4 ms·

'Dirty Jobs' Mike Rowe Meets the Koch Brothers

113 points by rajeck 10y ago

danblick 10y ago
When I think of the Koch brothers, I think of their support for the Mercatus Center, which is associated with a bunch of (libertarian-leaning) economists I respect and frequently learn from.
aaronbrethorst 10y ago
Meanwhile the Kochs have likely given around seven figures to ALEC[1], which has pushed aggressively for enhancing the laws[2] that Charles Koch is now, apparently, deeply opposed to. Maybe it's a turn of heart, but I'm rather skeptical. [1] https://www.thenation.com/article/alec-exposed-koch-connection/ https://www.thenation.com/article/alec-exposed-koch-connecti... [2] https://www.thenation.com/article/hidden-history-alec-and-prison-labor/ https://www.thenation.com/article/hidden-history-alec-and-pr...
- themartorana 10y ago
  "ALEC has proven expertly capable of devising endless ways to help private corporations benefit from the country’s massive prison population." Gross. "That mass incarceration would create a huge captive workforce was anticipated long before the US prison population reached its peak—and at a time when the concept of “rehabilitation” was still considered part of the mission of prisons." Are we finally admitting that that's no longer (never really was) a thing? Now maybe we can start to take responsibility for bolstering corporations that actively work to incarcerate people for profit? How is this different than slavery? Oh, if they're paid $0.20/hr they're not slaves? Edit: as pointed out below, the 13th Amendment says prisoners can be slaves. I hadn't considered it in that context.
  - justinator 10y ago
    The Thirteenth Amendment covers this, "Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction." So...
  - rhizome 10y ago
    Are we finally admitting that that's no longer (never really was) a thing? "Never" would imply that it hadn't ever worked, which...I take your point if that's what you mean, but as for even attempting to implement rehabilitation as a part of incarceration, that drive ended via both the Left and Right in the mid-70s after Robert Martinson[0], a Freedom Rider, published an essay[1] based on his thesis critique of the state of rehabilitation in prison at the time[2]. This was reinterpreted into the "Nothing Works" doctrine by the media and politicians, which resulted in the concepts and uses of prison being turned completely punitive within 10 years. Oh, if they're paid $0.20/hr they're not slaves? Nope! It's if you're in prison it's not slavery[3]. 0. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Martinson https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Martinson 1. http://www.nationalaffairs.com/public_interest/detail/what-works-questions-and-answers-about-prison-reform http://www.nationalaffairs.com/public_interest/detail/what-w... 2. https://www.ncjrs.gov/App/publications/Abstract.aspx?id=19591 https://www.ncjrs.gov/App/publications/Abstract.aspx?id=1959... 3. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thirteenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thirteenth_Amendment_to_the_Un...
  - cperciva 10y ago
    How is this different than slavery? Oh, if they're paid $0.20/hr they're not slaves? I think the relevant question is whether the labour is forced. My understanding is that prison workforces are comprised of inmates who request to take part.
    - cderwin 10y ago
      And people who (from a legal perspective) chose to break the law. Why is it morally acceptable to hold criminals in prison but not to employ them (at will, from what I understand) for little compensation during that imprisonment? Is there such a big difference between imprisonment with no employment and imprisonment with under-employment?
      - themartorana 10y ago
        It's not a bad question. For me, imprisoning somebody should be a last resort and something we strive to avoid at all costs. In that light, does then taking advantage of someone in a (literal) captive situation, with no recourse for being taken advantage of, fit in the same worldview? While "voluntary", promising time reductions or other sentencing modifications for either participation directly or "good behavior" indirectly changes the meaning of "voluntary." Add the threat of solitary confinement or other unconscionable punishments for bad behavior (and capable of being used in a punitive or retaliatory fashion by guards and administrators) and "voluntary" becomes even less voluntary. It's easy to dehumanize prisoners as "lawbreakers" or cast them as people who gave up freedom flippantly. For me, taking advantage of prisoners to bolster private corporate profits - no matter their crime - is not a justifiable thing.
      - acjohnson55 10y ago
        Why shouldn't prisoners get full compensation for their labor?
        Tinyyy 10y ago
        What does full compensation mean? The public market rate? Or the prison market rate because the risks and negative aspects of hiring prisoners mean that the demand for prisoners is low?
- orangecat 10y ago
  Will you be voting for Hillary Clinton? If so, does that mean you support mass surveillance and incessantly bombing the Middle East?
