Intro: "The billionaire brothers' influence is most visible in the makeup of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, where members have vowed to undo restrictions on greenhouse gases."
Demonstrators rally in Rancho Mirage, Arizona, during a retreat organized by the Koch Brothers, 01/30/11. (photo: Crystal Chatham/Desert Sun)
|
THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community. |
Comments
We are concerned about a recent drift towards vitriol in the RSN Reader comments section. There is a fine line between moderation and censorship. No one likes a harsh or confrontational forum atmosphere. At the same time everyone wants to be able to express themselves freely. We'll start by encouraging good judgment. If that doesn't work we'll have to ramp up the moderation.
General guidelines: Avoid personal attacks on other forum members; Avoid remarks that are ethnically derogatory; Do not advocate violence, or any illegal activity.
Remember that making the world better begins with responsible action.
- The RSN Team
We can expect a lot more pulmonary diseases.
Expect a big upswing in asthma, many sick people and all else that is caused by dirty air. California will be under heavy fire from these nasty Koch brothers, because we are always in the forefront of clean air regulations.
Of course our health system will also be severely burdened by the influx of the added sick people.
THE KOCH BROTHERS DON'T GIVE A DAMN AS LONG AS THEIR PROFITS ARE UP.
More to thank the Supreme Court for.
The Koch bothers are 'robbing hood(lum)s'!!
Under the American system of free enterprize, the Koch's brother's power pales in comparision to the power of the consumer. No corporation in America can long ignore the wishes of the American consumer. The almight IBM learned this in the 1980's. The 30 companies that make up the Dow Jones Industrial Average are mostly new companies over the past 30 years or so.
Government programs, on the other hand, do not have to answer to the consumer, nor, even, for the most part, to the voter. In fact, those that work for the ogvernment have learned well the importance of throwing around their electorial voting power, so much so in fact that few politicians today have the courage to stand up to public employee unions. So, in effect, these unions answer to no one but their own self greed.
Who do you think paid for your buses, signs etc. etc. at all your big rallies????? DUH!
Now you got a bunch of wild eyed people into Congress. They want to cut social security and medi[care, which a lot of you will need soon from the looks of you.
YOU ARE CUTTING OF YOUR NOSES...........
GOOD LUCK WITH YOUR NEW BUDDIES
God help the United States of Amerca - and ite PEOPLE!!
A stronger argument can be made that gov't contributed greatly to the ‘90’s S&L Crisis.
As for the mortgage meltdown of ‘08, Fannie, Freddie, FHA, the Fed and CRA are the real culprits. Bankers have always been greedy, but the market kept them in check by periodically slapping them silly whenever they got too foolish. But then the gov’t said “go ahead, write trillions in bad mortgages, we’ve got you covered and if you don’t we’ll fine you”. Nope. It wasn’t too little gov’t, it was too much … way too much.
Madoff was a slim ball who is getting everything he deserves and will rot in hell.
"Predatory Lenders" is a term that makes me laugh. You must be naive to believe the vast majority of their "victims" didn't know full well what they were doing. The whole concept would make a great skit for Saturday Night Live. Let's dress up a bunch of bankers like Hells Angels then have them "mug" some poor unsuspecting victim by pummeling him/her with wads of hundred dollar bills. The skit would end with CSI investigators drawing chalk marks around the money bags shaking their heads in disgust over the latest predatory lending mugging. Maybe we’d call it, CSI–PL Unit.
But, it's not their job to "believe". Their job is to deliver products consumers want at a price the market will bear while making a profit. If they're successful innovators, they'll make extraordinary profits. Otherwise, competitors will drive down prices to normal levels.
This is how efficient markets function. Like a well balanced eco-system, scarce resources are allocated in an efficient manner reflecting consumer desires. No gov’t will ever match such beautiful efficiency or brutal market honesty.
Conservatives want to end gov’t subsidies for oil, ethanol, cars, green jobs, farming, education, etc. and let the market find its equilibrium. Businesses that should survive, will. Consumers will pay the true cost for products and make allocations accordingly.
Tea Partiers despise crony capitalism and seek a wall of separation between gov’t and the economy with gov’t there only to enforce the Rule of Law.
