Not Logged In Log In   Sign Up   Points Leaders
Follow Us    10:17 PM

Message Forum - Read Message

Category: US politics > Topics Add to favorite topics   Post new topicPost New Topic
Author Topic: Why The Koch Brothers Are So Ruthless: They Were Raised That Way. Back to Topics
SemiSteve

Champion Author
Tampa

Posts:19,828
Points:457,025
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Jun 27, 2014 4:14:17 PM

Fist fights as kids; Competition for 'getting the most girls'; A father who showed little to no affection; A father obsessed with profits - often leaving the family children to essentially raise themselves; A subservient mother; A family that inherited a vast oil empire from a stressed father who worked himself into an early grave with a heart attack; A heartbroken mother who couldn't take the infighting and also died of a heart attack; Multiple failed marriages; Adult brothers who refuse to acknowledge or speak each other; Multi-million dollar law suits fighting over inheritances, family and company squabbles; Undertaking elaborate espionage against one another; - all part of the story that explains why the Koch brothers are so ruthless.

This real story would make a good novel. One must wonder if the writers of the hit TV series Dallas were inspired by the Koch brothers.

Mother Jones Article On The Koch Family History

Very interesting reading.

Apparently the way they treat the nation as their own little play toy is the way they treat everything and everyone else, including one another.

There are actually four Koch brothers. The two that currently run Koch industries (Charles and David) had a bitter dispute and power struggle with the other two (Bill and Fred, who objected to at least some of the ruthlessness) and, amid law suits, emerged as the victors in the greed contest. Imagine being forced out of the family company because you object to doing things that run afoul of federal regulators. Becoming the outsider because you want to comply with the law. And instead of compliance, more law suits. Amazing brashness.

Let's hope not all of the 1% is so cold and selfish as these guys. This story explains a bit of why they got that way and the personal price paid for their conquests.

Good businessmen?

Or sadly sick power junkies...
REPLIES (newest first) Post a Reply
Profile Pic
SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:19,828
Points:457,025
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Nov 3, 2014 9:31:43 AM

TheTower, commenting about atrocious acts does not constitute hatred. Otherwise all criticism could be equated to hatred, an absurd stretch.
Profile Pic
AnotherOne
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:26,599
Points:787,955
Joined:Aug 2010
Message Posted: Oct 30, 2014 7:52:44 PM



mudtoe, "Raise somebody to believe that they have the right to the fruits of other people's labor and they become a criminal or a liberal."

Or both!

Profile Pic
mudtoe
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:14,239
Points:1,953,675
Joined:May 2008
Message Posted: Oct 30, 2014 7:00:43 PM

socialiststeve: "Raise somebody in a cold-hearted way and they become ... take a guess. "


Raise somebody to believe that they have the right to the fruits of other people's labor and they become a criminal or a liberal.


mudtoe
Profile Pic
theTower
Champion Author Indiana

Posts:15,766
Points:634,815
Joined:Jun 2007
Message Posted: Oct 30, 2014 4:04:47 PM

"Who is talking about hating people, Tower?"

"Or sadly sick power junkies.." is quite the term of endearment.
Its no secret that the left tolerates hate as long as its for the cause.
Profile Pic
SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:19,828
Points:457,025
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Oct 30, 2014 3:51:56 PM

Raise somebody in a cold-hearted way and they become ... take a guess.
Profile Pic
SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:19,828
Points:457,025
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Oct 2, 2014 7:09:53 AM

Who is talking about hating people, Tower?

AC 302, I told you how I view Buffett. If you want to embellish it you own that. This topic is about the Koch brothers.

EZ, of course Buffett is smart. So are the Kochs. That doesn't make them nice.
Profile Pic
EZExit
Champion Author Phoenix

Posts:16,638
Points:2,395,435
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Sep 26, 2014 11:18:18 PM

Steve: <<<"But his greed is surpassed by the ruthlessness of the Koch's. Does Buffet spy on his own family out of suspicion? Does he sue them?">>>

--We don't know, there haven't been any "gotcha" journalism done to undermine Buffett that I am aware of. But one thing is for sure, one has the right to investigate members of their family, or anyone else for that matter, as well as sue them. That is still a freedom that has not been taken away from us yet. Actually, that same tactic was utilized by "MotherJones" to set up Romney with that 47% rubbish. I know that you relished THAT action...

