Anonymous vs. The Koch Bros

Seen something interesting in the news or on the intertubes? Discuss it here.

Moderators: Zamfir, Hawknc, Moderators General, Prelates

achan1058
Posts: 1783
Joined: Sun Nov 30, 2008 9:50 pm UTC

Re: Anonymous vs. The Koch Bros

Postby achan1058 » Thu Mar 03, 2011 12:22 am UTC

You can't argue the fact that they are effective. I have never heard of the Koch brothers before this. I guess this also explains why certain people routinely vote against and oppose bills that are for their best interest.

User avatar
addams
Posts: 10198
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: Anonymous vs. The Koch Bros

Postby addams » Thu Mar 03, 2011 3:00 am UTC

omgryebread wrote:
sourmìlk wrote:No, it is not the only way. Anonymous press releases gain enough attention without the addition of illegal activities.
Anonymous press releases get attention mostly because of illegal activities. No one really cares what a bunch of 16-22 year old white guys on the internet who like drawings of chicks with dicks and pictures of cats think. But a bunch of white guys (with the aforementioned futas and felines) who take down high profile websites? That's news. ish.


Non-edit: Ninja'd (but i have futas and lolcats)


Right. No one cares what any of us think. But, Anonymous got people's attention for less than one day.

I think that Anonymous is sexy. They seem heroic. Very 007, Batman, Lone Ranger and Tonto. We, humans, love heros. We, humans, love the struggle. (As long as the struggle is done by someone else.) We humans love the winners. Losers? Well; Losers are just losers.

The big boys are taking our government apart. I like government, when, done by and for the people. Think about it. Who put in the pipes that take your poop away?
The government put in the pipes that take my poop away. I like public works.

Who will get out of bed and operate a snow plow for $2.50/ hr? If, there is no collective bargaining, no government standards, few or no government jobs, then, we may find out, who. There is no doubt that someone will.
Life is, just, an exchange of electrons; It is up to us to give it meaning.

We are all in The Gutter.
Some of us see The Gutter.
Some of us see The Stars.
by mr. Oscar Wilde.

Those that want to Know; Know.
Those that do not Know; Don't tell them.
They do terrible things to people that Tell Them.

User avatar
sourmìlk
If I can't complain, can I at least express my fear?
Posts: 6393
Joined: Mon Dec 22, 2008 10:53 pm UTC
Location: permanently in the wrong
Contact:

Re: Anonymous vs. The Koch Bros

Postby sourmìlk » Thu Mar 03, 2011 3:39 am UTC

I think that Anonymous is sexy. They seem heroic. Very 007, Batman, Lone Ranger and Tonto.


More like V. (The anarchist in the comic, not the hero in the movie.) Or Sweeney Todd.
Terry Pratchett wrote:The trouble with having an open mind, of course, is that people will insist on coming along and trying to put things in it.

User avatar
Triangle_Man
WINNING
Posts: 1500
Joined: Sat May 02, 2009 8:41 pm UTC
Location: CANADA

Re: Anonymous vs. The Koch Bros

Postby Triangle_Man » Thu Mar 03, 2011 3:59 am UTC

sourmìlk wrote:
I think that Anonymous is sexy. They seem heroic. Very 007, Batman, Lone Ranger and Tonto.


More like V. (The anarchist in the comic, not the hero in the movie.) Or Sweeney Todd.


I'll take chaotic neutral hivemind.

And V was awesome.
I really should be working right now, but somehow I don't have the energy.

The Mighty Thesaurus wrote:My moral system allows me to bitch slap you for typing that.

nitePhyyre
Posts: 1280
Joined: Mon Jul 27, 2009 10:31 am UTC

Re: Anonymous vs. The Koch Bros

Postby nitePhyyre » Thu Mar 03, 2011 5:33 am UTC

achan1058 wrote:You can't argue the fact that they are effective. I have never heard of the Koch brothers before this. I guess this also explains why certain people routinely vote against and oppose bills that are for their best interest.

They set up a bunch a PR firms with misleading names like PFA and they then secretly fund the firms to create ads that are in line with their agenda*. That you haven't heard of them is kind of the point.

*more or less, from what I can gather
sourmìlk wrote:Monopolies are not when a single company controls the market for a single product.

You don't become great by trying to be great. You become great by wanting to do something, and then doing it so hard you become great in the process.

achan1058
Posts: 1783
Joined: Sun Nov 30, 2008 9:50 pm UTC

Re: Anonymous vs. The Koch Bros

Postby achan1058 » Thu Mar 03, 2011 6:04 am UTC

nitePhyyre wrote:
achan1058 wrote:You can't argue the fact that they are effective. I have never heard of the Koch brothers before this. I guess this also explains why certain people routinely vote against and oppose bills that are for their best interest.

