed of money, Madison Avenue executives might have seen The Big Short in their spare time. (My choice, by the way, for Best Picture of 2015).

Instead, an ad agency told a big corporation that the best angle is to once again make mortgage borrowing look easy and consequence-free.

Because what big corporations and banks remember is, the 2008 crash WAS consequence-free…for them.

And then they end the ad with “isn’t that the power of America itself?”

Because they have no conscience.

googletag.cmd.push(function() { googletag.display(‘div-gpt-ad-1386288741770-3’); });

I came across this picture a few weeks ago on Reddit. It’s pretty funny, when you think about it, how much of what Bernie wants to do isn’t the least bit radical.

He wants to:

  • Break up the big banks 
  • Make all public colleges and universities tuition free 
  • Raise the minimum wage 
  • Expand Social Security
  • Change to a single-payer healthcare system
  • Guarantee paid parental, sick, and vacation leave
  • Ensure that women get equal pay for equal work

How does he plan to fund all these “extreme” ideas? By taxing the wealthy and reducing the military budget.

Seriously. Even the “cons” are actually “pros”. A cost-benefit analysis is all about what you are getting for what you are giving up, but I’m not sure we’re really giving anything up in this exchange. I’m all for taxing the wealthy, particularly since they are currently paying significantly lower percentages than their employees. And with the military, he’s been one of the staunchest supporters of veterans, so we know this is about not getting into wars, not about abandoning the troops who served.
10 more reasons Wall Street would hate Bernie Sanders
No bank will be too big to fail under Bernie. The Vermont senator plans to radically overhaul our financial system
By Steven Rosenfeld

1. End too-big-to-fail. 

The underlying logic of this federal policy is that the biggest banks cannot fail and shut down, even if they make terrible investments or wreak great harm to the economy, because the U.S. economy and millions of ordinary people would become financially destitute. Sanders said this “scheme…is nothing more than a free insurance policy for Wall Street.” Compared to before the crash of 2008, the biggest banks in the country are larger than ever, he said, adding, “if a bank is too big to fail, it is too big to exist.”

2. Break up the biggest banks. 

If elected, Sanders said he would direct the Treasury Department to compile a list of the institutions “whose failure would pose a catastrophic risk to the United States economy without a taxpayer bailout.” Using the power of executive authority, he would break up these institutions. “Within one year, my administration will break these institutions up so that they no longer pose a grave threat to the economy as authorized under Section 121 of the Dodd-Frank Act.”

3. Pass a 21st-century Glass-Steagall Act. 

This Depression-era law, which was repealed by Congress under President Bill Clinton, prevented commercial banks from investing in risky and arcane financial instruments, such as bundled home loans during the housing market bubble that predated the 2008 financial market collapse.

4. End too-big-to-jail.

Sanders said that the government needs to run Wall Street, not the other way around, which he said is the reality today. He said that “equal justice under the law” means that banking and finance executives whose reckless gambles damaged people’s lives must face real criminal penalties including prison.

5. Criminalize Wall Street’s business model. 

One of Sanders’ most incisive comments concerned Wall Street’s ways of doing business, which he said are based on intentionally ripping off average Americans and engaging in all kinds of unethical and illegal behaviors. He said the government must do more to penalize companies that routinely rip off the public and richly reward the executives overseeing that process.

6. Tax the casino culture. 

Sanders said one of the keys of reforming Wall Street was ending its culture of financial speculation. He said he would do that by imposing a transaction tax aimed at high-speed, high-volume traders who are not investing “in the job-creating economy.” Those funds would then be used for cutting the cost of higher education.

7. Reform the financial rating agencies. 

This is the industry that not only rates people on their personal financial credit but also rates investments—and before the 2008 crash falsely labeled as credible many of the risky investments that failed. These firms are like foxes guarding the hen house, Sanders said, and cannot base their profits on getting paid by the companies whose products they are rating. “We will turn for-profit credit rating agencies into non-profit institutions, independent from Wall Street. No longer will Wall Street be able to pick and choose which credit agency will rate their products.”

8. Cap credit card interest and ATM fees. 

Banks and credit card companies must be stopped “from ripping off the American people by charging sky-high interest rates and outrageous fees,” Sanders said. “It is unacceptable that Americans are paying a $4 or $5 fee each time they go to the ATM. It is unacceptable that millions of Americans are paying credit card interest rates of 20 or 30 percent.”

9. Let the USPS offer banking. 

The post office’s money order service could be greatly expanded “to give Americans affordable banking options,” Sanders said. “The reality is that, unbelievably, millions of low-income Americans live in communities where there are no normal banking services.”

10. Reform the Federal Reserve. 

Sanders said this arcame institution that regulates the flow of the U.S. currency and interest rates charges to banks must be reformed so that its primary purpose is serving the public, not private bankers. “When Wall Street was on the verge of collapse, the Federal Reserve acted with a fierce sense of urgency to save the financial system,” he said. “We need the Fed to act with the same boldness to combat unemployment and low wages.”

Read the full article



When Americans think of how the economic rules are stacked against them, they naturally think of Wall Street. 

When the Wall Street bubble burst in 2008 because of excessive risk-taking, millions of working Americans lost their jobs, health insurance, savings, and homes.

But The Street is back to many of its old tricks. And its lobbyists are busily rolling back the Dodd-Frank Act, intended to prevent another crash.

The biggest Wall Street banks are also much larger. In 1990, the five biggest banks had 10 percent of all of the nation’s banking assets. Now, they have 44 percent – more than they had at the time of the 2008 crash.

They have a virtual lock on taking companies public, play key roles pricing commodities, are involved in all major U.S. mergers and acquisitions and many overseas, and responsible for most of the trading in derivatives and other complex financial instruments.  

And as they’ve gained dominance over the financial sector, they’ve become more politically potent. They’re major sources of campaign funds for both Republicans and Democrats.

Wall Street banks supply personnel for key economic posts in Republican and Democratic administrations, and lucrative employment to economic officials when they leave Washington.

It’s a vicious cycle. The bigger they get, the more likely it is that government will bail them out if they get into trouble again. This, in turn, confers on them an ever-larger competitive advantage over smaller, community-minded banks that don’t have the implied guarantee – which gives the biggest banks even more economic and political power.

What should be done?

First, resurrect the Glass-Steagall Act that used to separate investment from commercial banking.

Second, put a small sales tax on every financial transaction. This would discourage speculation and slow down the casino. Not incidentally, such a tax could generate billions of dollars a year for, say, better schools.

But the most important thing we should do is bust up the big banks. Any bank that’s too big to fail is too big, period.

Antitrust law should be used the way it was against the big oil trusts and the telephone monopoly. The idea was to prevent too much economic and political power from concentrating in too few hands. And that’s precisely the problem with Wall Street.

The only sure way to stop excessive risk-taking on Wall Street so you don’t risk losing your job or your savings or your home, is to put an end to the excessive economic and political power of Wall Street.

It’s time to bust up the big banks.