Steve: <<<"Yup, Buffet is no angel when it comes to sacrificing jobs for massive profits. After all, he is in the .1%. And Buffet has no concern for the climate, either. Bought a coal train just for the profits.">>>

--Perhaps Buffett is like many others, and doesn't believe that man is changing climate. Just because he doesn't believe the same stuff you believe doesn't make him wrong. For what it's worth, I don't think Buffett got to where he is today by being "stupid".

[Edited by: EZExit at 9/26/2014 11:23:34 PM EST]
Profile Pic
AC-302
Champion Author Los Angeles

Posts:31,633
Points:3,506,895
Joined:Aug 2004
Message Posted: Sep 26, 2014 8:03:46 PM

SemiSteve said: "But his greed is surpassed by the ruthlessness of the Koch's."

--Well, says you and Mother Jones News. I find it interesting that your defense is, in effect: "But.. but.. the Koch brothers are worse!" If I am mis-stating your case, please correct me, as I don't want to misrepresent you.
Profile Pic
mudtoe
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:14,239
Points:1,953,675
Joined:May 2008
Message Posted: Sep 26, 2014 7:51:12 PM

Precisely!
Profile Pic
theTower
Champion Author Indiana

Posts:15,766
Points:634,815
Joined:Jun 2007
Message Posted: Sep 26, 2014 5:21:46 PM

"just so long as you hate the right people."

Which is generally people who are on the right
Profile Pic
mudtoe
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:14,239
Points:1,953,675
Joined:May 2008
Message Posted: Sep 26, 2014 4:58:19 PM

TD: "And people accuse ME of being a "hater." "


The left has no problem with being a "hater", just so long as you hate the right people.


mudtoe
Profile Pic
Troller_Diesel
Champion Author Denver

Posts:2,139
Points:20,005
Joined:Jun 2014
Message Posted: Sep 26, 2014 3:19:33 PM

Wow. After several threads like this...

And people accuse ME of being a "hater."

SMH.
Profile Pic
SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:19,828
Points:457,025
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Sep 26, 2014 3:04:07 PM

Yup, Buffet is no angel when it comes to sacrificing jobs for massive profits. After all, he is in the .1%. And Buffet has no concern for the climate, either. Bought a coal train just for the profits.

But his greed is surpassed by the ruthlessness of the Koch's. Does Buffet spy on his own family out of suspicion? Does he sue them?
Profile Pic
mudtoe
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:14,239
Points:1,953,675
Joined:May 2008
Message Posted: Sep 26, 2014 2:15:59 PM

EZ: "Now the question is, how do the actions of Buffett differ from the actions of Koch in regards to company acquisitions? Other than one leaning liberal and the other leaning conservative, they are both in business to make money, and not operate charities. "


The answer is simple. The Koch brothers aren't hypocrites, whereas Buffett is a huge one. He says he supports one thing, but in his business dealings he does just the opposite, and runs his businesses no differently than how the Koch brothers run theirs. This is the liberal way. Somehow the policies they publicly support never seem to apply to them in their private lives. And it doesn't make any difference whether the liberal is someone wealthy and famous like Buffett or Gore, or average everyday liberals who do things like shop at Walmart to save money while at the same time complaining about the non-union wages paid there. They all do it.


mudtoe


[Edited by: mudtoe at 9/26/2014 2:23:01 PM EST]
Profile Pic
EZExit
Champion Author Phoenix

Posts:16,638
Points:2,395,435
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Sep 25, 2014 11:56:01 PM

Even liberal legends such as Buffett lay people off when the going gets tough...

Buffett's recent buy Heinz squeezes out 600 employees

Now the question is, how do the actions of Buffett differ from the actions of Koch in regards to company acquisitions? Other than one leaning liberal and the other leaning conservative, they are both in business to make money, and not operate charities.
Profile Pic
AC-302
Champion Author Los Angeles

Posts:31,633
Points:3,506,895
Joined:Aug 2004
Message Posted: Sep 25, 2014 11:35:12 PM

How many people are employed by companies owned or invested in by Berkshire Hathaway? I'm not hearing that Warren Buffett is foregoing profits to benefit those who work for his companies. Have you heard that?