They set up a bunch a PR firms with misleading names like PFA and they then secretly fund the firms to create ads that are in line with their agenda*. That you haven't heard of them is kind of the point.

*more or less, from what I can gather
I mean by Anonymous being effective, not the Koch brothers.

User avatar
bentheimmigrant
Dotcor Good Poster
Posts: 1366
Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2008 9:01 pm UTC
Location: UK

Re: Anonymous vs. The Koch Bros

Postby bentheimmigrant » Thu Mar 03, 2011 10:30 am UTC

nitePhyyre wrote:
achan1058 wrote:You can't argue the fact that they are effective. I have never heard of the Koch brothers before this. I guess this also explains why certain people routinely vote against and oppose bills that are for their best interest.

They set up a bunch a PR firms with misleading names like PFA and they then secretly fund the firms to create ads that are in line with their agenda*. That you haven't heard of them is kind of the point.

*more or less, from what I can gather

And, thanks to the Citizens United ruling, the amount they can spend is legally limitless. Interestingly, Scalia and Thomas have both attended conservative political retreats sponsored by the Koch brothers... America really sucks sometimes.
"Comment is free, but facts are sacred" - C.P. Scott

User avatar
Vaniver
Posts: 9422
Joined: Fri Oct 13, 2006 2:12 am UTC

Re: Anonymous vs. The Koch Bros

Postby Vaniver » Thu Mar 03, 2011 1:31 pm UTC

Thought people might be interested in an editorial by one of the Koch brothers.
I mostly post over at LessWrong now.

Avatar from My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic, owned by Hasbro.

User avatar
omgryebread
Posts: 1393
Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2010 3:03 am UTC

Re: Anonymous vs. The Koch Bros

Postby omgryebread » Thu Mar 03, 2011 3:14 pm UTC

Vaniver wrote:Thought people might be interested in an editorial by one of the Koch brothers.
That's a lovely editorial in which he raises a lot of points which he's pretty right on. It also doesn't address a major problem with Koch Industries. They are large polluters, and regularly fight against pollution laws. I disagree with most pollution laws and would just prefer a flat tax on it, but clean air is a public good, which the Koch brothers want to use without paying for.

Also doesn't address that the massive amount of money that special interest groups like themselves (and like unions) pump into politics is horribly poisonous to any kind of capitalist democracy.
avatar from Nononono by Lynn Okamoto.

User avatar
Vaniver
Posts: 9422
Joined: Fri Oct 13, 2006 2:12 am UTC

Re: Anonymous vs. The Koch Bros

Postby Vaniver » Thu Mar 03, 2011 5:31 pm UTC

omgryebread wrote:Also doesn't address that the massive amount of money that special interest groups like themselves (and like unions) pump into politics is horribly poisonous to any kind of capitalist democracy.
In this regard, they're actually white knights: their libertarianism is an ideological handicap in corporatism, since they fight for across-the-board changes in laws, rather than special exemptions. A carbon credit system where current firms are given free credits and new firms have to pay for credits is something corporatists would pay for and libertarians would pay to not get because it doesn't hurt current firms and does hurt their competition. (Pollution-sensitive libertarians would pay for a carbon credit system without grandfathering.)

Indeed, that's one of the things I find sort of odd about the hate pointed at them- yeah, they line up with conservatives on a lot of issues, and yeah, as people with a lot of money invested in the American economy, they have a lot to gain from returns to capital improving. But besides pollution / global warming, they're fighting against the sort of Washington-Wall Street crony capitalism that is massively destructive.

On the topic of pollution: I hope their private position on global warming is "it's happening but curing is cheaper than prevention" rather than "it's not happening," but I'm not familiar with that branch of their influence, and I'm only finding reports from their enemies. Like with the pollution citations, there's no sense of scale- this puts them at 10th largest, but what really matters is emissions per dollar of revenue. Comparing apples to oranges, ExxonMobil (#2, over double the score) has less total revenue than Koch Industries, but ExxonMobil is heavily concentrated in oil & gas and Koch Industries is diversified (but I don't know what percentage of their revenue comes from oil & gas). I also don't expect anti-pollution organizations to distinguish between "I want a floating pollution market" types (of which I am one) and "I want to pollute freely" types when you could just paint everyone as "fighting against pollution regulation."
I mostly post over at LessWrong now.

Avatar from My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic, owned by Hasbro.

