Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

InterstellarBlue t1_j6omepj wrote

Reply to comment by Fausterion18 in Bulls: Shut up and take my money!! by CrackCody

It sounds like you're completely and deliberately missing the point. The greed, shortsightedness, and ruthlessness on Wall Street are 100% morally wrong. They cost American taxpayers trillions and are representative of how the wealthy wield disproportionate power in this country.

All of the things I pointed to, from the movie, in my comment above are criticisms of that. The whole movie worked to criticize Wall Street. It's like you're insisting that someone who wins at poker isn't doing anything wrong, and I'm trying to explain to you that the whole point is that the game is messed up and all the players in it are greedily trying to screw each other over, while costing the audience their money and livelihoods.

0

Fausterion18 t1_j6omllc wrote

Cool story, nothing you said is even remotely relevant to my post, which is the fire sale itself that Kevin spacey had so much trouble with was not morally wrong.

There is nothing "messed up" about trading, just like there's nothing wrong with poker. Otherwise why the fuck are you here? What they did is no different from what all of wsb does.

0

InterstellarBlue t1_j6p02dr wrote

Honest question. Do you think that the many individuals working at big banks during 2008 did something wrong? I think there is a huge difference between what individual retail traders do and what is done at the big banks on Wall Street.

This movie was an indictment of that. I'm surprised you're not seeing that. That is what my original point was in my first comment.

0

Fausterion18 t1_j6p2ugs wrote

Totally irrelvant, I'm only addressing the fire sale and the CEO speech.

> I think there is a huge difference between what individual retail traders do and what is done at the big banks on Wall Street.

There is zero difference from a wsber selling an option and one of the traders in that scene selling a bunch of mbs.

> This movie was an indictment of that. I'm surprised you're not seeing that. That is what my original point was in my first comment.

Your original point is a red herring.

0