But what I did hear from Buffett was that he feels that California ought to get rid of the Prop 13, so that the Dems can tax the crap out of middle and lower class California homeowners to pay for foolish and expensive social programs that will not benefit them.
Profile Pic
SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:19,828
Points:457,025
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Sep 25, 2014 4:25:47 PM

"The Koch brothers employ 60,000 people, and donate millions of dollars to causes to help those that are less fortunate."

So they COULD have paid their unfortunate workers all those extra millions (plus many millions more that they kept for themselves), WEALTH THAT THE WORKERS EARNED, but instead they chose to keep it from them and give it to some charity so they could claim they are not quite so ruthless.

" Our government is the only entity that is CURRENTLY capable of operating in the red ..."

Wrong. Amazon and Walmart regularly operate at a loss in order to drive smaller competitors out of business. Once they have a monopoly over a market the prices go higher than they were when there was viable competition.

Koch Industries could have operated Purina Mills at a loss until market conditions turned around but they chose to cut their losses as they also cut workers out of a paycheck and their kids out of food on the table.

But, of course, they never run out of caviar and fine wine.
Profile Pic
EZExit
Champion Author Phoenix

Posts:16,638
Points:2,395,435
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Sep 25, 2014 2:27:48 PM

Steve: <<<"When a worker accepts a full time job they are commiting themselves fully to the venture. It is not as if they have 'extra years' of their life they can magically get back.">>>

--Not in Illinois or Arizona, when a worker accepts a job, they are committing themselves to earn the agreed upon salary and terms of employment that was negotiated during the hiring process. Most employees do not sign into a time based contract with their employers, thus the reason that many of them might go elsewhere when a better opportunity comes along.

When I think of people being left out in the cold and on the dole, I think of things like the Keystone Pipeline, where politics are the only barrier between gainful employment and EBT cards. Or new government regulation that prohibits one from building designed expansion into a hospital creating more jobs because ObamaCare© has outlawed physician owned hospitals.

The Koch brothers employ 60,000 people, and donate millions of dollars to causes to help those that are less fortunate. Sure, they are in business to make money, but so are all other business ventures. If they don't make money, they go out of business. Our government is the only entity that is CURRENTLY capable of operating in the red, and that's only because they print the currency and make up their own rules.

Now, your thoughts that any successful conservative business owners are "ruthless"... were you raised to think this way too?

[Edited by: EZExit at 9/25/2014 2:28:22 PM EST]
Profile Pic
SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:19,828
Points:457,025
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Sep 25, 2014 2:10:56 PM

When a worker accepts a full time job they are commiting themselves fully to the venture. It is not as if they have 'extra years' of their life they can magically get back.
Profile Pic
flyboyUT
Champion Author Utah

Posts:28,800
Points:1,597,050
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Sep 25, 2014 12:43:19 PM

"Workers give it their all and are completely committed and dependent upon the success of the venture. " Man oh man you really do live in some different universe Steve.

Some workers are good workers but I used to fire about 50% of those hired because they didn't put in a good days work for a good days pay. Others were fired for theft of various kinds from the "company" and some were fired because they used illegal substances and became a danger to themselves and others.

The % of workers who meet your mythical standards Steve is in singe digits at best. Those that did I hung on to as best I could by giving them merit increases, promotions and awards of all different kinds. The best ones I tried to promote regardless of if they stayed in my department or not. They earned a better job with more pay.

But seriously Steve - you need to reevaluate you ideas. Based on my work experience I think your all wet and sadly mistaken.
Profile Pic
SE3.5
Champion Author Indianapolis

Posts:24,667
Points:3,852,340
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Sep 25, 2014 12:28:47 PM

"while the workers at the company they owned lost much more."

Cry me some crocodile tears. Purina Mills came out of bankruptcy and is now owned by Land O Lakes. As far as I can see workers are still busy at Purina.

I neither love nor hate the Koch brothers. They are neither angels nor devils.

I neither love nor hate workers. Some workers are outstanding. They get promoted. Most are average. They remain where they are. Some are leeches. If the leeches are in a union, they get to continue to be leeches. If they are not in a union they get "let go", and the company gets stronger.
Profile Pic
SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:19,828
Points:457,025
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Sep 25, 2014 11:44:33 AM

Yeah, well if I have 'Koch ODS' it is a national epidemic.

