Aggiungi una trama nella tua linguaNearly 100 years after its creation, the power of the U.S. Federal Reserve has never been greater. Markets and governments around the world hold their breath in anticipation of the Fed Chair... Leggi tuttoNearly 100 years after its creation, the power of the U.S. Federal Reserve has never been greater. Markets and governments around the world hold their breath in anticipation of the Fed Chairman's every word. Yet the average person knows very little about the most powerful - and l... Leggi tuttoNearly 100 years after its creation, the power of the U.S. Federal Reserve has never been greater. Markets and governments around the world hold their breath in anticipation of the Fed Chairman's every word. Yet the average person knows very little about the most powerful - and least understood - financial institution on earth. Narrated by Liev Schreiber, Money For No... Leggi tutto
- Regia
- Sceneggiatura
- Star
Foto
- Narrator
- (voce)
Recensioni in evidenza
Inflation remains low but my understanding is the CPI no longer includes food or energy? And while unemployment has lowered my understanding is that is because people have left the workforce, and very few if any "real jobs" have been created. The films producers point out we are an economy that has consumed more than we have produced for an entire decade. They ask the question: "how long can this continue?"
The film really got me thinking about a term they brought up: "moral hazard." If I know the Fed will bail me out on the downside why not accept the risk? It also applies in my mind to debt. In olden days people worried about putting debt on their children and grandchildren. That's no longer the case for many people like me. Free Heath care? Why not? Oh if an anti-viral will save me I can practice unsafe sex? Why not? I never knew it had a name but it does: "moral hazard" and I think it's becoming rapidly absent in modern society.
It's especially applicable to the Justice System. I'm now officially a true crime addict. And one common thread in these horrendous cases is truly dangerous people are released into society time and time again. Criminals routinely violate their paroles with no negative consequences. Yes I'm against the "Prison State." But if we promise to punish but in the end "bail out" the truly bad guys, what are the consequences for a safe society? No easy answers.
Anyway I suppose I should start a blog rather than meander in emails. This movie is kinda a snoozer but I wanted to share my thoughts.
"The nation's most powerful banking regulator considered regulation obsolete."
But that wasn't entirely true. He practiced hands off until the banks were in trouble, then it was all hands on deck. If banks got into hot water with risky practices they could rely upon the "Greenspan put." This prompted one economist to say:
"This alleged libertarian was presiding over the socialization of risk in our economy."
While another stated, "Banks were spared of the free market's rule of survival of the fittest."
It's an interesting documentary while still being upsetting because yet again you see that there are a different set of rules for banks and corporations than for the rest of us. If banks make bad bets, "Don't worry about it, you have a safety net." If YOU make bad financial decisions, "You need to make smarter decisions, you peon."
At least that's what I continue to hear.
Free on Tubi TV.
Now, while Lehman and Bear-Stearns share plenty of the blame in the recent crisis, these bad debts and faulty reliance on sub-prime mortgages were not solely private sector malfeasance. A US department agency also played a crucial role: The US Federal Reserve. The US Federal Reserve ("The Fed") since Alan Greenspan became Fed Chairman in the late 1980's under then President Ronald Reagan engaged a more "hands-off" policy in terms of financial regulation and at the same time allowed much more loan money to be acquired by these private financial institutions who in turn bought into risky investments. This documentary outlines why the Fed was created in the first place, its role over the years in terms of both regulating and stimulating financial markets and what it did and didn't do to contribute to the recent financial collapse. While I don't believe the Fed was solely responsible for the financial collapse, as suggested by the film, their policy approaches were vital as one of many contributing factors which created a financial "perfect storm".
Two of the leading characters whose roles were crucial in the Fed's policy-making in this unfolding drama were the two Fed Chairmen Alan Greenspan (1987-2006) and Ben Bernanke (2006-2014). Greenspan in particular was touted as a financial guru who understood financial markets better than a Super Bowl winning football coach understands how to get first downs and touchdowns. If Greenspan didn't know the answer to an aspect of the financial market, the question itself must be flawed, or so went the conventional wisdom for nearly 30 years. To his credit, Greenspan had steered the US economy through several storms. What he didn't know was that a financial hurricane was descending upon Wall Street.
Over and over, Greenspan had opportunities to regulate aspects of the financial markets, particularly the so-called credit default swap insurance policies, issued by the likes of AIG and others. He also could have reigned in loose lending practices. Once, early on as Fed Chairman, Greenspan hinted the stock market may be spiraling out of control, but was quickly vilified by Wall Street for his remarks. Since then, during much of his tenure, he took a position of deregulation in which "the market will figure it out" approach so prevalent in Conservative politics. Ben Bernanke, who is a self-described scholar of the Great Depression, also didn't see the financial collapse coming. In several interviews prior to the beginning of the collapse, Bernanke iterates the impossibility of a national drop in housing prices. His scholarship for some reason precluded him from seeing the coming crisis, first in terms of the bursting housing bubble, then the ensuing financial crisis which was spawned as a result.
While scholars have debated and will continue to do so over the next century over the reasons for the financial crisis, several things are clear about the Recession. The Fed contributed to the collapse with certain policies, greed does not necessarily regulate itself, and no single individual can know everything about every aspect of the market. At the ensuing congressional hearings which Congress called after the collapse, Greenspan admitted the flaws of his policies. He said he assumed that financial institutions would always make the best decisions which would be in the interest of their companies. The reality is, just like everything else in a complex modern world, the private sector cannot always be counted on to make the best of decisions, be it for their companies or the worldwide economy. The Fed has a role to play in at least helping to thwart a possible crisis in the future. That role is always endlessly debated by politicians, congressmen, financiers, advisers and occasionally scholars. Let's hope the financiers won't always get 100% of their desires.
Lo sapevi?
- BlooperIn the short segment about the 1910 private rail car trip of several important bankers, plus Senator Nelson Aldrich, from Hoboken, New Jersey to Jekyll Island, Georgia, two pieces of old black-and-white film footage of train travel are used to illustrate the trip, with one of those pieces showing curving tracks in a mountainous landscape. There are no curving tracks in a mountainous landscape on any normal rail route from Hoboken to Jekyll Island.
I più visti
- How long is Money for Nothing: Inside the Federal Reserve?Powered by Alexa
Dettagli
- Data di uscita
- Paesi di origine
- Lingua
- Celebre anche come
- Деньги за бесценок
- Vedi altri crediti dell’azienda su IMDbPro
Botteghino
- Lordo Stati Uniti e Canada
- 88.045 USD
- Lordo in tutto il mondo
- 88.045 USD
- Tempo di esecuzione1 ora 44 minuti
- Colore