  - addicted 10y ago
    Thats a terrible example for your point because the alternative is you improve the odds of electing someone who is even more likely to bomb the middle east, and does not just support mass surveillance, but thinks we arent doing enough of it. The alternative thinks that we should be asking people to answer questions such as thwir religion to be able to enter the country. Oh, and thinks that besides not bombing enough, the other problem is a lack of using nukes.
- cderwin 10y ago
  It seems to me that they just found common ground, like Charles Koch and Mike Rowe have. ALEC produces models for a huge number of laws, the vast majority with which the Koch brothers are politically aligned. To me it doesn't seem to be a stretch that the people who founded the Cato Institute and bankrolled the Libertarian Party would agree with a conservative legislative group on a whole bunch of issues, but not on prison sentencing reform.
- jacobolus 10y ago
  Jane Mayer fills in the context about the Kochs’ rebranding: http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/01/25/new-koch http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/01/25/new-koch
  - euroclydon 10y ago
    Great article. Thank you. It says the Kochs are using criminal justice reform to gut corporate executive's criminal liability for environmental violations.
daeken 10y ago
I've gained a massive, massive respect for Mike Rowe over the past 5-10 years. He works to make the world a better place through education and understanding, and this post is a perfect example of this. Kudos to him for speaking out and standing his ground, rather than crumbling to nonsensical public pressure.
- hnpuff 10y ago
  > Kudos to him for speaking out and standing his ground Come on. Koch is literally paying him. How is it brave to write a letter endorsing the person that is paying for you to run your charities? How is this not a paid endorsement?
  - daeken 10y ago
    1) Unless he was paid on the condition of posting this (which seems tremendously out of line with his character), this isn't a paid endorsement. That's the definition -- an endorsement for which one is paid -- and no amount of linguistic gymnastics will change that. 2) It's brave because the Koch brothers aren't the only people he cares about, whether for money or otherwise. Posts in support of "bad" figures run a risk of losing credibility, support, funding, and partnerships; I strongly doubt that the check to his foundation was large enough to compensate for that.
- cthulha 10y ago
  I don't think the public pressure is nonsensical: Koch may be doing the right thing in some areas and not others. Why does it have to be so black-and-white? Can't people raise issues that they genuinely believe to be bad for the country they live in?
  - marklyon 10y ago
    Some people wear such narrow ideological blinders that they're incapable of comprehending that this week's subject of two minutes hate might not actually be the all-encompassing embodiment of evil they've been told. They label everything they encounter as good (generally, where "good" is on the side of agreeing with them) and bad (generally, where "bad" transgresses by deigning even remotely disagree with the "good"). That sort of approach silences thought, innovation, argument and compromise. It's a sad state of affairs that serves only the leaders who utilize such simplistic division so that they can lock in votes with far less effort than is required to meaningfully solve real problems.
mabbo 10y ago
"The truth is, progress only happens when people find common ground and build something on it." Very wise words.
ebbv 10y ago
This is a fluff piece trying to make an arch-conservative who is constantly pushing for deregulation and removal of environmental protections sound like a softy because he donated a bunch of money to Rowe's foundation. I have no doubt that the Koch brothers believe the agenda they push is for the best, but that's because they are self centered people. If you dig below the surface of any of the seemingly not self interested stories told in this piece, they come from a place of total self interest. The Koch brothers employ former convicts because they know they can pay them low wages and work them hard in their factories because they're desperate for work. The Koch brothers push for deregulation of all industry, the hair braiding license is just a seemingly "common sense" deregulation story. Mike Rowe has long been far too cozy for my comfort to large corporations and conservative politics in general. He throws Bill Maher in here to make himself sound "middle of the road" or like he has views across the spectrum, but in general Mr. Rowe tends to be on the conservative side of issues, which is why it's no surprise to me that he's buddies with the Koch brothers. EDIT: I should add that you can be a conservative and be a principled person who isn't selfish (obviously), but the Koch brothers are not that. You can also be a selfish liberal too, so I don't mean to imply that conservatives have a monopoly on being an asshole.