The Kochs may have taken a loss on Purina Mills but losing millions is virtually nothing to them while the workers at the company they owned lost much more. They lost their entire livelihood. Did the Kochs show any concern for the workers of their company? Did they do anything to try to save those jobs? Did they feel any obligation to? Or were the workers instead treated like so much rented industrial machinery as is the big corporate standard method of operation.

Were the Kochs in it for the long run; or just trying to make a quick buck?

Really rich people invest SOME of their wealth in a business, hoping to increase it. Workers give it their all and are completely committed and dependent upon the success of the venture. Do really rich corporate owners typically accept this as their responsibility? Do they actually go around and even meet the people who give it their all toward the goal of realizing the hopes of the really rich owners? Do they ever shake their hand, smile, and look them in the eye and tell them they will do everything they can to make the venture successful for all involved? Do they tell the workers they can depend on them for this?

Or do they instead hire more people to figure out how to insulate the profits from the 'inconveniences of using human labor'? Do they instead do everything they can to protect their money as they make sure that the concerns of individuals are given the least priority or even not considered at all?

When people enter into an arrangement which involves requiring workers to make a commitment to perform labor over a period which typically involves a significant portion of workers' entire lives there is an implicit responsibility to those workers well being.

Shirking that responsibility is pure greed.

Doing it on purpose, as in planning to do it, followed by meticulous execution of such a plan is ruthless.

Big corporations have made this practice standard operating procedure, which is why they have earned such low approval ratings in the USA, Koch industries is among the least appreciated business in the USA.

If my view on this is ODS, buddy, that ailment is a national epidemic.

And for that condition, there is a cause.

And it also doesn't have to be that way.

And THAT is why I speak out.

For the workers.

For the middle class.

For the backbone of America.

You can favor the elite all you want. Defend their atrocious and disgusting behavior as if they are angels. But when actions like such greed and ruthlessness produce a vast and increasing wealth inequity and social instability our nation is moved one step closer to melting down.

Just like France did when it got that way over there.

Just how long do you think we can last when the majority is on the dole and the debt is out of control?

It is time we took some action to protect workers. If we don't we will wish we did. Mark my words.
Profile Pic
SE3.5
Champion Author Indianapolis

Posts:24,667
Points:3,852,340
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Sep 24, 2014 5:35:08 PM

Steve, you apparently suffer from Koch ODS, which makes you believe every Koch business decision is ruthless. The real skinny on Purina Mills is as follows:

Ralston Purina sold Purina Mills to British Petroleum in 1986. In 1993, the Sterling Group of Houston bought Purina Mills. In 1998, it was purchased by Koch Industries.

Purina Mill's 1997 decision to enter the hog business was disastrous. In 1999 hog prices dropped to their lowest level in 26 years, and farmers lost money on every hog they sent to market.

Purina Mills was hurt on several fronts. Many hog farmers either quit or were forced out of the business. This led to a decrease in hog feed sales--which accounted for 20 percent of Purina's total sales. In addition, was the loss Purina took on its own hog operation. Not only did the company lose money on the hogs it already owned, but it was under contract to buy 9.8 million more over an eight-year period while it had contracts to sell only 3.4 million. The financial exposure on the contracts amounted to approximately $236 million.

In September 1999, Purina was unable to make a $16 million interest payment on its debt and filed for bankruptcy. The Koch's decided to take their losses and walk away. After bankruptcy,Land o Lakes acquired Purina Mills.
Profile Pic
mudtoe
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:14,239
Points:1,953,675
Joined:May 2008
Message Posted: Sep 24, 2014 3:03:01 PM

AC: "So SemiSteve wants to punish companies for making a profit, and considers profit a bad thing, particularly when it's someone who is Republican or conservative that is making that profit."


Precisely. His purpose is to dis-empower his enemies. The fact that he never expresses concern over the wealth of the liberal elites is proof that he really isn't against the rich and powerful, despite what he says, but rather he is against rich and powerful people only if they happen to be opponents of the left. By contrast have you ever heard a conservative say that the Hollywood elite or people like Soros should be muzzled or otherwise prevented from earning their money or spending their money in any way they see fit? We are far more egalitarian about acknowledging that the rights we support should be granted even to our opponents than the left is. Their game plan is to stack the deck by any means necessary, including using the power of government, to silence their opponents. This is one reason we conservatives don't want to see more power accorded to government, because we know what liberals do with power once they get it.


mudtoe

[Edited by: mudtoe at 9/24/2014 3:03:31 PM EST]
Profile Pic
SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:19,828
Points:457,025
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Sep 24, 2014 12:27:10 PM

Strawman alert!

