-
A Novel Solution to the Immigration Problem: The NAFTA Angle
January 30, 2013 | 10 comments
-
Keeping Eastern Europe in Mind
April 25, 2012 | 1 comment
-
Why Some Government Spending Is Better Than Others …
February 24, 2012 | 3 comments
-
The End of Secularism and the HHS Mandate
February 15, 2012 | 2 comments
-
The Reversal of Proposition 8: A Dangerous Precedent
February 8, 2012 | 9 comments
The Spectacle Blog
I was telling my boss, Robert Sloan (former Baylor president and current president of HBU), about Michael Moore’s new film Capitalism: A Love Story. We briefly discussed an interview of Moore by the Wall Street Journal yesterday in which Moore asserted that the auto workers should own 100% of the auto companies.
Sloan responded, “The interviewer should have asked Moore if the crews on his films own the projects they work on for him.” That would be a nice question for the filmmaker, wouldn’t it?
“Mr. Moore, do you pay your workers a wage to perform their functions or — consistent with your philosophy — do they own the films you make along with you?”
I suspect we know the answer to that one. Michael Moore probably places a premium on his own intellectual property, creativity, and personal drive and thus maintains ownership of the fruits of his own labor. He likely thinks his unique work product and his unorthodox and risky career as a filmmaker should benefit him personally and that he should own and control his projects.
Why not believe that for all the other capitalists, Mr. Moore?
Reporters, we need the answer to this one, please. “Mr. Moore, do your crews own your film projects or are they simply paid a wage?”
I wonder how much the key grip made on Fahrenheit 9/11?
View all comments (39) | Leave a comment
More Blog Posts by Hunter Baker
http://spectator.org/blog/2009/09/24/the-question-michael-moore-mus
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
The Spectacle Blog
The #FreeKate Narrative Melts Down: Lies Exposed in Florida Teen Sex Case
Robert Stacy McCain | 5.25.13
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
H/T to National Review Online
ADVERTISEMENT
Tim| 9.24.09 @ 10:31AM
The only way you'll get Moore's attention to that question is to write it on a piece of chicken and fry it.
Mark | 9.24.09 @ 10:52AM
Good point...I've also wondered, do I have to PAY to see this film? And secondly, if wage controls are so peachy keen for Wall Street, why not Hollywood? Why not a documentary on the obscene amount of money Brad, Tom and Julia make? While were at it, lets extend that to Katie, Brian and Charlie.
S.L. Toddard| 9.24.09 @ 11:50AM
"I've also wondered, do I have to PAY to see this film? And secondly, if wage controls are so peachy keen for Wall Street, why not Hollywood?"
I would assume it's because Hollywood - unlike Wall Street - has not, through its own rapacity and corruption - and in collusion with a federal government literally owned by Wall Street - destroyed the world economy. Also, Hollywood has not recieved trillions of dollars confiscated from American taxpayers to reward its malfeasance and futher enrich and empower the architects of this recent disaster that cost the American people so much.
In short because Hollywood - sleazy as it is - is not nearly as morally bankrupt and corrupt as Wall Street.
wbfrank| 9.24.09 @ 1:51PM
Whoa! Wait a min! And you think that ONLY Wall Street is to blame for all of this financial mess??
And the legislation making the banking industry give out bad loans wasn't??? You know the legislation signed by Carter (the first Obama) and increased during the Clinton Error? Fannie May and Freddie Mac and Barny the Frank and all of the Democratic Party leadership?
Check your history. And, BTW I am NOT an apologist for either the Republicans or the corrupt banking industry. But the banking industry had a little to do with the mess but not the WHOLE reason.
What do you think: quadrupling the debt of the US economy in less that 7 months by BHO is going to get us out of debt. Then anyone who thinks that is reality should be locked up!
chas| 9.24.09 @ 2:38PM
Wow, there really are people dumber than dirt out there! Good to know Obama has some supporters who will never understand just how big an idiot he is!
Jim_NH | 9.24.09 @ 12:58PM
To say nothing of the salaries of the top 20% of professional football, basketball and baseball players
Pingback| 9.24.09 @ 10:59AM
Twitter Trackbacks for The American Spectator : AmSpecBlog : The Question Michael Mo links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Greg| 9.24.09 @ 11:03AM
Once healthcare passes he should have to pay by the pound.
He is a racist
wbfrank| 9.24.09 @ 2:40PM
careful what you say. I work for the US Govm'nt and am currently under IT investigation. I just happened to have a couple of political cartoons on my office computer. It was confiscated and one of my supervisors, who coincidentally happens to be black, has my number... or so he thinks.
Little does he know but when pushed I push back.
I am a veteran of the US Navy and never seen anything like this. There is racism all over the world. With this administration Black Racism has raised it's evil head. No kind of racism is anything but evil.
This government does not care about you. They do not have a soft part of their evil self that has any compassion on the so called poor. They could care less if you have any health care much less that government controlled. They give not a whit about the environment; all they want is to be in power and control ALL of the citizens. We are moving rapidly towards a dictator controlled country. Next comes a UN controlled One World Government!
S.L. Toddard| 9.24.09 @ 11:41AM
"The interviewer should have asked Moore if the crews on his films own the projects they work on for him."
That really is a good point. Although what Moore is suggesting - worker ownership of companies rather than popular ownership of industry - is more Dorothy Day than Karl Marx.
COnservative Bob| 9.24.09 @ 12:33PM
SL not to be picky but I think you are misinformed.
While Hollywood cannot be blamed for the credit melt down they are taking government funds.
A major film project recently shot in PA will not have the sequel filmed there specifically because the subsidies paid by state and local government will not be as large for the sequel as there were for the original project.
The amount in question is substantial, and it is a direct payment to the movie company of funds extracted at gun point from the citizens of PA.
Cities, counties and states all over the country have kicked in substantial sums so that films will be shot in their locations.
As to morally bankrupt and corrupt I believe that on too is debatable. CAN you refine your target a bit more please or are you suggesting that traders, brokers, analysts, broker assistants and support staff that work on wall street are all corrupt or the leadership of companies traded their or the few well connected insiders who through their connections to people in government have been able to capitalize on their position?
S.L. Toddard| 9.24.09 @ 12:38PM
You misunderstand me. No Hollywood movie studios have recieved *bailouts*. That is what I was referring to when I said they'd not received billions "to reward... malfeasance and further enrich and empower the architects of this recent disaster that cost the American people so much".
State gov'ts subsidizing films is not really germane.
S.L. Toddard| 9.24.09 @ 12:42PM
"CAN you refine your target a bit more please or are you suggesting that traders, brokers, analysts, broker assistants and support staff that work on wall street are all corrupt or the leadership of companies traded their or the few well connected insiders who through their connections to people in government have been able to capitalize on their position?"
No, I'm not saying that every person who works on Wall Street is a criminal. I'm referring to those who control the most powerful firms, those who pinball back and forth from positions of extreme power in the private and public sectors to pass legislation in the public sector that "regulates" the industry they just left, and then returning to that industry to reap the spoils. I'm speaking of those companies whose irresponsibility and corruption helped fuel this last disaster and who were *rewarded* for it by the federal gov't in the form of massive bailouts and/or prominent positions in the Obama gov't, instead of being punished for their malfeasance by the Free Market.
Pingback| 9.24.09 @ 12:52PM
Stones Cry Out - If they keep silent… » Capitalism: A Hypocritical Odyssey links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
COservative Bob| 9.24.09 @ 1:01PM
We ‘celebrated’ the anniversary of the collapse of Lehman Brothers a short while back and I wondered how much better off we would be today if those deemed too big to fail had been allowed a similar fate.
I think we will much more regret “saving’ those too big to fail and the massive intrusion of the government into the economy than we would have the pain of the market punishing those that took imprudent risk.