User avatar
EsotericWombat
Colorful Orator
Posts: 2567
Joined: Wed Sep 19, 2007 4:36 pm UTC
Location: Boston, MA
Contact:

Re: Anonymous vs. The Koch Bros

Postby EsotericWombat » Thu Mar 03, 2011 7:39 pm UTC

Why would I be interested in an editorial that begins with the blatant fucking falsehood that the economic downturn was somehow caused by government spending?
Image

achan1058
Posts: 1783
Joined: Sun Nov 30, 2008 9:50 pm UTC

Re: Anonymous vs. The Koch Bros

Postby achan1058 » Thu Mar 03, 2011 7:47 pm UTC

Vaniver wrote:Indeed, that's one of the things I find sort of odd about the hate pointed at them- yeah, they line up with conservatives on a lot of issues, and yeah, as people with a lot of money invested in the American economy, they have a lot to gain from returns to capital improving. But besides pollution / global warming, they're fighting against the sort of Washington-Wall Street crony capitalism that is massively destructive.
Well, I don't know much about them, but from what I am seeing here, I think the fact that they are dishonest and not up front about what they want to achieve is the biggest problem. I doubt the groups they fund will say anything like:
This is the GSL Cato Institute, casted by Tasteless and Artosis John and Jim, sponsored by Intel and G Skill David and Charles (Koch).

If they are as up front as that with their sponsoring, as well as their agenda, I doubt they would receive nearly as much hate, though they would not receive maybe even one tenth of the support.

Dark567
First one to notify the boards of Rick and Morty Season 3
Posts: 3686
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2009 5:12 pm UTC
Location: Everywhere(in the US, I don't venture outside it too often, unfortunately)

Re: Anonymous vs. The Koch Bros

Postby Dark567 » Thu Mar 03, 2011 8:07 pm UTC

Vaniver wrote:Indeed, that's one of the things I find sort of odd about the hate pointed at them- yeah, they line up with conservatives on a lot of issues, and yeah, as people with a lot of money invested in the American economy, they have a lot to gain from returns to capital improving. But besides pollution / global warming, they're fighting against the sort of Washington-Wall Street crony capitalism that is massively destructive.
For the record the Koch brothers have donated a fair sum of money to the ACLU to fight for civil liberties. That seems to imply that they are more ideologically driven than for their own businesses purposes.
I apologize, 90% of the time I write on the Fora I am intoxicated.


Yakk wrote:The question the thought experiment I posted is aimed at answering: When falling in a black hole, do you see the entire universe's future history train-car into your ass, or not?

User avatar
bentheimmigrant
Dotcor Good Poster
Posts: 1366
Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2008 9:01 pm UTC
Location: UK

Re: Anonymous vs. The Koch Bros

Postby bentheimmigrant » Thu Mar 03, 2011 8:09 pm UTC

I'm with EW. It's hard to take someone seriously when there editorial opens with a piece of rhetoric designed to establish a complete lie.
"Comment is free, but facts are sacred" - C.P. Scott

Dark567
First one to notify the boards of Rick and Morty Season 3
Posts: 3686
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2009 5:12 pm UTC
Location: Everywhere(in the US, I don't venture outside it too often, unfortunately)

Re: Anonymous vs. The Koch Bros

Postby Dark567 » Thu Mar 03, 2011 8:13 pm UTC

EsotericWombat wrote:Why would I be interested in an editorial that begins with the blatant fucking falsehood that the economic downturn was somehow caused by government spending?

I am not sure thats what he was saying... I read as we a facing an economic crises in the future caused by our debt, not that the current one was caused by debt.
I apologize, 90% of the time I write on the Fora I am intoxicated.


Yakk wrote:The question the thought experiment I posted is aimed at answering: When falling in a black hole, do you see the entire universe's future history train-car into your ass, or not?

User avatar
Zamfir
I built a novelty castle, the irony was lost on some.
Posts: 7588
Joined: Wed Aug 27, 2008 2:43 pm UTC
Location: Nederland

Re: Anonymous vs. The Koch Bros

Postby Zamfir » Thu Mar 03, 2011 8:17 pm UTC

achan1058 wrote:If they are as up front as that with their sponsoring, as well as their agenda, I doubt they would receive nearly as much hate, though they would not receive maybe even one tenth of the support.

But how are they secret? I don't live in the US and even I heard about them. That's hardly the way smooth political operators work, They look more like people who have spend more lavishly and openly on lobbying than would be optimal, probably because they really believe what they are saying. Lots of people genuinely believe stuff that happens to be in their personal interest.

Vaniver wrote:In this regard, they're actually white knights: their libertarianism is an ideological handicap in corporatism, since they fight for across-the-board changes in laws, rather than special exemptions. A carbon credit system where current firms are given free credits and new firms have to pay for credits is something corporatists would pay for and libertarians would pay to not get because it doesn't hurt current firms and does hurt their competition. (Pollution-sensitive libertarians would pay for a carbon credit system without grandfathering.)

Do you have any indication that they do seriously support other methods to set a price on carbon emissions or other pollution? The AFP website has just the usual "regulations are bad for business" that you get from any industry lobby group anywhere, without much sign of white knighting.