Obama, Pelosi, Reid, et al are all about crony capitalism and for that Wall Street loves them. Tea Partiers revile such a toxic mix of gov’t and markets. We’re dumbfounded and disgusted at how Libs somehow declare our love of free markets to be racist!
When Conservatives advocate “Free Markets” we mean it.
"Libs declare our love of free markets to be racist" again: What??? No: Racism has nothing to do with free market. It is a disrespect of another human being, and as such, portraying the President, who was properly ELECTED by a majority of us as a monkey to disparage his Democratic view is RACIST, whether you like it or not!and we will keep on stating the obvious every time it happens.
Let me pre-empt those who say "well, unions represent the working man". They don't. They only represent the special interests of those workers in their union. The vast majority of America's workers do not belong to unions. Giving disportionate influence to unions therefore effectively disenfrancises the all the rest of America's workers.
But, I'll go even further, the union's don't really represent their own workers. Ultimately, who they represent is the union bosses.
Where is the indiginent outcry by Libs against the undue influence of unions?
In the decades since, as the influence of unions has declined, so has our middle class declined also. Income disparity is now the greatest in our history! At last report, only 8% of American workers belong to a union,----hardl y a monolithic political force! But, the GOP is determined to push that MYTH in order to destroy what little remains of effective advocacy for American workers!
The major reason for the decline in unions is the loss of manufacturing jobs. Contrary to popular belief, this is not due to outsourcing, though that has had some impact. The major factor is technology. Today, America manufactures more than ever; double 1970’s levels. However; we’re doing it with far fewer workers.
As for the decline in the middle class, you are quick to blame it on the decline of unions. Yet, the far greater change in America over the past 50 years has been the massive expansion of government, regulations and socialization of our economy. This sucks the life out of an economy and ultimately creates a two class society. We’re starting to see that today with crony capitalists (whom Tea Partiers despise) and government elites. Neither group would last long in truly free markets. Government would shrink and crony capitalists would fail.
If America returns to true free market capitalism, then America will once again be the land of opportunity where dreams are made.
Graves, you lament the decline of the middle class and prescribe even more government programs. Yet, wasn’t the middle class larger back when government was smaller?
On the state and local level, just look at all the public pensions that a bankrupting communities and states across the land.
Check your facts about manufacturing. America's industrial output is double what it was in 1970 and continues to increase almost every year (current recession excepted). Low technology products like toys, clothing etc are often made overseas. These are the labels we see most often.
But, aggregate stat's tell otherwise. Massively complex things like planes, trains, ships, heavy machinary, are made here.
Even big business' have been found to have been deducting pension costs from employees pay and not putting it into it funds like they should have.
Anyone can put down on a piece of paper that x amount of dollars was deducted for a pension, but w/o proof that the funds deducted were placed into the company's pension plan/portfolio for the employee, it's just numbers on paper.
Most Conservatives, myself included, support reasonable environmental laws. However; we think global warming is based on 'baked' numbers. We don't think that every species on earth needs to be protected. And, we're willing to take reasonable environmental risks (BTW - did you notice how quickly the Gulf is recoverying from that truly massive spill; that's no thanks to BP, thouse guys are a bunch of schmucks). But, we'd reinstitute drilling in the Gulf and in ANWAR. We love our planet, but as a place to live, not a deity. We don't worship mother earth.
Clean water, yes. Clean soil, yes. Clean air, yes (though CO2 is not a pollutant, it's what plants inhale and then piss out oxygen).
By the way, for all your ranting against the EPA, the EPA at least gets the sanction of laws. Much more surreptitious and dangerous is the DNR (Department of Natural Resources): They make "rulings" that have force of Law without going through the Legislature. I hate to bring water to your mill, blow in your sails and the like, but that is a serious problem, in my humble opinion. The EPA, at least, has to go through channels. The DNR does not. The Constitution does not give them the powers they have.
About "global Warming":Global Warming is just a buzz word. Climate IS cyclical, and we ARE in a warming phase, that cannot be denied. What is harder to PROVE is that homosapiens ALONE is responsible for the change, or that when this change will be CATACLYSMIC an SUDDEN in nature. (My weather forecaster has a tough time predicting a sunny/ not so sunny weekend so it seems that predictions of Global Warming in the next century are greatly exagerated). If they are not cataclysmic and sudden, then we will stop production of Oranges in California and Florida, and who knows, I may be able to grow some here in Wisconsin. A change in climate is not automatically a bad thing.(Heating may be cheaper, for example)
Unions are not perfect but without them workers would never have had any rights. We would still be in the dark ages.
