Inside Job: Who Maimed the Economy, and How - Movie Review Example

?The movie “Inside Job” elicits strong negative responses from viewers, which are relative based on one’s position of the events outlines and expounded in the movie. Personally, the movie being an expose of the background behind then events that led to the financial crisis of the late 2000s arouses outrage. This is concerning the vivid exposure of the selfish deeds that business executives participated in, in an attempt to line their pockets with more cash and leaving those in vulnerable positions to fend for themselves without any form of security or safety net to fall back on in the event of a financial mishap. The movie arouses emotions of hatred towards those with financial power and annoyance towards regulatory agencies. The activities portrayed are too inhuman to bear and even come to terms with, which people with such wicked ambition do exist, and little can be done to bring their mindset to a halt. This is including the lack of a conscious, which seems to be the perfect definition of a capitalist nation, and one in which power is given to a chosen few to control the fate of the country’s economics. The worst part in the entire movie is the lack of measures to regulate the financial industry, and especially the replacement of business executives. This is concerning the selfish ambition with no regard, whatsoever, for human welfare, other than propulsion of their business enterprises into greater heights. This is particularly so with the selfish decision made in misleading investors, in internet stocks, to continue investing heavily while then returns, in the future, were not something worth considering (Scots 2). It is also frustrating to watch, in the movie, the lack of accountability after the bubble burst in the face of the world. The situation is made worse by the presence of Charles Morris and Lawrence Summers in the movies. They are the most annoying characters in the footage owing to their carefree attitudes in a dire situation that requires seriousness to put the audience at ease. Charles Morris finds it amusing that bankers have taken advantage of the windfall resultant from selfish decisions and misfortunes of members of the public. He is also annoying in his attempt to induce humor in the cheap mindset of the individual bankers at making large fortunes and thinking it is because they are smart, which is the opposite. This is because; his attempts appear as a mockery to the innocent pubic, which loses to the bankers. It also depicts the public as being part of a foolish movement that is easily swayed by winds of selfish ambition. Lawrence summers, though not an official member of the cast, is also annoying with his conceptions of other peoples’ ideas despite being backed by ideas. This is such as the warning given by Raghuram Rajan earlier of the pending financial crisis in the near future, which summers dismisses and mocks (Scott 1). Since the 1980s, the financial sector has undergone a phase of lack of regulation as opposed to the period before it putting the country in the state it currently is. With this mind, the film puts the blame for the situation squarely on the shoulders of both political parties; that is democrats and republicans (Scot 1). This is because during the entire period of lack of regulation, both parties have been in power and have done little to ease the tension in the financial sector. This is as portrayed by Ferguson through the dropping of regulation of the economy in the 1980s and the resultant crisis in the late 2000s. The blame for the entire crisis originates with the government following the policy against regularization of the finance industry, which could have been fuelled by financial institutions. However, the main cause of the crisis lies with the selfish bankers individually and their boards for misleading members of the public and capitalizing on their trust in financial institutions. Decisions made by financial services companies led to the meltdown in the financial sector by undermining reports of looming collapse of the financial system. This is, in addition to the lack of, effort to correct the situation by the government, and even offering stimulus packages to revive the economy. With this, the directors in the financial service institutions created more crises by spending the funds on board members to increase their sendoff perks. This creates a solid base to blame them for the current situation. In order to punish those associated with then economic crimes, it is crucial to put certain financial advisors behind bars. These include Lawrence Summers, who downplayed warnings for selfish ambitions and other government finical advisors, as well as board members of all companies that benefited from the bail out plans from the government. This is in order to create accountability and prevent future occurrence of such events. With the events depicted in the movie, then future appears bleak. This is because; of the anti-reformists in the financial sector who want to maintain a status quo. The sustenance of the current policy will lead to the likelihood of another occurrence of similar events ruining the economy altogether. Ethically, the entire financial system is a mess owing to the power vested in a small number of people. This makes the power subject to abuse, which is against the moral obligation of any individual. This is particularly so in relation to individualistic decision making with no concern for public repercussions and welfare, resulting in the ruin of so many lives. With this in mind, the college education that the parties involved have is inadequate due to lack of any sense of responsibility in taking accountability for one’s actions. As a result, it is crucial to instill a sense of accountability and responsibility, such that utter disregard for the law and public welfare is stopped, and promotion of moral reasoning given a greater degree of recognition as opposed to simple academics. In conclusion, the movie is quite an informative expose on the inside dealings that led to the financial crisis in the late 2000s. It comes clear with information on the causes and hints at different ways through which future crises can be avoided. It is, therefore, crucial to pay attention to detail in the movie and understand the entire situation objectively. Work Cited Scots, A. Inside Job (2010): Who Maimed the Economy, and how. The New York Times. 2010. Web. 7 October 2012. < http://movies.nytimes.com/2010/10/08/movies/08inside.html> Read More