I’ve
come across one film and read a couple of books recently. I recommend all of
them.
The
film is The Big Short. If you’re
curious about how the mortgage crisis developed and how ridiculous things got
before the crash, this is the film for you. I almost didn’t watch it because it
clocks in at over two hours. Since it’s on Netflix, I figured I could watch an
hour and then come back to it later for the rest. I didn’t have to. It’s the
fastest two-hour film I’ve ever watched. It’s based on fact, and when it takes
liberties with the actual events, it tells you. The film is about several
people who were sure or were told (one group by a wrong number phone call) the
crash was coming. One man was so certain of a crash he had securities designed
so that he could short the mortgage market by a firm happy to take his money,
since it was axiomatic the housing market would never deflate. The group that
answered the wrong number investigated the mortgage market in Florida and
discovered a stripper who had five mortgages on houses she thought she could
always refinance as well as tenants who were not aware their landlord, who had
the mortgage in the name of his dog, had defaulted—I guess it was actually the
dog that defaulted (or maybe ate the mortgage). The group investigating Florida
mortgages were convinced to short the market. One thing that stands out is how
willfully everyone in a position to question the madness, from the ratings
agencies to the SEC, ignored their jobs, in no small part because their
continued existence depended on repeat business.
With our new administration and congress
in the process of dismantling the protections (including the Consumer Financial
Protection Bureau) the previous one put in place to prevent this sort of thing
from happening again, I recommend this film as a way for us to protect
ourselves, since no one else is going to be looking out for our interests.
I listened to Thomas Frank’s Listen, Liberal, which was written
during the 2016 campaign. Post-campaign, Mr. Frank could be considered a
modern-day Cassandra. He gives a biting commentary on what’s wrong with the
Democratic party—namely that they’ve cozied up to the well-educated and
well-heeled elite. The Democrats have abandoned the concerns of their (former)
working class base for those affluent (primarily coastal) city dwellers whose
concerns are bike paths, meritocracy, and individual opportunity. Perhaps it’s
because these people are the ones writing the checks, but, as we’ve seen in the
past election, these people are not the ones voting in states needed to win an
electoral majority. What’s even worse, is the Democratic elites’ answer for
everything is education. If you’re out of work because of NAFTA (which was
pushed through congress by Bill Clinton), it’s your fault for not having the
education to get another job. Mr. Frank reminds us it was also Bill Clinton who
pushed through welfare “reform,” depriving many of a means to a legal income.
What is interesting to me is Frank’s quoting Democrats who sound like very conservative
Republicans. (Larry Summers, for example, said, “One of
the reasons that inequality has probably gone up in our society is that people
are being treated closer to the way that they’re supposed to be treated.” You
didn’t go to Harvard? Well, you deserve what you got.) There simply seems to be
no sympathy or even empathy for the single parent making minimum wage who does
not have the time, energy, money or work schedule to get an education. But,
then, what kind of contributions will the party get from these losers?
Now that
Mr. Frank has proven to be correct, will the party take some action? Or will it
just slap some makeup on the dead horse its current leadership has left behind?
Finally,
What We Do Now, edited by Dennis
Johnson and Valerie Merians (and if I were either of these people, I would be
really pissed to have my name in such microscopic print on the cover—it’s a lot
of work to edit a book) was thrown together in two months. The book has
contributions by twenty-seven writers on “standing up for your values in Trump’s
America.” Some of the contributions are painfully predictable (How many ways
can Bill McKibben say the same thing?), but there are a couple of surprises.
Allan Lichtman, a history professor and developer of a prediction system, “the
Keys to the White House,” echoes some of Thomas Frank’s points except Lichtman
is more in favor of free trade. Cognitive linguist George Lakoff tells us Trump
uses the brains of those listening to him to his advantage. I’m not sure I
agree—I’ve listened to Trump, and all I get out of doing so is wondering how
the man got as far as he did. Nevertheless, he did win the electoral vote, so
maybe there’s something to what Mr. Lakoff says. Dave Eggers gives us several
vignettes he witnessed just before and just after the election. He notes that
in Michigan, where Trump won by 13,107 votes, 110,000 people voted down ballot
but did not vote for president. Writer George Saunders offers a scathing view
of the media in his contribution titled, “The Braindead Megaphone.” He savages reporters—especially
on the local level. While reading it, I couldn’t help but think of a local
station that features a married couple as dual anchors. They’re so sweet it
makes me want to barf, and when they show photos of their children and dog
(“This is Sweetie Pie in the snow; oh, look here’s another one of him; oh, and
here he’s petting Fido, etc.”), I want
to scream, “This is not why I watch the news.” I mean, I like dogs as well as
anyone (children not so much), but I have one of my own. Anyway, evidently this
kind of thing goes on everywhere these days. Mr. Saunders gives the example of
even when local media are reporting they’re frequently dwelling on the
obvious—malls are busy during Christmas because people buy presents, so mall
parking is more difficult to find that time of year. I’d add to that people
buying shovels and salt and what the highway departments will be doing to the
roads when a snowstorm is predicted. When I see something like that, I say, to
no one in particular, “My, wasn’t THAT informative?” I am glad I’m not the only
one who finds such reporting dumb and annoying, but I’d be happier of someone
would elevate reporting to maybe at least a third- grade level.
By the
way, and I guess this is a recommendation for a third book, I highly recommend
Dave Eggers’ The Circle, which is a
novel about a Google world taken to the extreme.
Incidentally, I know people are reading this blog. I’d really like to get some
discussions going, so please feel free to comment.
© 2017 Larry Roth
"The Big Short" was amazing. Having worked as a state financial regulator back before Clinton signed NSMIA amd took the states out of the regulatory business I was amazed and delighted how they showed how things got out of control (intentionally because they pre-paid for the fix) and the fraud continued until it couldn't any longer - and they took the jargon out so everyone could see the scam. I have watching it more than once - it is that good, and I think I learn a bit more every time.
ReplyDeleteI cannot bear local news either (or national news any more) because it all seems so scripted, and each generation of talking heads starts thinking history began with their own experiences. Hence the same "crowded mall and snow removal" stories year on year. (And don't forget the fuzzy animal stories to end the newscasts.)
The Democrat leaders are just like the Republican leaders - they are all more concerned with retaining power that risking change that may diminish it. That likely says more about human nature than either party's platform.