Most carbon heavy industries don't like schemes no matter how much grandfathering they get, because they don't expect such benefits to last. They can hope to make a convincing case that regulation would do damage far beyond its advantages, and that's a fight they can keep up for a long time. But once a system is in place, they would be left with the far less attractive job of defending their free credits. That's not a fight they can hope to sustain for long.
Last edited by Zamfir on Thu Mar 03, 2011 8:47 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
bentheimmigrant
Dotcor Good Poster
Posts: 1366
Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2008 9:01 pm UTC
Location: UK

Re: Anonymous vs. The Koch Bros

Postby bentheimmigrant » Thu Mar 03, 2011 8:42 pm UTC

Dark567 wrote:I am not sure thats what he was saying... I read as we a facing an economic crises in the future caused by our debt, not that the current one was caused by debt.

I'll grant that it's fairly ambiguous, and could be interpreted either way. The rest of the article comes off to me as trickle-down apologetics, and a general rebuke of Keynesian economics. As I fall firmly in an opposing camp to him, it's hard for me to take any of it seriously, or at face value. While Vaniver may read it as White Knighting, I read "I got mine, Jack."
"Comment is free, but facts are sacred" - C.P. Scott

Роберт
Posts: 4285
Joined: Wed May 14, 2008 1:56 am UTC

Re: Anonymous vs. The Koch Bros

Postby Роберт » Thu Mar 03, 2011 8:46 pm UTC

bentheimmigrant wrote:
Dark567 wrote:I am not sure thats what he was saying... I read as we a facing an economic crises in the future caused by our debt, not that the current one was caused by debt.

I'll grant that it's fairly ambiguous, and could be interpreted either way.
It seems pretty clear that he's saying "there's a crisis coming up, and we keep putting off real fixes to the budget".
The Great Hippo wrote:[T]he way we treat suspected terrorists genuinely terrifies me.

User avatar
bentheimmigrant
Dotcor Good Poster
Posts: 1366
Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2008 9:01 pm UTC
Location: UK

Re: Anonymous vs. The Koch Bros

Postby bentheimmigrant » Thu Mar 03, 2011 8:58 pm UTC

The first line wrote:Years of tremendous overspending by federal, state and local governments have brought us face-to-face with an economic crisis.

Considering that he provides no timeframe for this crisis, while in the midst of an actual economic crisis, either he is talking about the current one (and thus is blaming the government instead of the banks) or he is talking about one the might happen in the future if you believe what a neo-liberal says about government spending. I'd say that's ambiguous.
"Comment is free, but facts are sacred" - C.P. Scott

achan1058
Posts: 1783
Joined: Sun Nov 30, 2008 9:50 pm UTC

Re: Anonymous vs. The Koch Bros

Postby achan1058 » Thu Mar 03, 2011 9:38 pm UTC

Zamfir wrote:
achan1058 wrote:If they are as up front as that with their sponsoring, as well as their agenda, I doubt they would receive nearly as much hate, though they would not receive maybe even one tenth of the support.

But how are they secret? I don't live in the US and even I heard about them. That's hardly the way smooth political operators work, They look more like people who have spend more lavishly and openly on lobbying than would be optimal, probably because they really believe what they are saying. Lots of people genuinely believe stuff that happens to be in their personal interest.
Well, I have heard (very bad things) of the institutes they sponsor, but this is the first time I have heard of the people themselves.

User avatar
EsotericWombat
Colorful Orator
Posts: 2567
Joined: Wed Sep 19, 2007 4:36 pm UTC
Location: Boston, MA
Contact:

Re: Anonymous vs. The Koch Bros

Postby EsotericWombat » Thu Mar 03, 2011 9:47 pm UTC

Let alone that it completely ignores the fact that the deficits are this big because taxes are just about the lowest they've ever been, which combined in the total lack of growth in real wages and tax loopholes that allow some of the most profitable corporations there are to pay nothing, next to nothing, or come out ahead on their taxes, has completely fucked revenues.

The people he helped put in Congress are now trying to cut the IRS budget, which is a kind of funny way to go about reducing the deficit seeing as paying to enforce existing tax law has about a 10 to 1 return on investment. That they've managed to find a way to cut the budget and increase the deficit at the same time says a hell of a lot about the current GOP.
Image

User avatar
Thesh
Made to Fuck Dinosaurs
Posts: 6568
Joined: Tue Jan 12, 2010 1:55 am UTC
Location: Colorado

Re: Anonymous vs. The Koch Bros

Postby Thesh » Fri Mar 04, 2011 1:16 am UTC

EsotericWombat wrote:Let alone that it completely ignores the fact that the deficits are this big because taxes are just about the lowest they've ever been, which combined in the total lack of growth in real wages and tax loopholes that allow some of the most profitable corporations there are to pay nothing, next to nothing, or come out ahead on their taxes, has completely fucked revenues.