"SemiSteve wants to punish companies for making a profit, and considers profit a bad thing"

Totally bogus. Not my position. Made up by someone else. I never said that.

"Are you so foolish as to think that Koch Industries buys companies SPECIFICALLY for the purpose of letting employees go and putting them out of business? "

No, I did not say that. But I didn't have to look far to find a story about the Koch's corporate raiding:

" In 1998 Koch bought Purina Mills, the largest US producer of animal feed. Lethargic energy and livestock prices in 1998 and 1999, however, led Koch to lay off several hundred employees, sell its feedlots, and divest portions of its natural gas gathering and pipeline systems. Purina Mills filed for bankruptcy protection in 1999 and was acquired by US dairy co-op Land O'Lakes in 2001"

Kochs buy company, lay off workers, then sell company within three years.
Profile Pic
AC-302
Champion Author Los Angeles

Posts:31,633
Points:3,506,895
Joined:Aug 2004
Message Posted: Sep 24, 2014 8:20:41 AM

Koch Industries is good at their business. They make money. Isn't that want companies are supposed to do? So SemiSteve wants to punish companies for making a profit, and considers profit a bad thing, particularly when it's someone who is Republican or conservative that is making that profit. That's fine.

What about Georg Soros or Mike Bloomberg or Warren Buffett? They're billionaires. Or is it OK since they're liberal supporters?

SemiSteve said, just below: "Corporate raiding with the intent to destroy jobs for a quick buck is the essence of ruthless, and since it has a detrimental effect on economies should be well regulated."

--Are you so foolish as to think that Koch Industries buys companies SPECIFICALLY for the purpose of letting employees go and putting them out of business? That is a VERY foolish assertion. Like most company takeovers, there are redundancies when a company is bought by another. Those folks are let go. My son and I were discussing Microsoft. He figured that Microsoft, being so big and pervasive, wouldn't have layoffs. So we Googled it. Guess what? Microsoft is laying of 12K employees from their Nokia acquisition, as well as another 6K from their own staff. So are you going to complain about Microsoft "destroying jobs"? They lay people off CONSTANTLY during their many, many acquisitions. What say you about that? Or is that OK since MSFT is known to be liberal in their political outlook and support?

SemiSteve, I only ask you to be even handed in your assessment. You complain and complain about the conservatives you read in Mother Jones News. OK, but when I point out that your liberal pals do the same bloody thing, you either complain that your topic isn't about liberals, or you say nothing. Again, acknowledge it saying: "yeah, you're right, the other side is doing it, too", and you'll get a lot further with me. Blaming one side for all of the ills of America isn't going to help get us solutions. Shoot, if we did everything the liberals wanted, we'd be a Marxist society already, and even if it could be a "soft tyranny", it's still tyranny.

[Edited by: AC-302 at 9/24/2014 8:29:04 AM EST]
Profile Pic
AnotherOne
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:26,599
Points:787,955
Joined:Aug 2010
Message Posted: Sep 23, 2014 10:49:45 PM



mudtoe, "As long as the Koch brothers do harm to the liberal agenda I support them 100%."

Not a bad gauge to use for anyone or anything.

Profile Pic
mudtoe
Champion Author Cincinnati

Posts:14,239
Points:1,953,675
Joined:May 2008
Message Posted: Sep 23, 2014 10:45:06 PM

As long as the Koch brothers do harm to the liberal agenda I support them 100%.


mudtoe
Profile Pic
SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:19,828
Points:457,025
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Sep 23, 2014 10:08:09 PM

I was thinking about these Koch brothers and trying to figure out how they can rationalize being in the dirty energy business as it is so clearly destroying our habitat; and the answer is starkly clear. If you were raised by a rich tyrant who trained you to carry on the family empire then that's what you do. If science tries to say this activity is causing global warming and you make a kajillion dollars from this thing of course you are going to agree with and support voices of dissent.

