The answer: Simple greed.
There. I just saved the viewing public 90 boobless minutes.

As if Michael Moore doesn't already know everything there is to know about enriching oneself by fleecing gullible common folk.

C'mon GREEN! This thread could be a wonderful hodgepodge of capitalism defenders, internet tough guy anger and fat jokes.


I'll be back in a while to check on you guys.

Otto's_Jacket: C'mon GREEN! This thread could be a wonderful hodgepodge of capitalism defenders, internet tough guy anger and fat jokes.


I'll be back in a while to check on you guys.

we had one earlier this week.

Link (new window)

cmunic8r99: we had one earlier this week.

Link (new window)

With all the repeats lately? It will go green anyway.

Moore is usually pretty right with what he says. The problem is he says it horribly every single time.

cmunic8r99: Otto's_Jacket: C'mon GREEN! This thread could be a wonderful hodgepodge of capitalism defenders, internet tough guy anger and fat jokes.


I'll be back in a while to check on you guys.

we had one earlier this week.

Link (new window)

Thanks for the pointer. I missed that one. Lots of fun located in the comments...

strangeguitar: The answer: Simple greed.
There. I just saved the viewing public 90 boobless minutes.

hey... you don't know there won't be boobs.

Is there a chart or graph somewhere that tells you when, exactly, you have "enough wealth," and can stop accumulating more?

If so, this would be a very handy thing to have. If one doesn't exist, would anybody like to buy one?

oldebayer: "enough wealth" ?

My personal definition: buying food in a supermarket without looking at the prices = wealthy enough.

I'll give him credit where credit is due: so far he's the only person courageous enough to take on criminal mastermind Dick Clark.

SilentStrider: strangeguitar: The answer: Simple greed.
There. I just saved the viewing public 90 boobless minutes.

hey... you don't know there won't be boobs.

true - this is michael moore we're talking about. there's a good chance that there WILL be boobs. Just not ones you wanna be looking at.

Haha, and it did go green.

... so a fat, extremely rich white man is making a movie about rich white men who make a lot of money, he will then release that movie through the company of other rich white men, making them richer when millions hundreds of thousands gullible middle-class people go see this movie, thus making himself richer than ever with millions sent directly to his bank account....

Genius.

oldebayer: Is there a chart or graph somewhere that tells you when, exactly, you have "enough wealth," and can stop accumulating more?

When I don't have to worry about how much the medication costs that keeps me alive (~$1500/month).

Right now I have decent medical insurance, but that basically means I get to live as long as I keep this particular job.

I make a pretty good salary, but am very, very aware of every dollar I spend because I need to save enough that if I have to, I can cover my medical costs.

Oh, and a mortgage, too.

So that's what "enough wealth" means to me, personally.

Because there are lots of stupid people in the US and they have money. The same type of people that buy your movies Mr. Moore.

Michael Moore at some point decided he needed another paycheck. So he systematically set about producing a movie that tells us something we already know in exchange for our hard-earned money.

Sgygus: oldebayer: "enough wealth" ?

My personal definition: buying food in a supermarket without looking at the prices = wealthy enough.

Don't be silly, who looks at the prices? Just buy what you need or want. Wealthy enough = your servants don't have to check prices.

Crosshair: Because there are lots of stupid people in the US and they have money. The same type of people that buy your movies Mr. Moore.

that's why I make it a point to pirate his movies!

/not really.

MuadDib: As if Michael Moore doesn't already know everything there is to know about enriching oneself by fleecing gullible common folk.

Uh... care to point out one thing that was wrong with Fahrenheit 9/11?

WFern: Uh... care to point out one thing that was wrong with Fahrenheit 9/11?

Aside from all the inacurracies and the portrayal of Iraqi life under Saddam as completely ridiculous and down-right propaganda?

If Michael Moore had any interest in actual thought and not garbage knee jerk, he could do something worthwhile. As it is, his stuff is the other side of the coin from Ann Coulter and others.

GAT_00: Moore is usually pretty right with what he says. The problem is he says it horribly every single time.

He got the Pakistani pipeline in Afghanistan incorrect, which was a major prop in F:9/11. He got the timeline wrong, and managed to completely fail to mention the culpability of Benazir Bhutto in the whole thing.

Bowling for Columbine was the best of his movies. He's also not a terribly likable fellow to talk to in person.

Too often he frames his interpretation of the facts into a form that comes across as deliberately misleading and pointing to an obvious conclusion rather than presenting facts and letting viewers interpret for themselves. A left-wing Fox News show one might call it.