Tea baggers love to say that unions pour so much money into supporting their champions.
THEY DON'T HAVE A FRACTION OF THE MONEY BIG BUSINESS POUR INTO BUYING POWER IN CONGRESS.
Back when my girlfriend's grandfather was heading one of America's largest unions (think of On The Waterfrond time period), unions did address a somewhat uneven playing field. But those days are long since gone. Union-free auto mfr jobs in S.C. are highly sought after jobs. And the companies like BMW are in S.C. so that they can avoid the myriad of ridiculus, cumbersome work rules and inability to fire incompetent workers. BMW doesn't mind paying well and treating their workers well, but it's those union work rules that kill 'em.
As far as union vs corporate contributions, you need to recheck your numbers. Unions give $ hundreds of millions.
Also if unions were nearly as powerful as you say there would be far more union members, the Virginia mine disaster wouldn't have happened, Card check legislation would have passed, Wage theft wouldn't happen, the minimum wage would be higher, Wallmart wouldn't be doing nearly as well and CEO's would be making several hundred times more than there average employee not to mention there would be no golden parachutes, especially for CEO who fail.
Nothing for nothing, dudes, but has anyone noticed how Obama is granting Obamacare waivers to millions of unionized workers?
What's all that about?
I thought the unions loved Obamacare? How come they're all now getting waivers from it?
And, I thought we were all going to love Obamacare? So how come Obama is giving waivers to all his political allies.
And, I thought the Dem controlled Senate under Reid and Congress under Pelosi said Obamacare was a "gift to the American people"? So how come Congress exempted itself from Obamacare?
I am soooo confused.
Maybe one of you smarty pants, genius type Libs can educate me as to why so many powerful Dem party loyalists and government elites don't want this gift to the American people. Isn’t it good enough for them? They sure think its good enough for us.
Please, help me to understand. Your powerful minds must be able to discern nuances that are impossible for my Conservative mind to see. My reality based mind must be stuck on the cold hard facts.
PS – in case you missed the relevancy to this Koch story, my point is that any power the Koch brothers have pales in comparison to big labor, in particularly, public service union.s
I had my first job at age 10. I was a newspaper delivery boy. At 14 I worked after school at a ski bus tour to ski for free. At 16 I was a busboy and a waitor at 18 throough college. Most of my career I've worked in commercial real estate on 100% commission without any guaranteed pay. I've served my community for 8 years as a volunteer firefighter/EMT . About 10 years ago, I was between careers. The job market sucked in finance so I took the opportunity to serve my community working full time as a firefighter/EMT doing 24 hour shifts on an ambulance getting paid 8 bucks an hour. When not on shift, I responded from home to fires, wrecks, medical calls and other emergencies. In that 2 yr period I responded to 35 working structure fires, 21 fatalities from a 95 y/o woman to a dead baby hanging upside down in a flipped over car, 5 saves and 2 babies born out of the hospital. It was a service I will always be proud of performing.
I believe in hard work and in serving my community. I've had hard years and good years. In my late 40's I restarted my career and earned almost nothing for 2 yrs. Finally, 7 yrs into my new career, I'm making the highest income I've ever earned and hope to double my income next year.
It is GREAT and shows how regular English people took action and organized to make big tax dead beat pay up, when poor people were forced out of their homes because of cuts. It was done Egyptian style: Twitter, face book and the likes
SO LET'S GET TOGETHER!!!!
Study after study have shown that on average, Tea Partiers are better educated and earn more income that the aveaerage American. Hardly the redneck shopping cart bunch you imagine.
I live in NY and have been active in the very early days of the NYC Tea Party group. It would certainly make any of us New Yorker laugh to hear us called rednecks. As for corporate $$$ backing, there was none, zippo, nadda. We scraped together fundraising $1 at a time and operated on a shoestring budget. The same is true for all the other TP groups I've met.
What you fail to usnderstand is that a lot of working-class and middle-class Americans have realized that big government hurts job creation and sucks the life out of the eoconomy.
The TP is a self-reliant, vibrant bunch that is driven by principal. You have every right to disagree with us, but you're a fool to dismiss us a force in reshaping American politics.