You are going to do this by default.
Profile Pic
SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:19,828
Points:457,025
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Aug 20, 2014 8:36:45 AM

AC302: "Now, who are the shareholders of most big and medium sized-companies? Why, that would be folks like you and I. Those of us with mutual funds and stocks in our 401K funds are those "owners". And we expect a profit for the capital we risk. The Koch brothers, and many, many other, Rep and Dem supporters alike, will turn around poorly run companies, make them run better, then sell them for a profit. "

We stock holders may hope for a profit but we have no right to expect it. Buying stock carries the risk that it may go down in value. Purchasers need to do some homework before buying.

"But SemiSteve, anything that makes even one job "go away" seems to be your definition of "ruthlessness"."

Seems to be? You'd be better off sticking with what I actually say than coming up with these exaggerations. You think companies have to be exclusively dedicated to anyone who bets a few dollars on them but have no implied obligation to workers who devote their whole lives to them? Dollar equity talks but sweat equity walks, hunh? Corporate raiding with the intent to destroy jobs for a quick buck is the essence of ruthless, and since it has a detrimental effect on economies should be well regulated.

Investments that pan out on win/win philosophy are great, but blood money is tainted. Just as morality can not be legislated; something being legal does not ensure it being moral.
Profile Pic
AC-302
Champion Author Los Angeles

Posts:31,633
Points:3,506,895
Joined:Aug 2004
Message Posted: Aug 19, 2014 10:25:54 PM

But SemiSteve, anything that makes even one job "go away" seems to be your definition of "ruthlessness". As I said in the other thread - technology changes. And there are companies that do have too many employees for every dollar they take in. Bloated, overstaffed payrolls are a problem. I'll say this again - for profit companies are not charities, they are companies. They are to be run in the best interest of the shareholders in particular, and to consider the needs of the stakeholders at large.

Now, who are the shareholders of most big and medium sized-companies? Why, that would be folks like you and I. Those of us with mutual funds and stocks in our 401K funds are those "owners". And we expect a profit for the capital we risk. The Koch brothers, and many, many other, Rep and Dem supporters alike, will turn around poorly run companies, make them run better, then sell them for a profit.

If you decry ruthlessness, why aren't you also kicking trial lawyers around. It's those liars.. oops, Freudian slip.. lawyers, who put companies like Blitz out of business ( they make gas cans). Lawyers killed them through lawsuits. They can't make a gas can that is idiot-proof. They only make it as safe as possible. But they got sued out of existence. Lawyers used them as a big pocket and sued the crap out of them multiple times. They couldn't even afford to defend themselves anymore with suit after suit. But I don't see you going after these fools. And I get why - they're largely liberal Dems -whom you like.

I bet if Dem supporters did the same thing (and I'm positive a few examples of Dem supporters who are "turnaround" experts can be found), then you'd more than likely give them a "pass".

[Edited by: AC-302 at 8/19/2014 10:27:16 PM EST]
Profile Pic
SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:19,828
Points:457,025
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Aug 19, 2014 1:43:24 PM

Oh good grief, AC-302.

First of all I am well aware of the charitable giving of the Koch brothers. So if you are going to attempt paraphrasing it might help to avoid falsehoods.

And while MJ may favor liberal attitudes that hardly makes them 'far, far left'.

And I do not tear them Koch's down for the good they do. I hold them accountable for the bad they do.

A little charitable giving does not cancel out rampant ruthlessness.
Profile Pic
AC-302
Champion Author Los Angeles

Posts:31,633
Points:3,506,895
Joined:Aug 2004
Message Posted: Aug 19, 2014 1:31:29 PM

SemiSteve said: "False. My position is based on a professionally written article...

--..as found in Mother Jones News - a propaganda rag for the far, far left. Need I say more? I would put this under the category of "SATIRE" or even "Propaganda" before I'd deem it anywhere near "truth" or "news".

Again, your argument of "guilt" as to why the Koch brothers support public TV and radio is being a very silly strawman. You don't know that - you're just guessing at their motives. But whatever their motives, and I don't know their hearts and minds either, mind you, they are supporting this public good in a big way. And all you can do is tear tear them down for the good they do as "guilt", rather than saying: "Yeah, they really are putting up some money to do some public good, I hadn't known that, good for them."
Profile Pic
SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:19,828
Points:457,025
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Aug 19, 2014 12:36:36 PM



"Raised that way?"