WhyteRaven74 makes my point more concisely, though I don't think he's quite on the level of Coulter as far as unthinking ideological conformity and outright douchebaggery -- matching her would be a feat for the gods themselves. Moore is a dick, Coulter is an outright asshole.

Tatsuma: WFern: Uh... care to point out one thing that was wrong with Fahrenheit 9/11?

Aside from all the inacurracies and the portrayal of Iraqi life under Saddam as completely ridiculous and down-right propaganda?

What inaccuracies? Specifics please.

There's a reason he and his staff vetted everything before filming. I'm not a big Moore fan, but even his website has a massive page dedicated to nothing but sources for that film.

Oh awesome - that twinge in my loins earlier really was this thread going green.


Also thanks cmunic8r99, I didn't see that one from earlier. Twofer!

Sweet! I need some entertainment for a bit...

006andahalf: A left-wing Fox News show one might call it.

Only, you know, he's not actually a news organization, despite his size.

/Fat

Wall street is full of crooks. Las Vegas is better. As tacky as Las Vegas is, at least they will tell you the odds before you put your money in.

co-conspirator: oldebayer: Is there a chart or graph somewhere that tells you when, exactly, you have "enough wealth," and can stop accumulating more?

When I don't have to worry about how much the medication costs that keeps me alive (~$1500/month).

Right now I have decent medical insurance, but that basically means I get to live as long as I keep this particular job.

I make a pretty good salary, but am very, very aware of every dollar I spend because I need to save enough that if I have to, I can cover my medical costs.

Oh, and a mortgage, too.

So that's what "enough wealth" means to me, personally.

That's not wealth, that's survival plus stability. It's sad that the combination is a rare, tenuous occurrence for many.

WFern: Tatsuma: WFern: Uh... care to point out one thing that was wrong with Fahrenheit 9/11?

Aside from all the inacurracies and the portrayal of Iraqi life under Saddam as completely ridiculous and down-right propaganda?

What inaccuracies? Specifics please.

There's a reason he and his staff vetted everything before filming. I'm not a big Moore fan, but even his website has a massive page dedicated to nothing but sources for that film.

Facts? Citations? C'mon man, are you high? Moore bashers don't use facts, they make him defend his facts by making outright lies and then when he shows them the research and sources for his movies, they ignore it and move onto the next outrageous claim hoping to find that one single instance where he's not 100% correct so they can screech about it at the top of their lungs as evidence that everything he shows is wrong.

I mean, c'mon - people should be wising up to wharrgarble tactics by now. Get with it :D

MuadDib: As if Michael Moore doesn't already know everything there is to know about enriching oneself by fleecing gullible common folk.

"Pretentious? No, je suis nes't pas pretentious. Why do you ask?"

WFern: Tatsuma: WFern: Uh... care to point out one thing that was wrong with Fahrenheit 9/11?

Aside from all the inacurracies and the portrayal of Iraqi life under Saddam as completely ridiculous and down-right propaganda?

What inaccuracies? Specifics please.

There's a reason he and his staff vetted everything before filming. I'm not a big Moore fan, but even his website has a massive page dedicated to nothing but sources for that film.

What about that kite-flying scene?

"The wealthy, at some point, decided they didn't have enough wealth. They wanted more -- a lot more. So they systematically set about to fleece the American people out of their hard-earned money. created all the wealth in the country that pays for schools, hospitals, healthcare, roads etc
Now, why would they do this? That is what I seek to discover distort in this movie."

Fixed.

Wealth does not exist naturally. Potential resources like oil and coal do, but without someone to make use of them you have nothing.

The Soviet Union for the last hundred years had as much natural resources as the US, but they lived in poverty. Even the people at the very top were paupers compared to the average US billionaire. That's what happens when you get rid of "Rich fat cat businessmen".

"Wealth" does not exist naturally. Rich people do not "Take more than their fair share". It's not a pie where if someone has a lot everyone else has less.
Business owners create wealth. All the wealth.

If the inheritance tax is high enough, say in the 80% range, then in the long run it wouldn't matter if someone got extremely wealthy by by fleecing the general public.

zz9: "The wealthy, at some point, decided they didn't have enough wealth. They wanted more -- a lot more. So they systematically set about to fleece the American people out of their hard-earned money. created all the wealth in the country that pays for schools, hospitals, healthcare, roads etc
Now, why would they do this? That is what I seek to discover distort in this movie."

