Archive for Wednesday, March 23, 2011

Koch Industries gives $1 million for Japan relief

March 23, 2011


— Koch Industries says it will donate $1 million for disaster relief efforts after the earthquake and tsunami in Japan.

The Wichita-based firm announced on Wednesday donations of $500,000 each to the American Red Cross and The Salvation Army.

In addition, the company says its subsidiary, Georgia-Pacific LLC, is also donating bath tissue, paper towels and other products to Convoy of Hope and Feed The Children.

Koch Industries has 75 employees in Japan, most working in or near Tokyo. Koch companies with a presence in Japan include Koch Chemical Technology Group and INVISTA.


ksriver2010 6 years, 2 months ago

Finally some good news involving Koch.

Bet the trolls on LJW will be out on this one.

puddleglum 6 years, 2 months ago

can you buy your way into heaven? or do you just pray?

notanota 6 years, 2 months ago

Well three out of four of those charities are church-based, and the other one involves a cross, so I'm sure it almost counts.

BigPrune 6 years, 2 months ago

I'm sure it is a much larger amount than George Soros (if he gave anything at all) - but then again, republicans historically give much more to charities than democrats - and that's a fact. look it up.

jafs 6 years, 2 months ago

Provide a reliable source for your claim, please, and I'll be glad to look at it.

I doubt very much that it is true.

oldvet 6 years, 2 months ago

Just Google "charitable giving republicans vs democrats" and take your pick of the 45K+ articles found...

notanota 6 years, 2 months ago

It all points back to as single book by Brooks, and every citation has been on that book, so all that hinges on the data and analysis of a single author. He himself admits that he cut out most of the qualifying facts in order to make a sensational point. For instance, he relies on information from Social Capital Community Benchmark Survey. That measures whether or not someone says they donate more to some survey taker over the phone, but it doesn't actually dig into their wallet and hunt for receipts to verify those claims. He also claims that liberals earn 6% more than conservatives on average. Do you think that's accurate? If it is, doesn't it tend to make the claim that liberals "just want government handouts" a bit suspect? If they're richer, the handouts would tend to be for someone else, and the increased taxes for the wealthy would tend to be for them.

notanota 6 years, 2 months ago

Reading comprehension is not your friend today.

somedude20 6 years, 2 months ago

Like Bill Clinton creating a surplus and GWB spending it all in putting us deep into the red?

somedude20 6 years, 2 months ago

That is right, you only chastise the Dems and never the Repubs. Just making sure you know that Dems are not the only "charitable" people

notanota 6 years, 2 months ago

No. You just clearly didn't read for comprehension before you replied.

gudpoynt 6 years, 2 months ago

if you mean Democrats are more likely to favor social programs aimed at promoting a broader degree of equality among US citizens, then yeah, I'll agree with that.

And if, by "other people's" money, you are including said Democrats themselves as part of the "others".

gudpoynt 6 years, 2 months ago

True, a lot of it is about vote buying, but that's not all what it's about.

Is there no room in your word view for tax payer funded social programs that actually achieve their stated goals?

gudpoynt 6 years, 2 months ago

for what it's worth, I agree with you that Koch Ind. and their CEO (Charles) and Exec VP (David) get unjustly demonized, as extraordinarily wealthy people with lots of political influence tend to.

However, I find it interesting that Americans For Prosperity was founded by David Koch, while Charles Koch is Board Chairman of the Cato Institute.

There seems to be a lot of overlap between the two organizations regarding how they attempt to influence public policy. However, there are some stark differences as well.

For instance, prominent members of AFP (i.e. Brownback) are publicly against gay marriage, while the Cato Institute seems to take the position that gay marriage is an individual liberty that should not be denied.

Saying that "the Koch brothers support gay marriage" and that "the Koch brothers are fighting gay marriage" are both true to some degree, depending on which brother you're talking about, and in which ways they are "supporting" or "fighting against"

kawrivercrow 6 years, 2 months ago

Yeah, it's a 'fact' as long as you count tithing at the church. If you take away church tithings, the far-right's charitable contributions drops dramatically.