Until 2009, our tax receipts as a percent of GDP has remained pretty constant (exceptions are higher than normal during the mid to late 90s, and lower than normal in 2003 and 2004). In 2009 and 2010, there was a significant revenue drop, and we saw the lowest revenues as a percent of the GDP since 1950. However, the fact that our expenditures for 2009 and 2010 as a percent of the GDP are higher than they have ever been (at least since 1948) has something to do with it as well.

Did changes in the tax laws that allows what you are saying come into effect in 2009? Loopholes aren't exactly new.

Table 15.1—Total Government Receipts in Absolute Amounts and as Percentages of GDP: 1948–2010
Table 15.3—Total Government Expenditures as Percentages of GDP: 1948–2010

EDIT: This is a better spreadsheet that has both receipts and outlays, including inflation adjusted and percentage of GDP:

Table 1.3—Summary of Receipts, Outlays, and Surpluses or Deficits (-) in Current Dollars, Constant (FY 2005) Dollars, and as Percentages of GDP: 1940–2016
Summum ius, summa iniuria.

User avatar
Vaniver
Posts: 9422
Joined: Fri Oct 13, 2006 2:12 am UTC

Re: Anonymous vs. The Koch Bros

Postby Vaniver » Sat Mar 05, 2011 2:19 am UTC

Zamfir wrote:Do you have any indication that they do seriously support other methods to set a price on carbon emissions or other pollution? The AFP website has just the usual "regulations are bad for business" that you get from any industry lobby group anywhere, without much sign of white knighting.
No, I don't, hence the later comment that I hoped it was their private belief. I gave that example to highlight the difference between libertarians and corporatists. People who care strongly about pollution are unlikely to enter polluting industries because of their preferences, so from that selection effect alone I wouldn't be surprised that people in extraction industries care less about pollution regulation. Add in that it hits their wallet...
I mostly post over at LessWrong now.

Avatar from My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic, owned by Hasbro.

Arrian
Posts: 464
Joined: Wed May 20, 2009 10:15 am UTC
Location: Minnesota

Re: Anonymous vs. The Koch Bros

Postby Arrian » Sat Mar 05, 2011 1:32 pm UTC

bentheimmigrant wrote:And, thanks to the Citizens United ruling, the amount they can spend is legally limitless. Interestingly, Scalia and Thomas have both attended conservative political retreats sponsored by the Koch brothers... America really sucks sometimes.


What part of Citizen's United addressed how much a private citizen could spend on political speech?

There's some decent commentary on the Koch brothers over at the Volokh Conspiracy:

The Kochs would appear to be the perfect liberaltarians–they support gay marriage, drug legalization, opposed the Iraq War, want to substantially cut military spending, and gave $20 million to the ACLU to oppose the Patriot Act (compared to a relatively piddling $43,000 to Scott Walker’s election campaign).


They're not plaster saints, but their main political priority is smaller government that is less intrusive in our daily lives. And they're willing to put their money where their mouth is to back that up against both Democrats AND Republicans. If you're left leaning, there are much better people to be hating on than the Koch brothers.

User avatar
EsotericWombat
Colorful Orator
Posts: 2567
Joined: Wed Sep 19, 2007 4:36 pm UTC
Location: Boston, MA
Contact:

Re: Anonymous vs. The Koch Bros

Postby EsotericWombat » Sat Mar 05, 2011 3:23 pm UTC

43 thousand was the second biggest contribution of the campaign. Not actually piddling. They also gave a million dollars to the RGA, which spent 65 thousand in Wisconsin

They've just now opened up a lobbying office in downtown Madison. Which makes since, as union-busting is a major goal of their political operation.

But there may be more to this. Here's Section 44 of the budget bill:

SECTION 44. 16.896 of the statutes is created to read:
16.896 Sale or contractual operation of state−owned heating, cooling,
and power plants. (1) Notwithstanding ss. 13.48 (14) (am) and 16.705 (1), the

department may sell any state−owned heating, cooling, and power plant or may

contract with a private entity for the operation of any such plant, with or without

solicitation of bids, for any amount that the department determines to be in the best

interest of the state. Notwithstanding ss. 196.49 and 196.80, no approval or

certification of the public service commission is necessary for a public utility to

purchase, or contract for the operation of, such a plant, and any such purchase is

considered to be in the public interest and to comply with the criteria for certification

of a project under s. 196.49 (3) (b).


Man, I wonder which energy company is going to get a sweet no-bid contract from Walker to buy up state-owned utilities.