Fixed.

Wealth does not exist naturally. Potential resources like oil and coal do, but without someone to make use of them you have nothing.

The Soviet Union for the last hundred years had as much natural resources as the US, but they lived in poverty. Even the people at the very top were paupers compared to the average US billionaire. That's what happens when you get rid of "Rich fat cat businessmen".

"Wealth" does not exist naturally. Rich people do not "Take more than their fair share". It's not a pie where if someone has a lot everyone else has less.
Business owners create wealth. All the wealth.

wow, that's some powerful hero-worship you got going on there.

MuadDib: As if Michael Moore doesn't already know everything there is to know about enriching oneself by fleecing gullible common folk.

well, can't really add anything else, so...

This!

Those evil rich people. You know, the ones that create jobs, and spur economic growth and pay most of the taxes while getting the fewest benefits of said taxes.

Damn them!

Weaver95: SilentStrider: strangeguitar: The answer: Simple greed.
There. I just saved the viewing public 90 boobless minutes.

hey... you don't know there won't be boobs.

true - this is michael moore we're talking about. there's a good chance that there WILL be boobs. Just not ones you wanna be looking at.

There will be boobs. There won't be boobies though. There is a difference.

Spanky_McFarksalot: MuadDib: As if Michael Moore doesn't already know everything there is to know about enriching oneself by fleecing gullible common folk.

well, can't really add anything else, so...

This!

one movie ticket/DVD at a time

WFern: What inaccuracies? Specifics please.

Are you serious? You never heard about those?

Link (new window)

George Carlin: Bullsh*t Unites The Nation


/Moore is part of it

Typical Lefty thinking.

The perception that "wealth" is a finite commodity, and that if someone has lots of wealth, a portion of the population has somehow gone without.

Benni K Rok: Weaver95: SilentStrider: strangeguitar: The answer: Simple greed.
There. I just saved the viewing public 90 boobless minutes.

hey... you don't know there won't be boobs.

true - this is michael moore we're talking about. there's a good chance that there WILL be boobs. Just not ones you wanna be looking at.

There will be boobs. There won't be boobies though. There is a difference.

but will there be moobs?

randomjsa: Those evil rich people. You know, the ones that create jobs, and spur economic growth and pay most of the taxes while getting the fewest benefits of said taxes.

Damn them!

It would be interesting to see what these captains of industry would do without government funded roads and their government educated work force. Business owners benefit far more from government provided services than individual people do. That's not a bad thing, I'm just pointing on that you're wrong.


Oh and we tried trickle down economics, and it failed. HARD. Learn the lesson. It doesn't matter what your ideology is, you need to recognize an idea when it fails. I'm sorry, it sucks, I've had my ideas fail before, but you have to move on.

Otto's_Jacket: C'mon GREEN! This thread could be a wonderful hodgepodge of capitalism defenders, internet tough guy anger and fat jokes.


I'll be back in a while to check on you guys.

Hey, if an Ann Coulter thread turns into an endless list of tranny jokes, I can sure as hell make cracks about Moore's corpulent, hairy, faux-working class form.

Swampthing in Korea: Typical Lefty thinking.

The perception that "wealth" is a finite commodity, and that if someone has lots of wealth, a portion of the population has somehow gone without.

this lefty thinks wealth is a game that you gotta ante up some serious bucks if you want to be allowed to sit at the table.

SilentStrider: strangeguitar: The answer: Simple greed.
There. I just saved the viewing public 90 boobless minutes.

hey... you don't know there won't be boobs.

If Michael Moore is in it I'll bet there will be boobs....jiggly sacks of manories.

After a point, wealth just serves as a means of 'keeping score.'

YodaTuna: randomjsa: Those evil rich people. You know, the ones that create jobs, and spur economic growth and pay most of the taxes while getting the fewest benefits of said taxes.

Damn them!

It would be interesting to see what these captains of industry would do without government funded roads and their government educated work force. Business owners benefit far more from government provided services than individual people do. That's not a bad thing, I'm just pointing on that you're wrong.


Oh and we tried trickle down economics, and it failed. HARD. Learn the lesson. It doesn't matter what your ideology is, you need to recognize an idea when it fails. I'm sorry, it sucks, I've had my ideas fail before, but you have to move on.

Different services have different levels of importance.

Free, universal education up to university level is something I am in favor of.

Giving welfare payouts to ghetto-mamas squeezing out endless kids is something I am against.