Is tithing even a real charity? Churches are obviously nothing more than social clubs. Is paying your dues to be a member of a club really an act of charity? Hardly!

Kontum1972 6 years, 2 months ago

its a tax write off.....nah its good way to buy into the Catastrophic wreck that occurred there..these clowns only look out for themselves.

have they given up any of their own kids to the US military...duhhhhhhhh...!

Kris_H 6 years, 2 months ago

A lot of people are giving and not blowing their own horns about it. I've always felt it's kind of tacky to brag about how much you give, or get the media to do that for you. Anyway, a million is chump change to The Bros.

notanota 6 years, 2 months ago

I'm fine with them blowing their own horn about it. Not my style, but the money spends the same. I just wish they were more open about their purchased political influence.

notanota 6 years, 2 months ago

Mostly we don't read about a lot of those donations, because we don't have your gift for cherry-picking and distortion.

notanota 6 years, 2 months ago

Nope. I'd be all over it if they truly had nuanced opinions and worked to advance their social agenda with the same fervor they do the economic one. They've gladly supported anti-legalization, anti-freedom, war hawks that want to hand out a few tax cuts. George Bush ring a bell? I've never seen a case where they've supported a liberal candidate that disagreed with them only on economic policy. Have you? Seeing as Koch has contributed more to campaigns than any other energy company, I'm sure there are a few examples somewhere. Find a few.

Cherry picking and distortion. With a heaping helping of quoting someone else's blog post without attribution.

notanota 6 years, 2 months ago

I'm not sure why it would matter if the money went to a PAC or a 503(c) with a clear political agenda.

gudpoynt 6 years, 2 months ago

And your Libertarian bias seems to only take into account that Charles Koch is Chairman of the Board at the Cato Institute, while looking past (or at least not taking into account) the fact that David Koch founded Americans for Prosperity, one of the most socially conservative leaning PACs in the nation.

Two organizations with very different stances on social issues, but lots of overlap on economic policy -- economic policy that prevents hindrance to the for-profit juggernaut from which they both glean all of their power and influence.

notanota 6 years, 1 month ago

Koch-owned Matador Cattle Co uses a New Deal program to ranch on government property for free, they used imminent domain laws to build a lot of their oil pipeline, Georgia-Pacific logs in public forests (and we the people subsidize the logging roads to the tune of 1 billion), they sell ethanol (which the Cato institute does advocate getting out of the corporate welfare business on, but I guess it's only bad if you're not a Koch), and even old daddy Koch founded his empire and gave his sons their big nest egg by setting up the old Soviet oil bidness for Stalin.

So yeah, I guess they support economic policies that are against their interests, when they're not too busy compromising their principals by taking advantage of corporate welfare, public land, and deals with Communist regimes. Do as they say, not as they do, eh?

notanota 6 years, 1 month ago

What were you saying about good points and only being able to refute them with personal attacks? Oh right, like the Kochs' business practices, it only applies when it's to your advantage.

They've actively lobbied for many of these exceptions, loopholes, and corporate welfare handouts. Sorry, but your fetishized heroes are simply out to make a buck. They might think anarcho-capitalism is a good idea, but that doesn't stop them from partnering with Venezuela, asking for bailouts in Alaska, or working on sweet government contracts. It's time to get the Koch brothers off the government teat.

notanota 6 years, 1 month ago

I had the same thought "what personal attack?" when you threw it out, but I couldn't resist. The hypocrisy in the idea is pretty rich, though. I've got this mental image of the Kochs as briar rabbit begging not to be thrown into the corporate welfare patch.