IT CAN'T HAPPEN SOON ENOUGH. THEY ARE DOING A LOT OF DAMAGE TO OUR PEOPLE AND OUR COUNTRY.
The Koch's own Brawny Towels. There's an easy target. Don't buy them and tell everyone you know not to buy them and why. Let's get started.
Take a look at who Wall St gives to ... its Dem's by a 3:1 margin. Same with lots of other industries. And, let's not forget about George Soros, Hollywood, trial lawyers, etc. The Dem's feed at the trove of crony capitalizsts.
The Tea Party is the new energy behind the GOP and TP'ers despise crony capitalists.
We seek truly free markets where businesses fail or thrive based on their ability to produce a product that consumers want at a price that makes sense and earns a profit.
We would not have bailed out the big banks, confident in the fact that new banks would fill the void. We would not have bailed out GM, confident in the fact that if left on their own; creditors, vendors, unions and managment would have struck a deal to survive. We would not have bailed out California, forcing the state to balance its budget. We would not be attempting to re-inflate the housing market, but would let prices seek equilibrium and function naturally.
All the corporations give to,--- make that BUY-- both parties; but by a wide margin the GOP get the greatest amount.
As I have mentioned a number of times. Our system is totally corrupt, since NO politician can run for office without money.
And when you TAKE you have to GIVE. So as long as our system is corrupt we will never have a government, that works for US, meaning the PEOPLE
But, if you're so convinced that government is inherently corrupt, then why give them so much power? Why give them more and more control over our economy? More control over your life, and the lives of your children and grandchildren?
At least with capitalism, your "bribe" is above board. I'll pay you this much money if you give me the product that I want. If you won't give it to me, you'll not get my money. Your “vote” wins every time you do decide to buy or not buy. You're a guaranteed winner (i.e., the candidate you just voted for won). You get to vote thousands of times a year. You get to vote (or not vote) on any product or service that suite your fancy. And, you can change your mind anytime you want and immediately vote for another product or service.
No so with politicians.
With politicians, you vote only once in 2, 4 or 6 years and are stuck with whomever the majority voted for. And, your 1 vote has to count for all issues from health care to education to defense. And your vote is only 1 in 700,0000 (Congress), 18,000,000 (NY Senate), 300,000,0000 (US President).
When politicians take control, we the people loose our freedoms. I’ll gladly be subject to the free markets.
42 BILLION BUYS A LOT OF POWER AND INFLUENCE.
BTW - Obama is planning to raise $1 Billion for his personal re-election campaign. He'll be sucking up to a lot of fat cats to get that kind of money.
That is precisely what the Supremes UNDID, Where have you been this whole year??????
Because of their (UNITED) ruling January 2010 the big corporations can now spend as much money as they want.
SECRETLY.!!!!!!!!!!
So your vote and mine will not count diddly squat, if we vote against the Khoces, for they can throw so much money AGAINST a candidate, who will not do their bidding, that regular voters don't stand a chance.
Soros is wealthy, but he does not have nearly the billions the Koch's do, and he does not spend as much as they do.
UNFORTUNATELY THEY SPEND THEIR MONEY AGAINST US.
Maybe you LIKE dirty air?? if you do, they are your guys
I and most Tea Parties are not against all regulations, just most of them. Fire Codes, reasonable Air Quality, etc are good. Global Warming, however, is a shame based on 'baked' numbers.
I'm strongly against forcing insurers to cover pre-existing conditions. I reject 'cross-subsidie s' in which government forces one group of consumers to subsidize another. Politicians of both parties love this trick. They give benefits to one group by effectively taxing another without their knowledge. Then, when the second group gets the higher insurance rates, politicians announce they’ll fight those terrible greedy insurance companies. They caused the problem then says they’re here to save the day. What a racket. The government is taxing good behavior (i.e. deferring consumption today to buy insurance) and subsidizing bad behavior (foolishly not carrying insurance). It’s taxation without representation (or at least awareness) and is inherently dishonest.
A more honest approach would be, “We have fellow citizens who through their own negligence or bad luck, have no insurance and need expensive medical care. We therefore propose to levy additional taxes to care for our fellow citizens.”
That would be an honest approach which I would support.