But yeah, they're all about small government. Totes.
Image

Arrian
Posts: 464
Joined: Wed May 20, 2009 10:15 am UTC
Location: Minnesota

Re: Anonymous vs. The Koch Bros

Postby Arrian » Sat Mar 05, 2011 4:30 pm UTC

EsotericWombat wrote:Man, I wonder which energy company is going to get a sweet no-bid contract from Walker to buy up state-owned utilities.

But yeah, they're all about small government. Totes.


I'm curious about this section about selling state owned utilities, it sounds very exploitable without context, but what's the context? How much profit does the state get from "state−owned heating, cooling, and power plants?" Are they even profitable at all?

The Public Services Commission of Wisconsin doesn't list any state owned power utilities. I found an article from the Wisconsin State Journal that talks about the proposal to sell or contract out operations of the state's heating, cooling and power plants. This article notes that the measure had already passed back in 2005 but got vetoed by the (Democratic) governor at the time, Jim Doyle.

That article references the state Department of Administration which would be tasked with deciding exactly what to do with the plants. That site has a page about the three state heating plants, which also happen to provide power and cooling. It looks like these provide heating, cooling and electricity to some of the State's government buildings and maybe U of W's Madison campus. The Wis State Journal article mentions 32 heating plants, but it sounds like they all serve government buildings, not the general population. (I couldn't find any official reference to the other 29.)

The idea is to privatize these plants and let a profit seeking firm run them more efficiently than the state can. Whether or not that will be the end result is a fair question, examples in the past have gone both ways. In fact, one of the proposal's supporters says:

Plale [R] disagreed. "It's probably more economical to be able to negotiate the product of the heating plant at a better rate for the taxpayer," he said.

Plale said there is not yet a financial analysis to indicate how much the state might save by privatizing the plants. "This really is just the very first step here," he added.


This is NOT a measure to sell off all the sweet, profit making power plants providing electricity to the 5.7 million residents of the state. Wisconsin can't sell you those plants any more than it can sell you "a nice bridge in Brooklyn."

Dark567
First one to notify the boards of Rick and Morty Season 3
Posts: 3686
Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2009 5:12 pm UTC
Location: Everywhere(in the US, I don't venture outside it too often, unfortunately)

Re: Anonymous vs. The Koch Bros

Postby Dark567 » Sat Mar 05, 2011 5:01 pm UTC

EsotericWombat wrote:43 thousand was the second biggest contribution of the campaign. Not actually piddling. They also gave a million dollars to the RGA, which spent 65 thousand in Wisconsin
Yeah. But its still less than one percent of his campaign. 43 thousand, even to a governor's campaign, is peanuts. The Koch brothers didn't really have an effect until the dems had already fled the Wisconsin.
I apologize, 90% of the time I write on the Fora I am intoxicated.


Yakk wrote:The question the thought experiment I posted is aimed at answering: When falling in a black hole, do you see the entire universe's future history train-car into your ass, or not?

User avatar
EsotericWombat
Colorful Orator
Posts: 2567
Joined: Wed Sep 19, 2007 4:36 pm UTC
Location: Boston, MA
Contact:

Re: Anonymous vs. The Koch Bros

Postby EsotericWombat » Sat Mar 05, 2011 8:03 pm UTC

Arrian wrote:The idea is to privatize these plants and let a profit seeking firm run them more efficiently than the state can.


Bullshit. If this was about efficiency, the state would solicit bids.
Image

User avatar
Chfan
Posts: 2141
Joined: Sun Oct 19, 2008 10:26 pm UTC
Location: American East Coast

Re: Anonymous vs. The Koch Bros

Postby Chfan » Sat Mar 05, 2011 8:52 pm UTC

Anonymous sucks, but the Koch brothers suck more. So, despite my hatred for Anon I would support this- ineffective as it will be in the long run.
Just FYI, the guy isn't avatar isn't me. But he seems pretty cool.

wokattack
Posts: 8
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 5:06 pm UTC
Contact:

Re: Anonymous vs. The Koch Bros

Postby wokattack » Sat Mar 05, 2011 9:22 pm UTC

Take a look at the industries that Koch Industries is involved in. It reads like a list of key personnel for the Death Star...: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Koch_Industries

Arrian
Posts: 464
Joined: Wed May 20, 2009 10:15 am UTC
Location: Minnesota

Re: Anonymous vs. The Koch Bros

Postby Arrian » Sat Mar 05, 2011 10:59 pm UTC

EsotericWombat wrote:
Arrian wrote:The idea is to privatize these plants and let a profit seeking firm run them more efficiently than the state can.


Bullshit. If this was about efficiency, the state would solicit bids.


Yes, because the lowest bidder is ALWAYS the lowest cost solution, no such thing as cost overruns, amiright?

