While his propagandamentries are undoubtedly cheap to churn out, the speciality branch of Paramount distributing his film laid on lots of TV ads at the time of the initial film launch. This is very expensive advertising even if done mostly on cable/satellite channels.

My informal tracking of the grosses to date suggest that they may not reach much over $10 million domestic, though the film is still playing. There are DVD and foreign showings, but theater owners and the distributor would normally take most of the gate until certain targets are it. Time will tell, but it seems that trashing “capitalism” of whatever sort isn’t a boffo box office draw.

Moore’s low rent antics can’t continue unless actual capitialsts (those who risk their own capital) get their money back plus a little vig.

Sure, true believing statists might flock, but even they will hesitate to part with $10 to hear what they already believe, and few others care about the subject. Moore doesnt’ exactly have a reputation for unbiased reporting or even dramatic presentation. Some 250 lb+ goofball in a Tigers ball cap harassing security guards (who, unlike Moore, seem to appreciate capitalism) is hardly entertainment in this “Punked” and realtity TV saturated world. If he danced naked and set himself on fire, maybe…

I assume Moore’s past commie loving films have been modestly profitable (so they must be “evil”, right?) but “Capitalism” might be the bridge too far. You don’t have to be a cheerleader for the AIG/Goldman Sachs banksters to want to see the Dow average back up and your 401(k) in the black.

Moore’s ideological confusion again contaminates his theme here. Obama has coopted the Left, and real Maoists have long since turned into Armani wearing marketeers. As Sheldon and others have duely noted, it isn’t 1965 again and few intelligent observers are confused by the smoke and mirrors of state capitalist bailouts.

Cartoon quality anticapitalism simply makes no sense, and this Porky Pig’s muddled attack on a strawman simply ain’t that funny…

In Europe there are multiple parties, but even there conservatives are not seen as the prime defender of free markets and thus the concept remains cleaner (though radical free markets are a no go in Europe).

Moore directs his movies to an audience that is in a locked battle with Conservatives and not with libertarians. It is them that have this muddled concept of what free market means and how it works.
There exists a You Tube video, where you can clearly see that when he discusses his position with more free market and less conservative people. He tends to agree and loses his momentum, because we are suddenly soft targets that concede to some progressive theory and lifestyles. However, this wouldn’t make for a good populist movie, if you have to agree with a group about half the time and even on important issues…

There are only two types of human beings.

One type just wants everyone to leave everyone else alone and these humans are students and advocates of the Philosophically Mature Non-Aggression Principle.

The other type refuses to leave others alone and these humans are the Mobocracy Looter Minions with their hords of bureaucrats, jackboots, and mercenaries that perpetuate the perpetration of the loot and booty gravy-train. Rob-peter-to-buy-paul’s-vote bread and circuses of the doomed Amerikan Empire.

You are either the one…or the other.

The John Galt Solution of Starving The Monkeys is the only solution. Stop funding and forging your own chains and shackles. What are you leaving for your children and grandchildren and prodigy!?!

The Mobocracy Looter Minions must be allowed to consume everything around them, then each other, and finally themselves. There is no other way. Ayn Rand wrote about it over fifty years ago and it rings as soundly today as it did then.

Get your copy of Starving The Monkeys by Tom Baugh today, before the book is banned and the author is hunted down and Vince Fostered!

Sincerely,
John and Dagny Galt
Atlas Shrugged, Owner’s Manual For The Universe!(tm)

http://www.starvingthemonkeys.com/

http://voluntaryist.com/fundamentals/introduction.php

.

Moore gets the tax-rate story wrong, and I let it get by me. The 91 percent rate fell to 77 in 1964 and 70 in 1965; this was the Kennedy tax cut — I wonder why Moore didn’t say that Democrats John Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson were the rate cutters. Under Republican Ronald Reagan, whom Moore wishes to demonize for cutting taxes for the rich, the rate dropped to 50 and eventually to 28 percent. HT: Gary Chartier.

This is a wonderful turn of phrase. When stated like this it’s easier to explain how more regulation may in fact be in order – provided it is directed at reigning in the politicians power to collude and plunder.

So Moore is a radical in no respect whatsoever. He’s just a good old big-government, big-business, big-union “liberal.” Hubert Humphrey would have been proud.

Unfortunately, what I think Moore pines for, what he means by “socialism,” is a kind of New Deal social democracy based on the most bloated and bureaucratic mass-production model out of the mid-20th century. “There is no God but Chandler, and Galbraith is his prophet.” Moore has repeatedly expressed nostalgia for the “consensus capitalism” of the mid-20th century (including the “good war” that made it possible by destroying most plant and equipment outside the U.S.). I think if we could just go back to a world where GM employed half the people in the country, and they all got union wages, the prospect of a “Brazil”-like world managed by giant bureaucracies would make Moore happy as a pig in… well, you get the idea.

Moore tips his hat to the Green and New Agey stuff, talking about switching Detroit from producing cars to producing buses and high-speed trains. But there’s no combination of such products that could continue, after a few years, to utilize the same capacity and employ as many people as it took to produce 18 million cars a year. From what I can see, Moore has absolutely no sympathy to anything lean or decentralized–just a greenwashed version of Alfred Sloan and George Meany.

http://fee.org/articles/tgif/regulation-red-herring/

That is, we do not choose between a regulated or an unregulated market. The choice is to decide who regulates it, centralized government, or decentralized private individuals.

Less from Moore: A Love Affair with Misunderstanding
http://economicsfreedommatters.blogspot.com/2009/10/less-from-moore-love-affair-with.html