The rest of it? Straw men, red herrings. Nobody's upset about cancer research, and you know it. If they're not your heroes, I suspect you'd have a much more balanced picture of them. But then, I expect binary attitudes out of you on most issues. I'm seldom disappointed.

bolshavik_vw 6 years, 2 months ago

what's in it for them? They will expect something in return. These people are not the kind of people that do this out of the kindness of their hearts. I have boycotted buying anything they represent. And so have my friends.

AnonymousBosch 6 years, 1 month ago

I think the point is that they seem to be jumping on the Japan bandwagon (which is fine, admirable, and all that), but this and other donations seem to be contradictory to the legislative and business practices that they otherwise lobby for - which are selfish and tend to hurt Americans. Perhaps their charity donations are to try to cleanse their dirty souls.

Mari Aubuchon 6 years, 2 months ago

So often, giving to churches is included in charitable donation, which is quite questionable. When you are donating to a church that has been destroyed to help them rebuild, it is charity. When you are donating to a church that you attend as with tithing, it is more like a membership fee, not charity.

bevy 6 years, 1 month ago

Really? Perhaps you haven't been a church member. Is it not charitable when churches provide food and clothing for the hungry and homeless? When we provide visits and meals to the elderly and shut-ins? When we fund rape-crisis centers, battered women's shelters, pregnancy support centers? None of that is charity? When we send people to Haiti to rebuild homes and provide food and water to earthquake victims? I don't know about others, but in my church (United Methodist) there is no "membership fee" or tithing required - anyone can join and no one is required to give a dime of their money.

Please explain to me how these things are not charity. It seems that many on these boards have the idea that all church members (and/or all Christians) are hypocrites. Perhaps you need to visit a church and see how real members behave. Most of us are just regular folks trying to do God's work in our communities. We'd be glad to see you on Sunday!

Mari Aubuchon 6 years, 1 month ago

How much of the money that any church takes in from its members is used for charity and how much is used for wages and maintaining the church and its functions?

I am not judging what churches do, I am just saying that church donations are not charity UNLESS they are used for actual charitable purposes.

xclusive85 6 years, 1 month ago

So, why is rebuilding a destroyed church charity, but giving money for upkeep of a church is not?

Mari Aubuchon 6 years, 1 month ago

It is charity in the same way that helping people rebuild their houses after a natural disaster is charity. If it is your church or your house, it is no longer charity, is it?

verity 6 years, 2 months ago

So they're praying for God to fix what he broke?

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 6 years, 2 months ago

What the Koch brothers want is to create (or should I say maintain) a world where a very small group of wealthy autocrats can trickle a very small stream of selective benevolence down on the peonage, who, of course, would appropriately express their great appreciation to our self-appointed Lords.

AnonymousBosch 6 years, 1 month ago

Check again. The republicans tend to make more policies that hurt the middle class (and lesser classes) and make the rich richer. Sorry - you are welcome to have your opinions, but you are not allowed to make up your own facts. Granted, all politicians tend to be either rich, sellouts, incompetent, or some combination of all three, so don't mistake this for a partisan comment. Just an independent observation.

monkeyhawk 6 years, 2 months ago

So, boozo, are you going to refuse to pay your mortgage?

JustNoticed 6 years, 2 months ago

No different from Stringer Bell and Avon hosting a neighborhood fundraiser for crack babies.

BigPrune 6 years, 2 months ago

The democrats in congress have more personal wealth than the republicans. I wonder how much they've given to charity?

Here's a link to prove my above post stating that republicans give far more money to charitable causes than democrats.,or.r_gc.r_pw.&fp=73fc2eee6b126d9&bs=1

jafs 6 years, 2 months ago

As pointed out above, it's all based on a book by Brooks.

And, I don't find any detailed information - for example, if giving to churches counts as a charitable contribution, then much of the data simply means that religious people donate more to churches than non-religious ones, which wouldn't be surprising or meaningful.

notanota 6 years, 2 months ago

Theoretically Brooks corrects for religious belief, but again, he relies on a phone survey for a lot of the info, so the best you can say about that is that conservatives claim they're more generous than liberals when someone phones them up to ask about it.