BTW, you sound like you’re a Trust Fund Baby. You seem to know a lot about upper income tax brackets while exhibiting a certain disdain for those struggling to achieve success. You also look down upon people being cost conscious, another sign of someone who has never had to earn a living. It must be nice being a member of the Lucky Sperm Club.
Personally, I believe in paying taxes, especially to support a fair and reasonable sized government. I hate paying taxes to support a welfare state that merely provides for short term physical well being at the expense of destroying one’s pride and self esteem.
As for ‘getting under our progressive skin’ I am only able to do so by raising troubling questions. No doubt you know that a percentage of readers here are truly open minded and do not blindly buy into your Progressive (i.e. Communist) utopia.
BTW, you sound like you’re a Trust Fund Baby. You seem to know a lot about upper income tax brackets while exhibiting a certain disdain for those struggling to achieve success. You also look down upon people being cost conscious, another sign of someone who has never had to earn a living. It must be nice being a member of the Lucky Sperm Club.
No, Mr. T., I am a Pell Grant baby, and have achieved some meager success as a result of my college education. This would not have been likely without government largesse in the form of Pell Grants and low interest student loans(which I paid back in 5 years.) I am the product of "unlucky sperm"-having been born of lower working class parents.(Two of the hardest working people I ever saw-so actually it was "lucky".)
So, based on personal experience, I will always believe in a strong social safety net-particularl y concerning job training and education.It seems the "minority" you are so worried about are the upper 1% income earners. My old college roommate played the corporate ladder game and he retired at age 50 with millions.And he is the most liberal person I know and is certain he does not pay enough in taxes. Go figure..
Yes, I am confident in the superiority of free markets over centralized gov’t planning. This is a "debate" the world has essentially engaged in throughout most of the 20th century with much blood split in the process. The Nazis (Socialists), Stalinists, Maoists, Castro, Pol Pot etc provide amble reason to prefer free markets.
I do not think of myself as infallible. Nor do I believe that free markets operate perfectly.
Free markets provide freedom and efficiency. They decentralize power and diminish the power of tyrants.
I welcome challenges to my arguments and seek to learn from them. I feel comfortable responding to such challenges at RSN because I am generally the lone alternative viewpoint. Occasionally, someone will point out valid challenges to free markets. These are the most interesting to me. One challenge here tonight I thought was very good. He challenged me to consider his points, which I do. Again, capitalism does not always function perfectly, but I still feel it is by far the best for society.
Hopefully, some RSN readers also enjoy having their ideas challenged.
Did you know that having delivered a baby IS A PREEXISTING CONDITION??? YOU WILL BE DENIED. Not only is that insanity. It will also leave that child without insurance.
Health care insurance companies should not have stock holders. They should be straight companies, where people make a decent wage.
Think about it tommy. I have stocks in company C, which insures you. You need a life-saving operation. It is to my advantage to deny you, for it cuts into my profit?????
THAT IS PLAIN OLD IMMORAL, TO BENEFIT FROM OTHER CITIZEN'S ILLNESS AND MISERY.
It seems to me tea partiers claim to be Christian. That sure as hell is not Christian behavior. Jesus would NEVER approve of that. Your turn tommy??
The Nazis (Socialists)[ Hmmm. Nazis repressed socialism and communism and jews and gays, so equating nazis with socialism is inaccurate.],
Stalinists, Maoists, Castro, Pol Pot etc provide amble reason to prefer free markets [Are these shining examples of "Free Market" that you espouse?].
"Free markets provide freedom and efficiency"[No. Neither when wealth becomes so concentrated that the wealthy can write their own laws and undo anti-trust laws, become "too big to fail"and take from the poor (our taxes) to give to the rich]].
"They decentralize power and diminish the power of tyrants".[There is such a thing as "tyranny by wealth", though.
"Again, capitalism does not always function perfectly, but I still feel it is by far the best for society. [I concur, though it benefits from being 'tweaked' with anti-trust laws]
Hopefully, some RSN readers also enjoy having their ideas challenged.[ Yes, unless you only wish to be a "provocateur".T hat is less admirable.
Not a lot of comments on the "Mass Tree Deaths Prompt Fears of Amazon 'Climate Tipping Point' " article listed in the same mailing, but then he doesn't seem to interested in the climate change issue.
Most Koch Brother, water carriers are not.
RSS feed for comments to this post