How so?
Why are we supposed to be against the Koch Brothers again?
- Thread starter Zatch
- Start date
-
- Tags
- koch brothers
How so?
NewRightLibertarian
Member
- Joined
- Dec 12, 2010
- Messages
- 4,589
Look at the politicians they support. Also, their betrayal of Austrian Economics
Tom in NYC
Member
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2011
- Messages
- 138
The Koch brothers have always just seemed motivated by money, not ideology, to me. They spend like $20M a year lobbying the federal government to reduce regulations and increase tax breaks, but generally do so for the industries in which they are invested. Combine that with a less than stellar record on economics and occasional questionable articles/support from the think tanks they support and you can see why people are uneasy.
Wait. Reduced regulations and increased tax breaks are a bad thing?
jmdrake
Member
- Joined
- Jun 6, 2007
- Messages
- 51,924
You left off the last part: but generally do so for the industries in which they are invested. General tax breaks are good. Targeted tax breaks can lead to malinvestment. That said I don't know enough about the Koch brothers to know if that is indeed their strategy.
Victor Grey
Member
- Joined
- Dec 21, 2011
- Messages
- 554
This.
talkingpointes
Member
- Joined
- Mar 22, 2009
- Messages
- 2,503
Except, targeted tax breaks are in themselves a malinvestment with all good intentions aside.
heavenlyboy34
Member
- Joined
- Jul 4, 2008
- Messages
- 59,093
btw, there's some interesting info about Cato at the Cato Unhinged blog- http://catounhinged.blogspot.com/
kuckfeynes
Member
- Joined
- Aug 12, 2011
- Messages
- 784
It's easy to speak of liberty... It's not so easy to live up to it in the face of the machine (for 30 years nonetheless).
The Kochs value liberty when it is convenient to them, just as any rational businessmen in their place would.
Same with Reason, Cato, LP, etc. They talk a good game. Usually. But in the end liberty to them is nothing more than a cost/benefit analysis.
And I think that is the central crisis we face with the new "rising stars" of the movement. Who can be trusted to truly be in it for liberty, and who sees a career first?
Ron Paul truly is a rare bird in this respect... A leader like that doesn't just pop up every generation...
The Kochs value liberty when it is convenient to them, just as any rational businessmen in their place would.
Same with Reason, Cato, LP, etc. They talk a good game. Usually. But in the end liberty to them is nothing more than a cost/benefit analysis.
And I think that is the central crisis we face with the new "rising stars" of the movement. Who can be trusted to truly be in it for liberty, and who sees a career first?
Ron Paul truly is a rare bird in this respect... A leader like that doesn't just pop up every generation...
if it leads to outsourcing, unemployment, lower wages and more corporate power, yes, for some people.
Exactly. So do many people here. Nothing wrong with that.
heavenlyboy34
Member
- Joined
- Jul 4, 2008
- Messages
- 59,093
Yes there is. If you're only concerned about your own liberty you're being very myopic and naive. If others' liberty can be violated on a whim, yours will be next.
Tell that to the Koch brothers and NWO for me. I'm sure they're very concerned about that, then they'll fight for other people's liberties too.
Tax breaks are good in my opinion.
People invested in Oil want the government out of Oil, what a shocker!
The Koch brothers used to be apart of the Libertarian party, but after getting 5% of the vote, they viewed it as a lost cause and decided to influence the GOP with the Americans for Prosperity, the Cato Institute, etc...
=====
Did you know? David Koch was a Libertarian Vice-Presidential candidate in 1980
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showth...bertarian-Vice-Presidential-candidate-in-1980
David Koch on the Iraq War:
SOURCE:
http://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/paranoid-style-liberal-politics_555525.html?nopager=1
He opposed the Iraq war, saying that the war has "cost a lot of money, and it's taken so many American lives". "I question whether that was the right thing to do. In hindsight that looks like it was not a good policy." he told an interviewer.
SOURCE:
http://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/paranoid-style-liberal-politics_555525.html?nopager=1
Anti Federalist
Member
- Joined
- Aug 31, 2007
- Messages
- 117,586
I saw a clip of David Koch on the "Starz Westerns" channel, on a filler show called the "Real West".
He won an auction for an orginal photo of Billy the Kid for $2.1 million.
I hate him just for that.
/jk/
He won an auction for an orginal photo of Billy the Kid for $2.1 million.
I hate him just for that.
/jk/
Last edited:
jmdrake
Member
- Joined
- Jun 6, 2007
- Messages
- 51,924
I didn't say they were bad. I said targeted tax breaks can lead to malinvestment.
Not a shocker at all. But here's the problem. Say if oil gets a tax break but coal does not or vice versa. Is it really good for the government to pick the winners and losers based on who has the best lobbyists?
The Koch brothers used to be apart of the Libertarian party, but after getting 5% of the vote, they viewed it as a lost cause and decided to influence the GOP with the Americans for Prosperity, the Cato Institute, etc...
=====
Did you know? David Koch was a Libertarian Vice-Presidential candidate in 1980
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showth...bertarian-Vice-Presidential-candidate-in-1980
That's nice. But that has nothing to do with the point I made about targeted tax breaks. Did you know that 2004 libertarian presidential candidate Bob Barr endorsed Barack Obama's nomination of gun grabber Eric Holder as attorney general? I'm agnostic about the Koch brothers. But I have a problem with targeted tax breaks. Tax breaks should be across the board with the goal of getting them to zero.
Last edited:
What exactly makes them "neo-cons?" And shouldn't being opposed to corporate taxes and all other taxes be a good thing? I'm sure that Ron supports abolishing the corporate income tax, as he supports abolishing the entire IRS.
onlyrp is banned. The Koch brothers are not neo-cons.
angelatc
Member
- Joined
- May 15, 2007
- Messages
- 50,703
That's a fair point. But if we have to choose between getting some people lower taxes, or no people lower taxes, which should we pick?