The bill doesn't define the method for privatizing those heating plants, leaving it up to the agency that manages them. They might solicit bids to sell them, they might negotiate a contract to operate them, they might do something else. Does giving the agency that manages those assets discretion on how to privatize them guarantee the best value for the state? No. But neither does requiring them to offload the plants to the lowest bidder. In fact, sending something out for bidding has let to some catastrophic blunders while less competitive measures have resulted in spectacular successes.

There's no guaranty of a good outcome. Whether bidding or discretion generally leads to a better outcome is largely an empirical question, and very likely highly dependent on context.

User avatar
mmmcannibalism
Posts: 2150
Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2009 6:16 am UTC

Re: Anonymous vs. The Koch Bros

Postby mmmcannibalism » Sat Mar 05, 2011 11:31 pm UTC

wokattack wrote:Take a look at the industries that Koch Industries is involved in. It reads like a list of key personnel for the Death Star...: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Koch_Industries


So your criticizing them for being involved in industries that produce things other then direct consumer goods?
Izawwlgood wrote:I for one would happily live on an island as a fuzzy seal-human.

Oregonaut wrote:Damn fetuses and their terroist plots.

User avatar
addams
Posts: 10198
Joined: Sun Sep 12, 2010 4:44 am UTC
Location: Oregon Coast: 97444

Re: Anonymous vs. The Koch Bros

Postby addams » Sun Mar 06, 2011 4:45 am UTC

EsotericWombat wrote:Why would I be interested in an editorial that begins with the blatant fucking falsehood that the economic downturn was somehow caused by government spending?


Yeah. What you said.
Life is, just, an exchange of electrons; It is up to us to give it meaning.

We are all in The Gutter.
Some of us see The Gutter.
Some of us see The Stars.
by mr. Oscar Wilde.

Those that want to Know; Know.
Those that do not Know; Don't tell them.
They do terrible things to people that Tell Them.

User avatar
bentheimmigrant
Dotcor Good Poster
Posts: 1366
Joined: Fri Apr 25, 2008 9:01 pm UTC
Location: UK

Re: Anonymous vs. The Koch Bros

Postby bentheimmigrant » Sun Mar 06, 2011 9:31 am UTC

Arrian wrote:There's no guaranty of a good outcome. Whether bidding or discretion generally leads to a better outcome is largely an empirical question, and very likely highly dependent on context.


The context:
Arrian wrote:That article references the state Department of Administration which would be tasked with deciding exactly what to do with the plants. That site has a page about the three state heating plants, which also happen to provide power and cooling. It looks like these provide heating, cooling and electricity to some of the State's government buildings and maybe U of W's Madison campus. The Wis State Journal article mentions 32 heating plants, but it sounds like they all serve government buildings, not the general population. (I couldn't find any official reference to the other 29.)

The idea is to privatize these plants and let a profit seeking firm run them more efficiently than the state can.

So, if these are sold to a private firm, said company suddenly has a monopoly - competition-less control of the energy provision to state buildings. How does this encourage efficiency? How does this discourage them from building in inefficiencies so that they can raise prices?
"Comment is free, but facts are sacred" - C.P. Scott

Arrian
Posts: 464
Joined: Wed May 20, 2009 10:15 am UTC
Location: Minnesota

Re: Anonymous vs. The Koch Bros

Postby Arrian » Mon Mar 07, 2011 12:58 am UTC

bentheimmigrant wrote:So, if these are sold to a private firm, said company suddenly has a monopoly - competition-less control of the energy provision to state buildings. How does this encourage efficiency? How does this discourage them from building in inefficiencies so that they can raise prices?


Contracts?

Dedicated assets like this aren't generally sold or management turned over to a private company with no strings attached. Generally there is a contract to provide the services at a certain price for a certain time period. The price is usually lower than current operating costs are for the government, the private operator takes the contract on those terms, even pays the state for the privilege, because they think they can operate it more efficiently. The terms of the contract create constraints on the private operator.

It doesn't always come out optimally, Chicago got hosed when they privatized their public parking. (Though rate hikes were intentional: "[Daley's] conclusion was that Chicago had to outsource the political will to raise meter rates.") On the other hand, the National Park Service has done pretty well by privatizing concessions.

User avatar
BoomFrog
Posts: 1069
Joined: Mon Jan 15, 2007 5:59 am UTC
Location: Seattle

Re: Anonymous vs. The Koch Bros

Postby BoomFrog » Mon Mar 07, 2011 6:34 am UTC

Arrian wrote:On the other hand, the National Park Service has done pretty well by privatizing concessions.
Link doesn't work for me, but concessions are very different from a utility. I assume the concessions went to multiple suppliers and were thus not a monopoly.