- EGreg 10y ago
  I'm a liberal, but does it occur to you that your perception of this may be majorly colored by your own bias? If you had read a similar piece with conservatives replaced by progressives, who would feature in it? George Soros? One can also say that your moral indignation is only surface-deep. For example: "The Koch brothers employ former convicts because they know they can pay them low wages and work then hard in their factories because they're desperate for work." First of all, they don't know when setting the initial salary who is a former convict and who isn't. And secondly, what exactly are you proposing would be better for the former convicts than this? The ex-convicts choose to work there over the alternative employment options. It seems that their self-interest, such as it is, benefits the ex-convicts more than your non-existent alternative.
  - ebbv 10y ago
    Whoah buddy, I wasn't attacking you maybe you don't need to be so aggressive with me? > First of all, they don't know when setting the initial salary who is a former convict and who isn't. They don't have to know which individuals are. They put out there that they are willing/happy to hire ex-cons for these jobs and they will get them applying, and accepting lower salaries, lack of benefits, worse working conditions, no union, etc. The whole "We don't ask people if they were convicted of a felony" is a total charade meant to seem like they are benevolent but in reality they know they are hiring convicts. Which people should do, but they take advantage of it. > And secondly, what exactly are you proposing would be better for the former convicts than this? First off, the idea that I'm under some onus to offer a better solution when I call something out as terrible is ridiculous. I don't have to make you a three michelin star meal to tell you Applebee's isn't very good. Secondly, it's simple and obvious what I'm advocating in my original comment; paying people fair wages and providing them good working conditions and benefits and not taking advantage of their circumstance. Seems reasonable to me?
tptacek 10y ago
This is a great little piece, and I'm glad I saw it, and I wouldn't have seen it at all had it not been at the top of HN (despite the fact that most of what Mike Rowe writes somehow lands in my Fb feed), and I even agree with I think something like 98% of what it says. But it still feels like an almost textbook example of what shouldn't be on the front page of HN. Something Mike Rowe writes about the importance of the skilled trades, how they work, what the market for those people is like? Sure! But this piece is really just about politics and current events. In this case: politics I don't find very challenging (despite being a Democrat). But still: it's only interesting if you know who the Koch Brothers are and what their role in US politics tends to be. It would be neat if when things like this came up and got stuck to the front page, they could be replaced with something more important the same person wrote. Here, for example: same form, same author, basically the same content, without the horse-race political hook: http://mikerowe.com/2016/02/stopignoringskillsgap/ http://mikerowe.com/2016/02/stopignoringskillsgap/
- daeken 10y ago
  I would argue that this post sets a great example for businesspeople. Sometimes in business you're going to come across someone with a strong reputation -- negative or positive -- and being able to understand them is important. So often we look at a reputation and base our actions and decisions on that, which I believe is inherently flawed. We're all better off when different people can come together, understand each other, and work to make the world better, even if that's in a small way. So I think this is a great example of an HN post.
  - tptacek 10y ago
    We'll see how much of the thread is about the skilled trades and how much of it is about the Koch Brothers role in horse-race US politics, and then we'll revisit.
    - daeken 10y ago
      I don't think that the direction of the discussion necessarily imbues the value of an HN post. I also don't think that the skilled trades themselves were the focus of the post; rather, the focus was on what the Koch Brothers did for his foundation, and how it contrasts with their reputation.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
hnpuff 10y ago
This is a paid endorsement for the Koch Brothers. Am I missing something here? Mike Rowe talks about how the Koch brothers financially support his activities, and oh yeah, of course they are great people. How is this being taken seriously on Hacker News?
toodlebunions 10y ago
Why is this on Hacker News?
- daeken 10y ago
  From https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html > On-Topic: Anything that good hackers would find interesting. And > Please don't submit comments complaining that a submission is inappropriate for the site. If you think a story is spam or off-topic, flag it by clicking on its 'flag' link.
  - toodlebunions 10y ago
    Fair enough. Seemed very off topic.
tsomctl 10y ago
"But I was most surprised by his commitment to reinvigorate the skilled trades." Why is he surprised? Koch Industries relies extensively on skilled laborers. Wikipedia lists Koch Industries' produces as "Asphalt, chemicals, commodities trading, energy, fibers, fertilizers, finance, minerals, natural gas, plastics, petroleum, pulp and paper, ranching". With the exception of commodities trading and finance, all of these require fabricators, electricians, pipe fitters, millwrights, machinists, heavy equipment operator, and a whole bunch of other trades. Even if they have enough employees, having more people trained in these trades allows them to hire better employees. From a more pessimistic point of view, having allows them to pay workers less.
aresant 10y ago
[deleted]
- Hondor 10y ago
  Donating to politicians doesn't directly get laws passed. Voting for them does, and voting is only done by individuals no matter their wealth. If the people of Florida want solar, they shouldn't vote for that anti-solar governer. It's their democratic choice.