WES03: "Wonder what George Soros's excuse is?"

Before that can be assessed it would be paramount to establish that Soros actually IS ruthless. Can you present any evidence of such?
Profile Pic
Cliffisher
Champion Author Wisconsin

Posts:30,680
Points:3,809,475
Joined:Sep 2003
Message Posted: Aug 18, 2014 10:18:00 AM

Nothing to see here, just move on folks... Don't feed the trolls."

Spoken as a true Pilgrim troll.
Profile Pic
WES03
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:7,243
Points:1,853,625
Joined:Feb 2009
Message Posted: Aug 18, 2014 9:22:40 AM

"Raised that way?"

Wonder what George Soros's excuse is?
Profile Pic
SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:19,828
Points:457,025
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Aug 18, 2014 9:14:34 AM

AC 302: "There's ZERO substance to your argument..."

False. My position is based on a professionally written article which includes first hand accounts, researched public pieces and legal records It explains the cold ruthlessness shown in business and political undertakings.

Most well adjusted families do not spy on and sue each other over power and wealth.
Profile Pic
AC-302
Champion Author Los Angeles

Posts:31,633
Points:3,506,895
Joined:Aug 2004
Message Posted: Aug 16, 2014 3:24:01 PM

SemiSteve said: "Guilt? Maybe they think this makes up for the ruthlessness?" (as to why they'd sponsor PBS and public TV)

--Do you REALLY believe what you just said? That's a strawman, too, in fact. After all, you are ASSUMING that the Koch's are feeling some sort of "guilt" for making their fortune.

If you want to talk about dysfunctional upbringings, shall we talk about both of ours? I think you have little to talk about, my friend.

Why can you not talk about their political stances? Why to do you feel the need to tear them down as people? What this says to me is that you have no argument at all.

Here, now.. do you see me saying things like: "Georg Soros is a dirty, rotten SOB RAT!"? In effect, that's what your doing/saying about the Koch brothers. There's ZERO substance to your argument, just a character assassination - much like your assertion that Romney and his campaign were funded by the El Salvadoran death squads. Speaking of which, do you think that Koch industries was also funded by death and destruction, revolution and rebellion?
Profile Pic
Troller_Diesel
Champion Author Denver

Posts:2,139
Points:20,005
Joined:Jun 2014
Message Posted: Aug 15, 2014 9:30:45 AM

Just another progmunist SemiSteve conservative-bashing thread.

Nothing to see here, just move on folks... Don't feed the trolls.
Profile Pic
SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:19,828
Points:457,025
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Aug 15, 2014 8:30:06 AM

"Every dictatorship has its dissident, and Frederick played this part early on. While the three younger boys took after their father, he gravitated toward his mother's interests. Mary Robinson Koch helped to nourish Frederick's artistic side, and when he grew up they often took in plays and attended performing arts festivals. Frederick was a student of literature and a lover of drama who liked to sing and act. He wasn't athletic, displayed no interest in business, and loathed the work-camp-like environment fostered by his father, with whom he shared little beyond a love of opera.

By the late 1950s, when Frederick was in his 20s, many in the family's circle of friends assumed that he was gay. "You know, those things, especially in an environment like Wichita, were almost whispered," says someone who spent time with the family and their friends during that era. (Frederick told me he is not gay.)

Fred Koch chose Charles as his successor early on, intensifying a bitter sibling rivalry.

In the 1960s, mention of Frederick even vanished from one of his father's bios: "He and Mrs. Koch have three sons," it read. "Charles, William, and David." "
Profile Pic
AnotherOne
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:26,599
Points:787,955
Joined:Aug 2010
Message Posted: Jul 23, 2014 11:25:40 PM



SemiSteve, if you are going to quote passages out of Mother Jones, you really should credit them.

Jus' sayin'.

It's the law.

;-)

Profile Pic
SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:19,828
Points:457,025
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Jul 23, 2014 10:39:32 PM

"Fred's disappointment in his eldest son caused him to double down on Charles, piling him with chores and responsibilities by the age of nine. "I think Fred Koch went through this kind of thing that 'I must have been too affectionate; I must have been too loving, too kind to Freddie, and that's why he turned out to be so effeminate,'" said John Damgard, who went to high school with David and remains close with David and Charles. "So he was really, really tough on Charles.""