Definition of charity is probably tricky here, too. The Red Cross is a charity, but so are the Cato Institute and Americans for Prosperity. One could argue that founding a bunch of 503(c) groups to further your political agenda is a little less "giving" than sending medical aid to disaster areas, but I'm not sure there's any sort of easy way to classify charities as self-serving or truly altruistic.

Scott Morgan 6 years, 2 months ago

Tom, I love the Sen. Claire McCaskall recent story. I knew Claire back in the day. She was as poor like the rest of us young professionals. Through her public service she has profited it seems. What a hoot. Enough loot to forget taxes on her private plane.

Joltin Joe Biden before he realized his tax records would be public gave less than I did to charity. I aint rich, nor make anything near what he does.

I know libs are smart, some educated to high levels. I do not understand how they can follow the lead coming from folks like the above mentioned.

Scott Morgan 6 years, 2 months ago

Donate to save the Earth Global Warming you know, ...........strike that, Climate Change.......

save the elephants, oh, too many elephants now, what culling herds......strike that........move the elephants..........

for a few dollars a month you can feed 143 children....strike that for a few dollars a month you can pay for my third Mercedes and trip to the Bahamas

No wait, just give Claire and Joe your donations, they know what to do with the moolah.

Scott Morgan 6 years, 1 month ago

There is climate change, and it's natural.

Scott Morgan 6 years, 1 month ago

Surprisingly it's the folks challenging Lemming Think relating to Climate Change, or as we around the Wissmo home call it, "weather" who are educated.

Remember the words of AlGore, we only have months to act.

I wonder how many nickels collected by innocent frightened school children all in the name of Global Warming ended up in his wallet?

You can call it Global Warming, Climate Change, I call it a big hoax.

Vert, I consider myself educated in this area.

Daniel Dicks 6 years, 1 month ago

Or as I often say, "If I was that rich, I might be a republican too." Hey I am not even Christian and I was persuaded. Nice "come to Jesus" moment. Love that Allstate dude too. Peace.

Flap Doodle 6 years, 2 months ago

In other donation-related news: "...Senator Barack Obama and his wife, Michelle, sharply increased their charitable donations as Mr. Obama began to run for president and the family’s income increased from book sales, according to tax returns that the couple released on Tuesday....The Obamas’ returns are striking on a number of levels. They show that the couple made very few charitable contributions, sometimes less than 1 percent of taxable income, until Mr. Obama began his run for the White House. In 2004, before Mr. Obama entered the Senate, he and his wife gave $2,500 to charity, 1.2 percent of the taxable income. The next year, the donations jumped, to $77,315, or nearly 5 percent of the taxable income. “Their charitable giving only went up when it looked like he was campaigning for the presidential office,” said Paul L. Caron, a professor at the University of Cincinnati College of Law and editor of the TaxProf Blog, which examines tax questions and has posted the returns...." The Obamas’ returns are striking on a number of levels. They show that the couple made very few charitable contributions, sometimes less than 1 percent of taxable income, until Mr. Obama began his run for the White House. In 2004, before Mr. Obama entered the Senate, he and his wife gave $2,500 to charity, 1.2 percent of the taxable income. The next year, the donations jumped, to $77,315, or nearly 5 percent of the taxable income..."

grandnanny 6 years, 2 months ago

The two Koch brothers are worth a combined $44,000,000,000 so by removing the zeroes, that $1,000,000 donations appears to be $1 for every $44,000 they are worth. Wow, they are generous fellows! I'm sure that they have given to other charities, but every million they give away is like when you or I throw a dollar in the kettle at Christmas.

notanota 6 years, 1 month ago

I bet most of us could exceed the $1 for every $44k threshold with a single text to 90999.

