Moore Confronted Over $50 Million Fortune: "You Lie. Stop Lying."

[alexpnz]

A 'probably' isn't good enough to make an accusation.Glenn Beck probably murdered a girl in the 90's, you can find references if you simply google that.

Glen Beck is also a jew....but you never hear him make public acceptance of that fact!

 

[Bloodshot Scott]

I honestly figured he's worth much more than that. Considering 'documentaries' are his thing and they are so cheap to produce, and further, that his have grossed so much, I honestly figured him in the 200M+ range.

I think he's just full of hot air, honestly. I judge people by what they DO, and if they aren't building shelters and schools, handing out 18 wheeler trucks full of turkeys on the holidays and putting their money where their loud mouths are, they frankly are more disgusting to me than anyone.

Moore might have good intentions, but indications are he is a Soros TOOL of some sort.

 

[xfire]

Beck's Obsession with gold betrays that fact.

 

[SabrinaDeep]

EMCEEEEMCEE wrote:
What is it with the obsession with Michael Moore that forum retards have?


Do any of said retards care to explain this 'lol Moore's hypocrite!' argument they love to regurgitate? What exactly makes him a hypocrite? So what if he is a multi-millionaire? What relevance does this have to anything? The guy is advocating for a system where he would pay more tax.


You're argument doesn't make the slightest bit of sense, mongers.

You'll agree that an anti-capitalist millionaire can cause a smile on people's faces. I don't like Michael Moore, but i don't hate him either, but...what i'm tired about these days is the lack of transparency over those public figures who pretend to assurge to role models for the current and future generations.
If you have millions and you protest against capitalism trying to have the masses following you, i would expect you to clarify how you made your millions and especially how you have INVESTED them. Yeah it's possible that he has got his millions dustying in a local credit union nominal bank account with 1% interests, but allow me to doubt it.
In Italy there is a fantastic proverb which says something like:

"It's easy to be gay with someone else's ass."

No pun to gays intended of course.

 

[Will E Worm]

Another strawman, who has said that you can only have X amount of money?

Not a "stawman." Obama said it. :tongue:

like the inbred racist teabaggers did when their agenda started getting some representation.

Proof? :bigear:

 

[No_Man]

I honestly figured he's worth much more than that. Considering 'documentaries' are his thing and they are so cheap to produce, and further, that his have grossed so much, I honestly figured him in the 200M+ range.

Roger & Me, Bowling for Columbine, Fahrenheit 911, Sicko, and Capitalism: A Love Story have a combined revenue of just over $340 million and a combined budget of just less than $40 mil. So, right around $300 million in profit. But then, of course, when you factor in the distribution deals with Lion's Gate, Weinstein, Overture, etc, he's probably taking home quite a bit less than that, particularly from the later films with wide theatrical releases. And, of course, he IS paying taxes on it all, regardless of his arguments about millionaires paying more. $50 million in current net worth could be about right.

 

[xfire]

OP's criticism goes something like this- Micheal Moore is a big fat successful idiot. :wtf: Like that's some sort of indictment. Kind of like hating liberals for a statue of Lenin on private property in Seattle. Double :wtf:

 

[emceeemcee]

You'll agree that an anti-capitalist millionaire can cause a smile on people's faces

That's just a strawman. Or you've not read anything he's written or know what he's actually on about. When has he ever said people couldn't make money? even millions?


He argues against people and corporations making money (usually large amounts)by morally dubious means ie at the expense of other people, the environment, via wars etc, not people making money period.

 

[emceeemcee]

It's ironic how the (faux)conservatives love to constantly talk about how personal fortune is a non-issue, everybody should be able to earn as much as they like blah blah blah yet here they are taking issue with someone's financial success and the fact that he hasn't given every penny away (redistribution-gasp!)


I sense jealously.