And now we are stuck with the result of this messed up parenting.
Profile Pic
AnotherOne
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:26,599
Points:787,955
Joined:Aug 2010
Message Posted: Jul 22, 2014 3:26:05 PM



"They are nice, decent people," told USA TODAY recently. "They are absolutely national treasures and have a huge respect for what makes this country great — free enterprise."

BINGO!

But that is exactly the thing that makes the Koch Brothers the devil personified in the eyes of liberals.

Profile Pic
SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:19,828
Points:457,025
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Jul 22, 2014 2:51:59 PM

Hey, let's lay it on a little thick:

"Foster Friess, a multimillionaire Wyoming investor and Republican donor who has grown to know both Kochs in recent years, said he tires of portrayals of them as the dark villains of the conservative movement.

"They are nice, decent people," told USA TODAY recently. "They are absolutely national treasures and have a huge respect for what makes this country great — free enterprise."

Friess, who donated more than $2 million in this election cycle to a super PAC aiding Rick Santorum's presidential campaign, said he is among Americans for Prosperity's donors, but declined to say how much he has given.

"I probably want to keep that private," he said. "But it was a meaningful amount for me.""

USA Today

Oh, but don't ask what MY motivations are...
Profile Pic
owt
Champion Author Tennessee

Posts:10,326
Points:1,592,070
Joined:Aug 2005
Message Posted: Jul 19, 2014 11:01:56 AM

Whats is George Soros's, Bill Gates, Steyer, excuse. There are more democrat millionaires in Congress than republicans.
Profile Pic
SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:19,828
Points:457,025
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Jul 15, 2014 9:23:12 AM

"A Bloomberg Markets investigation has found that Koch Industries -- in addition to being involved in improper payments to win business in Africa, India and the Middle East -- has sold millions of dollars of petrochemical equipment to Iran, a country the U.S. identifies as a sponsor of global terrorism."

Bloomberg

"In May 2008, a unit of Koch Industries Inc., one of the world’s largest privately held companies, sent Ludmila Egorova-Farines, its newly hired compliance officer and ethics manager, to investigate the management of a subsidiary in Arles in southern France. In less than a week, she discovered that the company had paid bribes to win contracts.
“I uncovered the practices within a few days,” Egorova- Farines says. “They were not hidden at all.”

Egorova-Farines wasn’t rewarded for bringing the illicit payments to the company’s attention. Her superiors removed her from the inquiry in August 2008 and fired her in June 2009, calling her incompetent, even after Koch’s investigators substantiated her findings. She sued Koch-Glitsch in France for wrongful termination."
Profile Pic
AnotherOne
Champion Author Twin Cities

Posts:26,599
Points:787,955
Joined:Aug 2010
Message Posted: Jul 14, 2014 3:45:55 PM



SemiSteve, "Why would a business have unproductive people around? Makes no sense."

Because of Liberal UNIONS protecting unproductive people.

I agree, SS.

It makes NO sense!

;-)



[Edited by: AnotherOne at 7/14/2014 3:48:39 PM EST]
Profile Pic
SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:19,828
Points:457,025
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Jul 14, 2014 3:32:25 PM

Why would a business have unproductive people around? Makes no sense. The CEO is not worth his money if they do.
Profile Pic
flyboyUT
Champion Author Utah

Posts:28,800
Points:1,597,050
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Jul 12, 2014 11:49:35 AM

Steve again you dont understand - you just lay off the culls who dont produce. Reduce costs adn increase productivity...

Everyone gains and with the reduced costs you can afford to pay those who actually work hard more money - like stock option plan.....
Profile Pic
SemiSteve
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:19,828
Points:457,025
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Jul 12, 2014 11:15:17 AM

If they lay off some of the workers then less output results; thus less profits. Stupid idea.
Profile Pic
flyboyUT
Champion Author Utah

Posts:28,800
Points:1,597,050
Joined:Aug 2008
Message Posted: Jul 11, 2014 8:52:52 PM

Speaking of telling folks how to vote. I liked the story of a plant manager came in and said at a meeting of employees that Obamacare was increasing the costs to have folks working and they were going to have to lay off some folks. He said the only fair way was to go through the parking lot and lay off all those who had a 'vote for obama' sticker on the bumper.
Post a reply Back to Topics