Alright, it's a challenge. Everyone, be more generous than the Kochs! If you earn less than $440,000 per year, text REDCROSS <--- all one word to 90999 to donate $10 to relief efforts in Japan and donate a higher percentage of your income to the efforts. Win-win!

grandnanny 6 years, 1 month ago

I sent $50 to the Red Cross and I don't make anywhere near $44,000 a year as I'm a retired teacher living off that fantastic pension that I contributed to for many years.

Scott Morgan 6 years, 2 months ago

They have people working on nothing more than philanthropy. The mill they dropped and a tip o hat to them was just a tiny part of what they do.

Richard Heckler 6 years, 2 months ago

Why did this require a public announcement and news headlines? Seems like this organization is manipulating the public.


We should be trying to put Americans back to work, not trying to put public radio out of business.

Attacking labor unions…waging war on women’s rights…defunding NPR and PBS...repealing health care reform. The anti-worker, anti-woman, anti-Obama Koch funded agenda just proves that their priorities are seriously out of whack. How is any of this supposed to create jobs?

If the american people are not careful they’ll force through their Koch extreme agenda faster than you can say “Koch brothers.”

Flap Doodle 6 years, 2 months ago

There are thousands of people who are currently employed by the various companies owned by the Koch brothers. How many people do you employ?

verity 6 years, 1 month ago

Oh, well that certainly excuses everything they do.

verity 6 years, 1 month ago

Oh, well that certainly excuses everything they do.

notanota 6 years, 1 month ago

As a percentage of my income, I'd say I probably employ more people. I've also laid off several thousand fewer people than the Kochs have in the last couple years.

verity 6 years, 2 months ago

Matthew 6:2-4 KJV

2 Therefore when thou doest thine alms, do not sound a trumpet before thee, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the streets, that they may have glory of men. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward.

3 But when thou doest alms, let not thy left hand know what thy right hand doeth:

4 That thine alms may be in secret: and thy Father which seeth in secret himself shall reward thee openly.

lounger 6 years, 2 months ago

One Million from Koch? They steal that much alone from Indian oil every year. Cmon fellas make a real contribution- maybe 20 million?

pace 6 years, 2 months ago

I a glad they are starting to make their contributions openly. I hope to see ads appear as Koch brothers against labor unions, instead of their fronts. It just is more hones. Japan is suffering.

weeslicket 6 years, 1 month ago

will the koch brothers tithe to our great state of kansas in this same proportion?

if $1million = 1/44,000 = 0.0000227%; (also known as: not very much) and a tithing (common rate) = 10%: then, a common tithing for the koch brothers should be about 1/10 of about $44 billion = about $4.5 billion.

just to put this in context:
our current fiscal shortfall in kansas is equal to about $500 Million. or about the same amout of money raised by the "hideous" 1% sales tax increase ($400 million per year gained). or, about 60 cents/per day/per adult kansan. (assume about 2.25 million adults in kansas) ((there's certainly a joke in that last statment somewhere)) or, a 10% tithing from the kochs could allow our state to breathe easy for the next 9+ years without anyone (really) being hurt. ((i'm sure the kocks would suffer most terribly, though. good sports that they are.))

also: in what way is japan a better "investement" than their own home state?

Daniel Dicks 6 years, 1 month ago

Why this doesn't seem to resonate beyond the liberal base, continually mystifies, what is the matter with Kansas? Hey that would be a good book title. : )

monkeyhawk 6 years, 1 month ago

How much did BO's best friend Jeffery donate? (From the money stolen from taxpayers...) Or George Soros? But I'm sure the haters think this is different somehow - after all, most of you probably don't pay taxes, either.

"On its front page this morning, the New York Times reported that General Electric — the world’s largest company — made $14.2 billion in profits ($5.1 billion in America) and managed to not pay a dime in federal taxes. In fact, the company actually received “a tax benefit of $3.2 billion.”

The mega corporation’s tax dodging flies in the face of the rhetoric of its CEO Jeffery Immelt — also the head of President Obama’s Council on Jobs and Competitiveness — who sought to portray his company as one that values fairness in a speech at West Point in 2009."