 

[Bloodshot Scott]

Roger & Me, Bowling for Columbine, Fahrenheit 911, Sicko, and Capitalism: A Love Story have a combined revenue of just over $340 million and a combined budget of just less than $40 mil. So, right around $300 million in profit. But then, of course, when you factor in the distribution deals with Lion's Gate, Weinstein, Overture, etc, he's probably taking home quite a bit less than that, particularly from the later films with wide theatrical releases. And, of course, he IS paying taxes on it all, regardless of his arguments about millionaires paying more. $50 million in current net worth could be about right.

I was thinking some of those grossed much more. I still think 50 hills is on the shy side. Maybe he stashed some of his fortune outside of the States? :surprise:

 

[Will E Worm]

That's just a strawman.

:nono: No

 

[ragincaucasian]

protest against capitalism

I'd agree with you if your argument wasn't based on a false dichotomy.
To have a critique on inherent exploitation within our economic model doesn't automatically equate you to a "communist".
You can be a Marxist without being a socialist, too.

If we're gonna have a mature discussion, lets dispassionately assess the topic and not blindly throw labels out there (that are supposed to infer some kind of meaning). Start throwing around "socialist", "communist", "left", "atheist", "Alinsky", etc as a pejorative just pollutes any legitimate talk, because now after a crazy assertion is made, we have to expend numerous exchanges just to get back to sanity

 

[ragincaucasian]

It's ironic how the (faux)conservatives love to constantly talk about how personal fortune is a non-issue, everybody should be able to earn as much as they like blah blah blah yet here they are taking issue with someone's financial success and the fact that he hasn't given every penny away (redistribution-gasp!)


I sense jealously.

I'd understand the criticism to be that of hypocrisy. The argument is that Moore is a millionaire (in the 1%) so he is a hypocrite for talking about income disparity.

That is reactionary vitriol (because it isn't actually thought through), but that is the premise

 

[SabrinaDeep]

EMCEEEEMCEE wrote: That's just a strawman. Or you've not read anything he's written or know what he's actually on about. When has he ever said people couldn't make money? even millions?


He argues against people and corporations making money (usually large amounts)by morally dubious means ie at the expense of other people, the environment, via wars etc, not people making money period.

I know pretty well who he is, believe me: he's the one doing biz and making money with corporations like Disney's Miramax, B&N, Amazon and Blockbuster which left thousands of ppl jobless and many more moneyless. Again, if he says it's wrong to invest money in WS i would expect him to be transparent about where he has put his own millions. Because you know: if it came out that he owns a few stocks here and there that would be pretty hypocritical.

 

[SabrinaDeep]

I'd agree with you if your argument wasn't based on a false dichotomy.
To have a critique on inherent exploitation within our economic model doesn't automatically equate you to a "communist".
You can be a Marxist without being a socialist, too.

If we're gonna have a mature discussion, lets dispassionately assess the topic and not blindly throw labels out there (that are supposed to infer some kind of meaning). Start throwing around "socialist", "communist", "left", "atheist", "Alinsky", etc as a pejorative just pollutes any legitimate talk, because now after a crazy assertion is made, we have to expend numerous exchanges just to get back to sanity

Where did you see me labeling him? I have never used the word comunist. It would be totally inappropriate about Michael Moore, trust me. I've said that he trashes capitalism and corporate biz and i just asked myself if it wouldn't be more appropriate to be transparent about his investments before leading certain battles. Or he cannot be asked anything? I hope to make questions is not considered a corporate fellony yet.

 

[ragincaucasian]

sorry, I wasn't directing that 2nd paragraph TO you (or anyone for that matter). No matter what side of an issue you may be on (myself included), we can all really gain some appreciation and understanding for growth if we avoid the all-too common labels that are thrust upon us all from the media

The only thing I directed to you was your assertion that Moore is against Capitalism

 

[tino99]

These people don't want Socialism, they want MORE Capitalism. The bailouts and all that other bullshit wouldn't have happened in a Capitalism.

 

[Supafly]

[No message]

 

[luvsemlarge]

 

[lurkingdirk]

Proof? :bigear:

This may be your best post, ever. Reading this, from you, I looked a little something like this: