Talk:Reversal of Fortune (2005 film)

Our society and present economic system straight-jackets people much more than in the past. Read the history books. Common folks had many more options in the past.68.13.60.210 (talk) 23:02, 11 January 2008 (UTC)

I personally met Ted in 2005 in South Sacramento. He had a two bedroom apartment and his truck, that was about it. I witnessed drug and alochol use because I was doing it with him and his sister. He had issues of severe co-dependency and low self-esteem. I think this project victimized Ted and did not apply the proper education he needed in life skills to reverse his fortune. They might as well threw the money out of a plane. I believe Ted simply wanted to feel "accepted" and "good enough to his family and others". With the proper support he could have made it the Reversal of Fortune Documentary really did Ted a disservice. I have been homeless myself and one time and used the resources in the community to overcome my obsticles which is living proof that live change is available. Sure money helps, but it is pointless without the professional and proper life skills that let you know what to do with the money to enhance your life, not fill it full of regret. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.166.134.78 (talk) 06:21, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

They arranged for him to talk to a financial advisor, but he wouldn't listen. He wouldn't listen to his family either. How is this the producer's fault? For that matter, you could have tried talking some sense into him, but he probably would have blown you off too. Afalbrig (talk) 13:27, 25 June 2010 (UTC)

There have been people whom have already had money that have done what Ted did. They did not have to give a homeless person money to find that out. WHAT A WASTE. Ted mentioned on the Oprah Show "I think something is wrong inside of me that can't be fixed" that was a cry for help right there. They could have found that out before they gave him the money to waste on users in our world and his own addictions. Who was dumb enough to give away that money anyways, the person who regulated this documentary is an idiot. If they really want to reverse someones fortune give it someone like me who is willing to do the work it takes to get somewhere. The least they could have done for Ted was provide him with the proper counseling and help before he had access to the funds, with a promise of the funds if he was willing to do the work on personal growth first. That would be something to do a documentary about, not a wasteful "experiment" that history proves is more times than not fruitless. WHO WAS THE DUMMY THAT GAVE UP THE MONEY IN THE FIRST PLACE —Preceding unsigned comment added by Debbsj (talk • contribs) 06:51, 16 January 2008 (UTC)

Money wasn't "given away." NAY!!!!!!!!! It was an investment. The folks creating the film had this little thing known as "profit motive" behind them. It was sure a lot cheaper paying some homeless dude 100 grand than to hire even a two-bit actor whose wages would have required paying for worker's comp insurance, Social Security fees, etc.68.13.60.210 (talk) 10:30, 20 January 2008 (UTC)