Here are two of the boozomerrill fave sites all rolled into one just in case some of you can only discredit the sources rather than the topic...


The company reported worldwide profits of $14.2 billion, and said $5.1 billion of the total came from its operations in the United States. Its American tax bill? None. In fact, G.E. claimed a tax benefit of $3.2 billion."

jafs 6 years, 1 month ago

The only folks who might think this is ok would be those on the right, who often argue that companies shouldn't be burdened with taxes.

The rest of us think it's a disgrace, of course.

monkeyhawk 6 years, 1 month ago

"The only folks who might think this is ok would be those on the right, who often argue that companies shouldn't be burdened with taxes."

I done seen the light - it is the fault of the "right" that GE is allowed a tax pass.

Same apply to these folks?

"Kathleen Sebelius, President Obama's nominee to become Health and Human Services secretary, said in a letter obtained by the Associated Press that she made "unintentional errors" on her taxes and has corrected her returns from three different years.

Tom Daschle, the president's first HHS nominee, previously withdrew from consideration over tax issues, as did chief performance officer nominee Nancy Killefer.

Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner, US Trade Representative Ron Kirk and Labor Secretary Hilda Solis, meanwhile, were confirmed despite issues related to their taxes."

Damn righties made 'em do it.

I do find it highly unlikely that tax evaders transform into philanthropists, so in regard to my original question, I'll ask how much these duds donated?

jafs 6 years, 1 month ago

It is the right side of the aisle that continually calls for tax cuts, especially for corporations. In KS, they're trying to eliminate corporate income tax completely.

The left side continually calls for taxing those corporations, and is frequently criticized for it by the right side.

Individuals, from whatever political persuasion, are corruptible and fallible - I've said that over and over again.

monkeyhawk 6 years, 1 month ago

Actually, I caught your drift to begin with - no need to elaborate since I am not on either side of the aisle.

Jimo 6 years, 1 month ago

Some Koch ponies up 0.00001% of their wealth? Don't strain yourselves, brothers. I pitched in a whole dollar - got you beat by a mile.

Next you'll be telling me that I pay more income taxes than General Electric!

independant1 6 years, 1 month ago

1 mil dollar donation is a noble gesture. It's not Koch's 1st and won't be the last noble gesture. Good news for receiver/good news for the giver. That's all

Scott Morgan 6 years, 1 month ago

Corporate tax laws are extremely complicated. Often it seems people forget those "big business" offices are filled with people. People who live, eat, have families in the same community.

Least we never forget this. Illinois may lose Caterpillar due to the incredible brain dead liberal Chicago based social spending jag they've been on for decades.

Instead of a long winded post, just think of what losing this giant company will mean to Illinois. Is Caterpillar a horrible devilish company? Do you think Illinois would welcome Koch Industries?

verity 6 years, 1 month ago

The Koch brothers can make charitable contributions until infinity. They can (and do) support PBS. They can employ however many people they employ. That doesn't change one bit the damage they are doing to our democracy and our economy.

One question I have thought about a lot. According to studies (google them, I'm not going to cite them) after people have enough money to supply their needs comfortably, more money does not seem to make them any happier. Why do some people always want more than they already have, no matter how much they have, especially when it's at the expense of other people?

notanota 6 years, 1 month ago

As I pointed out earlier, I've actually created more jobs than the Kochs have as a percentage of my income. I've also fired several thousand fewer people in order to increase my bottom line.

notanota 6 years, 1 month ago

Yes, I realize that extremely rich people are closer to God in your Weltanschauung, but there are a lot more of me than there are of the Kochs, so my efforts combined with my peers will have a greater total impact on employment. It's all about the Long Tail.

Your wealth fetishism is amusing. I also find it ironic, since the same argument you've just presented is the rationale for graduated tax systems. Perish the thought that the rich might have to give a little more and have it personally impact them less.

Commenting has been disabled for this item.