[VIDEO] Ratigan: Koch Brothers & The Tea Party

[PermanentSleep]

If anyone can actually stomach watching this, please let me know if you felt like their 8 minute talk was just a huge speculative stretch with almost zero facts to back up anything they were talking about.

 

[FrankRep]

The Koch Brothers are a major financial force behind Americans for Prosperity, The Cato Institute, and the Reason Foundation


Wikipedia: David H. Koch

In 1984, Koch founded, served as Chairman of the board of directors of, and donated to the free-market Citizens for a Sound Economy. In 2004, this organization separated into Americans for Prosperity Foundation and FreedomWorks. Koch continues as Chairman of the Board and gives money to Americans for Prosperity Foundation and to a related advocacy organization, Americans for Prosperity. A Koch spokesperson issued a press release stating that the Koch's have "no ties to and have never given money to FreedomWorks"

Both FreedomWorks and Americans for Prosperity have been providing funding and training to the US Tea Party movement, which opposes much of U.S. President Barack Obama's policies and legislative agenda. In addition, Koch sits on the board and gives money to the libertarian Cato Institute and Reason Foundation. In the late summer and early fall of 2010, Koch's contributions to political campaigns, free-market think tanks and other advocacy organizations came under increased scrutiny. Koch supports the Tea Party movement and Republican candidates, and California Proposition 23 (2010). In July 2010, New York Magazine profiled him, calling him the "tea party’s wallet". In August 2010, Jane Mayer of The New Yorker wrote on the political spending of David and Charles Koch.[18] White House political advisor David Axelrod wrote in The Washington Post, calling them "campaigners we can't see." Koch says that: "I’ve never been to a tea party event. No one representing the tea party has ever even approached me."​

* Fred Koch, their father, was one of the original members of the John Birch Society.

 

[TheNcredibleEgg]

Well, I like Dylan somewhat, so I could stomach it.

They were basically calling the Koch Brothers corporatists. Saying how much they benefit from a gov't/business alliance. Nothing substantive was offered in the video. Just a bunch of perhaps and possibly and maybes. They really didn't talk about the Tea Party connection much at all - despite the title.

My only gripe was that they all confused corporatists and the free market. They were basically badmouthing the free market because the Koch Brothers are corporatists. Dylan never corrected them - so he might not really get the difference either. Sad.

As far as the Koch Brothers being corporatists - and infiltrating the TEA Party - I don't doubt it. I just don't know how much extent their influence is. I would say their influence in the Ron Paul faction of the TEA Party is zero. The Sarah Palin faction - probably.

 

[FrankRep]

The Koch brothers are rich free market capitalists. They support free market capitalist organizations like Cato, Reason, and Americans for Prosperity. I can why Progressives and Socialists hate them so much!

 

[TheNcredibleEgg]

The Koch brothers are rich free market capitalists. They support free market capitalist organizations like Cato, Reason, and Americans for Prosperity. I can why Progressives and Socialists hate them so much!

I wish I could believe they were free market capitalists. I just really am skeptical. (Especially after my faith in Warren Buffett as a capitalist was destroyed in recent years.) The video talked about the Koch Bros. lobbying and getting no bid contracts. If they did that - then nope, they cannot claim to be free market capitalists.

 

[FrankRep]

I wish I could believe they were free market capitalists. I just really am skeptical. (Especially after my faith in Warren Buffett as a capitalist was destroyed in recent years.) The video talked about the Koch Bros. lobbying and getting no bid contracts. If they did that - then nope, they cannot claim to be free market capitalists.

- Businesses lobby the government. You would be stupid not to, especially when your competitors are doing the same.
- Blame the Government for no bid contracts. A business would be stupid to turn down government money.

 

[TheNcredibleEgg]

Businesses lobby the government. You would be stupid not to, especially when your competitors are doing the same.

And therein is the crux of the problem. Your competitors are corporatists - so that justifies you to become a corporatist. Pretty soon everyone is a corporatist.

And then people like Dylan Ratigan cannot see the difference between free market capitalism and crony capitalism.

Blame the Government for no bid contracts. A business would be stupid to turn down government money.

Blame them both. The gov't doesn't offer no bid contracts to companies who do not donate heavily. Companies donating to politicians and getting rewarded with no bid contracts is just as insidious as public unions donating to politicians then getting better compensation.

 

[sluggo]

Ugh, Mark Ames. That guy is a sleazeball. Not sure why Ratigan has him on so much.

http://www.chicagoreader.com/chicago/beast-in-the-east/Content?oid=902762

 

[hugolp]

I wish I could believe they were free market capitalists. I just really am skeptical. (Especially after my faith in Warren Buffett as a capitalist was destroyed in recent years.) The video talked about the Koch Bros. lobbying and getting no bid contracts. If they did that - then nope, they cannot claim to be free market capitalists.

They do lobby.

The thing is: Can you compete with the rest of the corporatists in a regulated system without playing the lobbying game? I tend to think the answer is no. So I am not saying what they do is ok or that they would not try it anyways under other circumpstances, but the reality is that we live in a regulated system, and therefore to compete you have to play the corporatist game.

 

[PermanentSleep]

They do lobby.

The thing is: Can you compete with the rest of the corporatists in a regulated system without playing the lobbying game? I tend to think the answer is no. So I am not saying what they do is ok or that they would not try it anyways under other circumpstances, but the reality is that we live in a regulated system, and therefore to compete you have to play the corporatist game.

^^That's what I was thinking. I feel like that segment should have been on GE or some other Corporation that loves their handouts and special competition barring regulations.

 

[specsaregood]

I didn't watch it, but I'm guessing they failed to mention that the Koch's maxed out in donations to the establishment primary candidate that went up against the biggest name in the tea party last year? Rand Paul?

 

[FrankRep]

And therein is the crux of the problem. Your competitors are corporatists - so that justifies you to become a corporatist. Pretty soon everyone is a corporatist.

If I start an LLC, am I a Corporatist?

Blame them both. The gov't doesn't offer no bid contracts to companies who do not donate heavily. Companies donating to politicians and getting rewarded with no bid contracts is just as insidious as public unions donating to politicians then getting better compensation.

Should donating money to politicians be illegal?

Again, Big Government is the problem. It has too much power.

 

[EndDaFed]

If I start an LLC, am I a Corporatist?




Should donating money to politicians be illegal?

Again, Big Government is the problem. It has too much power.

If someone pays another to kill a person they hate should that person go unpunished? What I want to know is why do you still continue to suck the Koch of a group of people who stole 1,000 properties from citizens? I guess you only support private property for the rich and not for the slaves. So according to your logic it's perfectly fine and moral to pay someone to steal for you.

Koch Industries oil pipeline recently built in Minnesota shows that Charles Koch does not see an is anything wrong with the government confiscating private property, as long as he stands to make a profit. Completed in 2008, the 304-mile line now carries crude oil from the Canadian border to a Koch Industries refinery near the Twin Cities area via a two-foot-wide pipe. Company PR execs pitched the pipeline as a public benefit project, as it would increase Minnesota's gasoline supply. But the 1,000-plus landowners who were forced to handover their private property so that Koch Industries could run its pipeline didn't quite see it that way. "People's rights were violated, and they never got their due process," a farmer whose fields were going to be cut in two by the pipeline told a newspaper in 2007. "It's wrong. People's property is one of the most important things to their livelihood."

http://www.observer.com/2010/slideshow/131739/eminent-domain

 

[TheNcredibleEgg]

If I start an LLC am I a Corporatist?

No - running a corporation does not make one a corporatist.

But trying to get special favors or deals - or (un)competitive advantages - from gov't (invariably through donations to politicians) does make one a corporatist.

Now you can claim all you want that it's the gov't fault - not the corporation - but that's just naive. The corporatists (like GE and apparently the Koch Brothers) intentionally abuse the system to create the opportunity.

And really, what the corporatists do, is no different than what the public unions do in Wisconsin (and other states.) Both are destructive to the free market.

 

[PermanentSleep]

No - running a corporation does not make one a corporatist.

But trying to get special favors or deals - or (un)competitive advantages - from gov't (invariably through donations to politicians) does make one a corporatist.

Now you can claim all you want that it's the gov't fault - not the corporation - but that's just naive. The corporatists (like GE and apparently the Koch Brothers) intentionally abuse the system to create the opportunity.

And really, what the corporatists do, is no different than what the public unions do in Wisconsin (and other states.) Both are destructive to the free market.

The system is what it is. You are at a SERIOUS competitive DISadvantage if you do not utilize all legal means in the current system to ensure your company's viability and profitability. You seem to be implying that the Koch's should sit back and watch other corporations devour market share at the injury to their own company. If they play by the rules, who is at fault, the rule makers or the players themselves?

 

[EndDaFed]

The system is what it is. You are at a SERIOUS competitive DISadvantage if you do not utilize all legal means in the current system to ensure your company's viability and profitability. You seem to be implying that the Koch's should sit back and watch other corporations devour market share at the injury to their own company. If they play by the rules, who is at fault, the rule makers or the players themselves?

Are you fine with them using eminent domain as noted above to take 1,000 properties? If so and to remain logically consistent you shouldn't complain about any other group getting an advantage due to government. If you are fine with corporations doing it then you have no principled ground to stand on to say others can't.

 

[PermanentSleep]

Are you fine with them using eminent domain as noted above to take 1,000 properties? If so and to remain logically consistent you shouldn't complain about any other group getting an advantage due to government. If you are fine with corporations doing it then you have no principled ground to stand on to say others can't.

I don't complain about "groups" getting an advantage due to government, I complain about government wielding the power to offer such an advantage in the first place. If anything, the eminent domain example is just proof that such government ability to even grant the privilege in the first place is flawed. And while I do not agree with what happened, the system does allow it, and the Koch's taking advantage of such government blessings provided the utter absurdity of this legal means of stealing private property a national audience.

 

[TheNcredibleEgg]

The system is what it is. You are at a SERIOUS competitive DISadvantage if you do not utilize all legal means in the current system to ensure your company's viability and profitability. You seem to be implying that the Koch's should sit back and watch other corporations devour market share at the injury to their own company. If they play by the rules, who is at fault, the rule makers or the players themselves?

Ok - let's turn this around. If the public unions in Wisconsin now go out and spend enough to get willing politicians elected to support them - and overturn the recent legislation - you would cheer them?

Because they are playing by the rules and they should not sit back and watch others take away their (ill-gotten) gains in pay and benefits?

Seriously - your mentality is a BIG part of the problem - only blaming the gov't. The reason gov't wields such power is because so many people (on all sides) bribe them to create such power. You have to change the attitude of enough people to not expect favors and special treatment before you can strip the power from the gov't.

And really - to be blunt - there is no hope for a real free market as long as your attitude persists. Basically, your attitude sucks.

 

[PermanentSleep]

Ok - let's turn this around. If the public unions in Wisconsin now go out and spend enough to get willing politicians elected to support them - and overturn the recent legislation - you would cheer them?

Because they are playing by the rules and they should not sit back and watch others take away their (ill-gotten) gains in pay and benefits?

Isn't that what they do already, spend a bunch of money getting politicians elected to grant them special favors? I haven't "cheered" for anyone in anything I've said. You are hardly being realistic. When the system allows for such behavior, some portion of the population is going to jump at the chance to get ahead easily. This is an inevitability called human nature. Like I stated previously, the rules exist and people will use them to their advantage. Will I be happy if the unions spend untold amounts getting politicians elected to overturn the recent legislation? No. But do I expect them to do anything other than that? No.

Seriously - your mentality is a BIG part of the problem - only blaming the gov't. The reason gov't wields such power is because so many people (on all sides) bribe them to create such power. You have to change the attitude of enough people to not expect favors and special treatment before you can strip the power from the gov't.

My mentality is based on current circumstance and a realistic view of human nature. How do you propose we "change the attitude of enough people" unless we point incessantly to the unequal dolling out of special favors by the government in the first place? Solely blaming the Koch's in a particular instance (or any other single or group of individuals) only works to narrow the focus of public opinion onto that particular instance and person or group of people, instead shining light on the entire corrupt, nonsensical system.

And really - to be blunt - there is no hope for a real free market as long as your attitude persists. Basically, your attitude sucks.

There is no hope for a real free market until people realize that the sole reason for any and all unequal treatment arises from the government itself. The only way to have a fair environment is to eliminate special favors to all groups. And your attitude, quite frankly, is asshole-ish. Learn to be polite in conversation or YOUR behavior will alienate people from your viewpoint, regardless of whether or not it's correct.

"There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil to the one who is striking at the root." Keep hacking at the branches, and let me know how much you've accomplished 20 years from now.

 

[TheNcredibleEgg]

And your attitude, quite frankly, is asshole-ish. Learn to be polite in conversation or YOUR behavior will alienate people from your viewpoint, regardless of whether or not it's correct.

Well, sorry about that comment - but I just think the Koch Brothers (and others) ought to be condemned fully for being corporatists while at the same time trying to trumpet their support for the free market. I don't accept the notion that they were only "playing by the rules." I think they were fully complicit in partnership with gov't to set and take advantage of those rules. I also don't think people like them want a free market. They prefer their cozy crony market.

And while I agree with you fully that the whole corrupt system should be badmouthed and fought - I also think individual acts of corporatism (ala the Koch Bros.) should also be condemned individually.

Yes, it's human nature for people to game the system - if possible. But it's also human nature to try and keep that secret. The Koch Brothers don't like their acts of corporatism to see the light - so if others try and shame them in public perhaps they might not be so quick to game the system the next time.