S.L. Toddard| 9.24.09 @ 1:08PM
We didn't just "save" them - we *rewarded* them. We removed the entire motivation to act responsibly. In a free market, the heads of corporations ideally act responsibly because it is in their self-interest; if they act irresponsibly, they lose money and go out of business. We have removed that correcting mechanism entirely, and instead rewarded malfeasance, enshrined the miscreants in power and all but guaranteed continued malpractice. And why did we do that? Because the powerful elites who had the most to lose OWN Washtingon. I do not say that as rabble-rousing hyperbole, I say it as a statment of fact.
Liberals need to learn that "regulation" does not restrain the activities of mega-corporations and financial giants, because mega-corporations and financial giants *write the legislation*. Conservatives need to learn that Big Business doesn't need protection from Big Government - they are one and the same, and the American people need protection from them both.
Johnno| 9.24.09 @ 1:11PM
Liberal social engineering destroyed our economy; Barney Frank and Chris Dodd made sure of it.
Socialism destroys.
S.L. Toddard| 9.24.09 @ 1:15PM
It's just not that simple. The causes of the crash do not fit into the simplistic Left v Right narrative. In the end it boils down to mismanagement of money by the Fed, malfeasance writ large by the financial industry (with the full cooperation of both parties), and extreme fiscal irresponsibility in Washington, which does indeed include Liberal social engineering, but it also includes neoconservative social engineering of the sort we are now perpetrating in Afghanistan.
wbfrank| 9.24.09 @ 2:00PM
...and the housing reinvestment act had nothing to do with the financial collapse?
Yes all corporations are corrupt... free market? Ha! That is long gone in this country and now we have a government who is so corrupt in fact that they are looking for ways to stay in office forever!
No it is not Left vs Right: it is now and always has been Good vs Evil. And now we see it plainly.
Johnno| 9.24.09 @ 2:09PM
Nice backtrack, "Real Conservative." Why didn't your first rant include the culpability of liberal social engineering in our fiscal meltdown?
Lying liberal troll; you're Bob. Nitwit.
S.L. Toddard| 9.24.09 @ 2:15PM
I literally have no idea what you're talking about. Why didn't I list every single cause of the collapse in what rant? Are you drinking this early?
Johnno| 9.24.09 @ 2:33PM
Slow witted or maybe you're just drunk: Your 11:50AM rant conveniently excluded Barney Frank's and Chris Dodd's liberal social engineering policies (ACORN! ACORN! ACORN!) as contributory factors in the financial meltdown. We know you're just covering your liberal butt.
Yawn. You bore me, troll.
S.L. Toddard| 9.24.09 @ 3:13PM
Um... so you're having trouble understanding why I didn't mention social engineering in a post about why wage control would be more appropriate for Wall Street than Hollywood?
You need me to explain that to you. Wow. Ok, well, here it goes: I didn't include social engineering in the post about wage controls for Wall St vs wage control for Hollywood because the post was about wage controls for Wall St vs wage control for Hollywood. "Social engineering" is not at all relevant to why wage controls are more appropriate for Wall Street than Hollywood. I am not in the habit of inserting irrelevant non sequiturs into a post about a specific subject, because I am not a crazy person.
Let me know if I should simplify it any further for you.
Johnno| 9.24.09 @ 3:28PM
Stupid troll, you're the one who is having trouble understanding. You excluded leftist contributions to the economic meltdown because you don't argue in good faith. We know you're a lying, liberal troll.
You're just another Axelrod astroturfing whore. Nothing new under the sun.
S.L. Toddard| 9.24.09 @ 3:47PM
Oh. I almost feel bad now, for making you look so silly. I'm sorry, young man - don't feel bad.
Johnno| 9.24.09 @ 4:01PM
Ha ha ha ha. Loser.
Todd| 9.24.09 @ 1:25PM
May I recommend you read Liberal Fascism SLT? Real conservatives oppose corporatism which seeks protection of big business from its smaller competitors and is not free market in any way. Corporatism was a major component of the fascist regimes of Mussonlin's Italy and Nazi Germany where big business served the agenda of the State. We are unfortunately seeing this happen rampantly today in companies like GE, GM, Goldman Sachs, Citigroup, etc. Like you said, "regulation" like the Democrats want will protect big business and make them indebted to Washington for favors. More regulation equals more corruption and more lobbyist so former politicians like Tom Daschle can make millions as "consultants".
I certainly have had my disagreements with you on other subjects but on this we agree.
S.L. Toddard| 9.24.09 @ 1:28PM
I am glad that we do.
Todd| 9.24.09 @ 1:42PM
Mr. Baker is correct of course, Michael Moore is a huge hypocrite who profits from capitalism while he trashes it. If he really believed what he purports, he would move to Cuba and give away his ill-gotten capitalist money to Castro's regime and work for him at a "fair" salary. A "fair" salary in Cuba for government workers comes out to about $30 per month so somehow I doubt the fat bastard will be so willing to give up his millionaire lifestyle to live in a true "equitable" society like Cuba.
If the fat bastard was interested in comparing capitalist with socialist societies and how fair they are, he might want to compare how the average government worker in the US lives and the health care he receives compared with Cuba. Presumably he is all for high government salaries and benefits but it seems that is only possible in "evil capitalist societies".
wbfrank| 9.24.09 @ 2:08PM
When this country completely goes Socialist the and we have a Democratic Dictatorship where will Mr. Moore go then?
He, as is most of Congress, is an elitist.
The elitist mentality works only if you are in power. We need to trash the whole of Congress and start over. This goes with the states as well.
In my opinion a real revolution is just around the corner. Why else is OUR government trying to stifle free speech, change the Constitution through the probability of a Constitutional Convention, take over the economy, make any religion (especially Christianity and the religion of the Jews) illegal and take away the guns?
Let us all make sure we keep our powder dry.
Mark | 9.24.09 @ 2:24PM
Apparently we are unfamiliar with sarcasm. See, when I said, do I have to PAY to go see this film,,,oh never mind.
ATLmedia| 9.24.09 @ 11:12PM
Actually, if you did see MM movie(s) you'd be a better judge of his conclusions.
F. 911 pointed out the vast control the Saudis* hold over US policy (for decades) little things like the millions paid monthly to a cadre of DC whores
Not just the Bushes, but they did well!
Sicko too, was illuminating.
*Google/Read author (ex CIA Agent) Robert Baer on the subject
Jerry| 9.25.09 @ 10:42AM
ATL, I thought you morons on the left blamed everything on ISRAEL!!! So, the Saudis control our foreign policy; unlike Russia, Cuba and Venezuela who are in control now, right?
Only a turd believes anything Moorepig squeals. Bush was responsible for 9/11, too. Right? Freak.
cindy| 9.25.09 @ 12:09AM
This argument goes to all the Hollywood elite who support this administration, if you love socialism so much, why don't you spread your wealth around and live like the common man. It wouldn't be to much to ask you to cut down your carbon footprint while your at it. You are the worst capitalist pigs around, you got yours and now you don't want anybody else to have the same opportunity.
cindy| 9.25.09 @ 12:13AM
In sicko he shows a patient with renal cell carcinoma denied a bone marrow transplant and acts like this poor man was denied care. Nobody gets a bone marrow transplant for renal cell carcinoma, that would be beyond experimental and probably illegal to perform it. Later Michael Moore takes the patients to Guitamo where the terrorist are being held to make the point that they live better there then US citizens! I wonder if he feels stupid about that yet.
Jerry| 9.25.09 @ 10:44AM
Cindy, that fat slob is too stupid to know he's stupid.
Pingback| 10.2.09 @ 11:14AM
capitalist coffee » On Michael Moore and Capitalism links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
muse| 12.21.10 @ 11:41PM
Even though I may support some of Michael Moore's views I am also painfully aware that his films are non-union and he does not not give union benefits to the workers he employs on his sets and in post-production. I find this highly disturbing.