It’s not just donations to politicians; we have the SCOTUS to blame for that. In addition to the donations, they actively attempt to rewrite voting laws, eliminate public transportation, and overturn industry regulatory oversight for emissions. They’re helping to destroy the planet, and in a large way.
No disagreement from me. SCOTUS rat bags went with free speech, but quid pro quo offers aren’t protected free speech. It’s the politicians who are allowed to accept this money at fault. IMHO elected and appointed officials of the government should not be allowed to accept a penny from anyone outside of their salaries or disclosed prior investments.
I’d prefer ones that cheat on their wives to the ones that are bribeable, either legally or illegally.
Politics are not nearly as important as an astonishing number of people on this board seem to think they are. Certainly not something to control major life decisions. It baffles me why some people appear to desire to associate only with those that share their beliefs on either side of the political spectrum.
I work for Big Oil and hate pretty much everything they stand for. Doesn’t make a lick of difference to me.
I work for a university: I have no difficulty working for an entity that has different political values than I do.
Like Oakminister I’m baffled as to why people repeatedly post threads that assume that any significant number of people only work for places that espouse the same politics as they do. It all seems a bit too precious to me to believe more than a few people are so self-indulgent.
I wouldn’t work for them in some sort of political or lobbying role. I’d probably work for them in some sort of apolitical role. There are very few businesses I agree with completely.
I learned long ago to never discuss politics or social issues at work. It always leads to heated discussions and hard feelings. These are people I have to work closely with 40 hours a week. I keep all work conversations very neutral.
I have no idea what my bosses or the company owners do outside work. I don’t need to know.
Back in 1929 thru about 1940, my father worked for the Winkler-Koch company, a forerunner of Koch Industries. They sent him (with family, most of the time), all over the world building oil refineries. They always treated him very well, and he never had a word to say against them.
Dad didn’t have a college degree, but was a very smart man; Winkler Koch recognized this, and rapidly gave him very responsible positions - and well paid for that time. They were a very good company to work for.
I don’t know much about these brothers so I’m substituting a generic “I disagree vehemently” company. Would I quit? Not at all.
Principle is something rich people can afford.
That’s sort of what I was going to say. As someone who was laid off several months ago, I can say that being unemployed is depressing, and finding a new job is hard. Quitting isn’t something to be done lightly.
Quitting doesn’t hurt them. Destroying them slowly from the inside does, even if a little
I currently have no problem working for corrupt democrats so I don’t see a problem working for someone else I don’t agree with.
“If”.
As an environmental scientist, I’d feel compelled to quit. I’m not the most principled person in the world, but I didn’t become an environmental scientist to make the world worse. Medical doctors take an oath to do no harm. Well, I guess I’m the same way.
I’m sure it would be hard for me to make this decision, especially if I’m making big bucks. But I really like being able to look at myself in the mirror and having pride in what I do. I also like having the respect of my professional peers. I don’t think I’d have either of these things if I worked for Koch.
As a government employee, I know I am subject to working under administrations that I didn’t vote for, with policies that I don’t agree with. As long as my hand isn’t forced to do something that makes me very uncomfortable (like being forced to lie to the public about something serious), then I’m going be in it for the long haul. Administrations change every four years and so do the people’s opinions. The “free market” is much slower to change. This is why I like working for the government, despite all the complicating politics involved.
I retired from the military a few years early in part because I couldn’t stand having Bill Clinton as my Commander-in-Chief. So it would be possible for me to quit a job if I didn’t agree with the owners on some issue. Of course I’d only quit after finding another job first. In the case of something illegal, think Enron here, I might even quit before finding another job.
I’m sure anyone who working for one of those companies would have absolutely nothing to worry about financially after quitting for ethical/political reasons. They will be inundated with job offers with the same salary and benefits from the myriad of flawlessly ethical companies who will be highly impressed by their actions.
When you work, you do the best job that you can with what you have. You try to make your dept look god, you try to earn that mythical thing called a bonus. On the clock, you do what you need to to make the company a success.
Off the clock, your life in private and your opinions which you hold in private and not directly under your name should be your own. After all, they are buying employee services and not a soul.
That said, no such jobs drop from trees no matter what you believe in.
This is an absolutely lie. This shows the biggest individual donors to outside political groups (Super PACs) in 2012. You’ll find Sheldon Adelson at the top of the list and the Koch brothers are not on the list at all (which is 100 names long.)
Meanwhile, Unions are known to contribute over $600m/year to political causes, and had contributed some $4.4bn over a span from 2005 to 2011, far more than the Koch brothers. This article highlights total union spending on politics. The Center for Responsive politics put Koch Industries at $4.9m in 2012 contributions to campaigns, which ranks them 59th overall, and as I noted private donations by the Koch brothers to outside interests do not even rank.
It would instead appear that your rebuttal to Melchior’s post about campaign contributions was extremely incorrect. Just so you don’t look so ill informed next time, there’s a big difference between campaign spending and lobbying. The Kochs spending (both privately and through their company) on campaigns is not all that big compared to other larger donors (like Unions), guys like Sheldon Adelson spend vastly more than the Kochs on campaigns.
The Kochs spend most of their political money on lobbying already elected officials and on elections outside of Federal ones.
I disagree.
If I’m just a janitor, I’m not really representing anyone’s values or interests. But if I’m in a position of power in a corporation, towing the company line and helping to craft and implement the policies that make it so “evil”, then I’m indeed being “political”. At that point, I’m not a helpless, blameless cog in a giant machine. I have a responsibility, if I want to be true to my personal politics, to either fight that machine from within or bail out. Because when it’s brought down, I’m going to go down with it.
Atrocities throughout history were carried out by people “just doing their job”.
I think an individual has to decide for themselves which battles are worth fighting. I’m not going to judge someone for having a different cut-off point from me, especially since I’ve never had to put my own ethics and morality on the line before. However, it’s the responsibility of everyone to never get so blinded by money that they become willing to associate with anyone or do anything to get it. There’s pragmatism and then there’s spinelessness. And no action is purely apolitical or neutral.