Earlier quoted context omitted.
On a related note, I wonder why glorified investors like Michael Burry aren’t instead demonized for contributing to, and profiting from, the near collapse of the American economy in 2008 (obviously it’s not Burry’s fault that banks gave out shit mortgages, nor is it Soros’ fault that the pound sterling was overvalued. They both took large positions to profit off these events as economies crashed)
Because Burry et al helped collapse it sooner and softer, and their profits came from the banks’ losses.
Could you not make the same argument for Soros?
> their profits came from the banks’ losses.
Where do you think that money came from?
When mortgages go bad, the banks foreclose the property and sell it.
When the banks go bad, the government props them up (in 2008) by buying their toxic assets
The sale of those toxic assets let banks cover their bad positions, including those with Burry
Burrys profit came from foreclosures and the American government (in the narrative sense that Soros’ money came from the people of England)
Which again begs the question of why Soros is the villain and not also Burry