Privatizing into a monopolies may cut costs the first year but it's guaranteed the private company will eventually abuse the system.
"Everything I need to know about parenting I learned from cooking. Don't be afraid to experiment, and eat your mistakes." - Cronos

Arrian
Posts: 464
Joined: Wed May 20, 2009 10:15 am UTC
Location: Minnesota

Re: Anonymous vs. The Koch Bros

Postby Arrian » Mon Mar 07, 2011 10:15 am UTC

BoomFrog wrote:
Arrian wrote:On the other hand, the National Park Service has done pretty well by privatizing concessions.
Link doesn't work for me, but concessions are very different from a utility. I assume the concessions went to multiple suppliers and were thus not a monopoly.

Privatizing into a monopolies may cut costs the first year but it's guaranteed the private company will eventually abuse the system.


"Concessions" means complete operations of a park, from maintaining parking lots and campgrounds to cleaning toilets to selling snacks (if there's anything to be sold.) If the NPS link isn't working for you, here's a guy that actually does it for a living.

Don't get hung up on the monopoly part. Remember, these are dedicated assets, so the state is a monopsony buyer of their output. The second-best option for a private operator is to shut them down, the worst option for the state is to say "fuck off," install boilers, and heat their buildings the same way everybody else does. More likely they'd have written into the contract a way to kick the private company out and take over operations on their own. Long term contracts between two entities that include dedicated assets do not necessarily behave like your principles of economics monopoly model. Oliver Williamson recently won a Nobel in economics, and that type of relationship is one of the things he studied that got him the award.

Citation on your "guaranteed the private company will eventually abuse the system"?

User avatar
Babam
the Nearly Deleted
Posts: 1170
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 2:05 am UTC
Location: A multiverse, wandering the couch
Contact:

Re: Anonymous vs. The Koch Bros

Postby Babam » Wed Mar 09, 2011 12:04 am UTC

KnightExemplar wrote:
How was trolling the Epilepsy Foundation and Raiding Hobo and Tumbler "Fighting for the People" ??? While Anonymous didn't exist at the time, I'm 100% certain that "An Hero" is the prototype for Anonymous as well. (MySpace Hacking and massive trolling)

"An Hero" a prototype for Anonymous? Sounds like you need to read some histories on ed and come back when you better understand what Anonymous is and how it came about. As long as there have been image boards, there have been Anonymous.
Spoiler:
crucialityfactor wrote:I KNEW he could club bitches!

SecondTalon wrote:Reality - More fucked up than Photoshop.

s/notwittysig/wittysig

Eyat
Posts: 129
Joined: Tue Jan 05, 2010 3:48 pm UTC

Re: Anonymous vs. The Koch Bros

Postby Eyat » Wed Mar 09, 2011 2:05 pm UTC

Arrian wrote:
Yes, because the lowest bidder is ALWAYS the lowest cost solution, no such thing as cost overruns, amiright?



Um... yeah it kinda is the most cost effective, which is why it is almost universally used by local governments to dole out work, and why no-bid contract is a bad word in government circles.

KnightExemplar
Posts: 5494
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2010 1:58 pm UTC

Re: Anonymous vs. The Koch Bros

Postby KnightExemplar » Wed Mar 09, 2011 2:33 pm UTC

Babam wrote:
KnightExemplar wrote:
How was trolling the Epilepsy Foundation and Raiding Hobo and Tumbler "Fighting for the People" ??? While Anonymous didn't exist at the time, I'm 100% certain that "An Hero" is the prototype for Anonymous as well. (MySpace Hacking and massive trolling)

"An Hero" a prototype for Anonymous? Sounds like you need to read some histories on ed and come back when you better understand what Anonymous is and how it came about. As long as there have been image boards, there have been Anonymous.


But people didn't start gathering together and doing high-profile actions in the name of Anonymous till after the "An Hero" incident IIRC. True: people were anonymous before then, but they weren't "The Anonymous". (And btw, the FBI always could subpoena your ISP to figure you out. So you never are technically anonymous online. The concept of being anonymous online is a bit of a misnomer...)

If you disagree, you're welcome to share your thoughts on the matter here.

EDIT: Ah, looked it up. An Hero is close to the time of the Hobo Raid, possibly after the Hobo Raid. Still, as an identity, Anonymous didn't really separate itself from /b/ till later. So I guess technically speaking... it was the /b/tards that caused "An Hero". Nevertheless, you cannot deny that Anonymous was born from /b/tards (or at least, they share a common ancestry). This is why I call "An Hero" to be the prototype of Anonymous. Its was a semi-organized attack on someone's MySpace account for the lulz.

EDIT2: Hmm, didn't realize that LUEsers also participated in "An Hero" in some extent... Interesting. Ahhh... the memories... thats why the CJC did what he did...
Last edited by KnightExemplar on Wed Mar 09, 2011 3:11 pm UTC, edited 1 time in total.
First Strike +1/+1 and Indestructible.


Return to “News & Articles”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Dauric and 6 guests