Conley-Wilson+Film+Entry+7-+The+Story+of+Broke

Word-count: 1001
 * Title:** The Story of Broke: Why There’s still plenty of Money to Build a Better Future
 * Director:** Louis Fox
 * Release Year:** 2011

The central argument of the film is that there is plenty of funds available to build a better future of the United States. This film carries out this argument by explaining that the way the nation has been running our economy on the outdated “Dinosaur Economy”, and continuously supporting and funding it, our government has not been allocating these funds correctly. The dinosaur economy includes big oil companies, mining companies, organizations focused on selling over-consumption and blind consumerism. It is obsolete and produces the massive amounts of pollution and greenhouse gasses while making everyday people unhappy. The narrator gives examples on how averages people can solve these problems exactly where this money can solve.
 * What is the central argument or narrative of the film?**

The issues of sustainability this film draws out includes community development, highlighted in the film, American development has been going backwards in the past few years. For example we have stopped giving bulk taxes dollars to schools, hospitals, and support for retirees. Pollution and waste is mentioned in the film as well as well as sources of such. Pollution, likewise much waste, is produced by factories and oil companies. Citizenship and governance is the main issue drawn out in the film because the point of this film, explained by the narrator, is to take some action today to make a better tomorrow. This draws out issues of organizational learning, in other words she is teaching people how to act together and make a change. Health and well-being is valued in this film, because the narrator wants a better world for tomorrow, she wants Americans to be able to learn and thrive in a healthy environment. She believes that we should have access to resources that will help people stay healthy. Consumerism is mentioned in the film, however it is not the focus of this film because it was the focus of her previous film.
 * What sustainability issues does the film draw out?**

The parts of the film I found most persuasive and compelling was the steps individuals can take collectively to solve a problem. I find this compelling because it gives us the power, many assume have been taken away from them. I found her statements of restricting and reallocating subsidies compelling because she gave direct numbers and statistics that was easy to understand. She explained how funding certain aspects gives countless benefits to the environment and health of the community.
 * What parts of the film did you find most persuasive and compelling? Why?**

I was not convinced by the simplicity the film because the issues she talking about are very complex. Although I admire how simple it was to understand her points and key methods of intervention is was not as convincing because it takes a lot more effort than she let on to get people to collectively act on a political issue, especially ones regarding sustainability.
 * What parts of the film were you not compelled or convinced by? Why?**

Corrective action suggested by the film is for citizens to take back their government and tax dollars. Actions suggested by this film were ones of community involvement and outreach of the government. She states that we first need to become protective of our tax dollars by first voting out officials that do not represent in appropriate ways. Next spending the $10 Million on oil to renewable energy initiatives like retrofitting homes, giving 2 Million households solar energy, using less petro-chemicals and investing in zero waste and public education.
 * What kinds of corrective action are suggested by the film? If the film itself does not suggest corrective action, describe action that you can image being effective.**

The kinds of literacy cultivated by the film includes: understanding of their own health and well-being as shaped by an array of both proximate and far-off causes she realizes both that health and well-being is a result of both environment and opportunity. Understanding how their own actions have an array of proximate and far off effects is cultivated by explaining how actions yesterday got us to the society we live in today and how our actions can affect the future of the United States. The narrator understands the potential for change, and of alternative ways of doing things and organizing society, she cultivates this by explaining how we could reorganize our government’s management of subsidies.
 * What kinds of literacy are cultivated by the film?**

Improving the environmental educational value of the film would require this film to be significantly longer. Having professionals speak of how to improve the environment, economy, and society would give this film a lot more stature. Showing live feeds of factories, oil clean ups, and film of war would improve this value because it would make this issues to seem more tangible. I believe this film did a good job of creating some sort of base of environmental education however it does not go very deep into the problems sustainability in the nation.
 * What would improve the environmental educational value of the film?**

This film compelled me to see out this additional information regarding waste management in my community at home. I found out that, like Vermont, my hometown have a list of banded materials from waste that includes all recyclable materials, leaves and yard waste, white goods, whole tires, building materials, metal and wood1. Although I have only seen this law enforced in just leave and yard waste, this regulation is a vital step to zero waste. Recycling is mandatory in my town for anyone who receives residential waste pick-up, however I have never seen compost pick-up. I discovered that my town does not do compost pick up, however it does provide resources, curtesy of the Department of Environmental Protection, to obtain a discounted compost bins for “residents of grantee communities for $45 or less.” This film also compelled me to find what nations are performing zero waste effectively. In Europe Estonia the best waster performing country, followed closely with Slovenia and Belgium2. There are many countries that do well in recycling however generate lots of waste, however it does not surprise me that Europe is much more forward thinking about waste than the United States.
 * What additional information has this film compelled you to see out? (Describe what you learned in a couple of sentences, providing at least two supporting references.)**

1. South Shore Recycling Cooperative. “Waste Ban Regulations” [] 2. ZeroWaste Europe. “And the best waste performing country in Europe is…Estonia!” []