Mz 10y ago
(Although I must say, this is the first time my proximity to the “wrong guy” has brought about the demise of a ten-year celebrity crush. That one stings.) Eh, if it makes Mike Rowe feel any better, I crush on him and, off the top of my head, I can only think of a couple of other celebrities I crush on. Glad to see him doing this kind of work and kudos to him for building bridges and getting shit done. To hell with the folks writing him hate mail over him collaborating with the "wrong" people in order to do good works. Refreshing to read something about the need for labor and skills on HN instead of basic income.
driverdan 10y ago
This applies to HN because it's relevant to raising money and ethics of charity. Would you accept a funding round from a person or company who has done things you strongly disagree with? Does the "good" you can do with that money outweigh the "bad" that person or company has done? There are a lot of people out there who would be fantastic investors for you, provide great mentorship and guidance to your company along with the money but who are generally considered to be bad people. Do you take their money? If the topic interests you I recommend learning about effective altruism: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effective_altruism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effective_altruism
rajeck 10y ago
FWIW, I thought this would be of interest to hackers as I think Mike Rowe exemplifies the hacker ethos of crossing boundaries to get a new perspective on problems. If all you do is sing from the same hymn sheet all the time, you're going to get the same song </strained analogy>
mempko 10y ago
I guess that's one way to handle cognitive dissonance. Sorry Mike, you could have just ignored the hate mail and kept on truck'n. Or you could have said "Yeah, he is Satan, but I will take his money because I'm fine with ripping off the devil". This is a fluff piece and you made it very clear you know who butters your bread.
SCAQTony 10y ago
My mother was a closet racist but I loved her very dearly. She donated to many charities, set up fund raisers for drug rehab centers and always picked up the check no matter how many people were at the table. I separated her bad judgement knowing damn well it was wrong and illogical and appreciated the good; I still continued to love her despite some ugly thoughts she had. I like Gaugin's paintings even though he was a syphilic pedophile who left his family so he could have sex with teens in the south pacific... I separate the man from the work because it is good work. I would have had him put in jail if I could too. http://hyperallergic.com/111730/posthumous-prognosis-for-supposedly-syphilitic-gauguin-via-his-teeth/ http://hyperallergic.com/111730/posthumous-prognosis-for-sup... Hugo Boss makes some really nice underwear and mens shirts but when Hugo Boss was alive he designed all the NAZI and SS uniforms. The original Hugo Boss is dead and is one suppose to "never forget" and punish those that came after him? http://www.nytimes.com/1997/08/15/business/hugo-boss-acknowledges-link-to-nazi-regime.html http://www.nytimes.com/1997/08/15/business/hugo-boss-acknowl... T.S. Elliot was anti semitic but he was pen pals with Groucho Marx (a jew) and had a photo of Groucho on his wall. Being friends with Groucho actually softened his points of view because Groucho stayed engaged. http://www.openculture.com/2014/02/groucho-marx-and-t-s-eliot-become-unexpected-pen-pals.html http://www.openculture.com/2014/02/groucho-marx-and-t-s-elio... Personality has many modules. In some areas within our personalities there is a bunch of lice. However, you support what you agree with and you aggressively question the bad.
- eatplayrove 10y ago
  That's not how it works though. There is no harm in you liking Gaugin's paintings now, because he is dead, and by liking a painting, you don't enable his pedophilia. I will not judge Koch, but if you view him in a bad light, you have every right to question Rowe, because Rowe and Koch enable each other.
SCAQTony 10y ago
My mother was a closet racist but I loved her very dearly. She donated to many charities, set up fund raisers for drug rehab centers and always picked up the check no matter how many people were at the table. I separated her bad judgement knowing damn well it was wrong and illogical and appreciated the good; I still continued to love her despite some ugly thoughts she had. I like Gaugin's paintings even though he was a syphilic pedophile who left his family so he could have sex with teens in the south pacific... I separate the man from the work because it is good work. I would have had him put in jail if I could too. http://hyperallergic.com/111730/posthumous-prognosis-for-supposedly-syphilitic-gauguin-via-his-teeth/ http://hyperallergic.com/111730/posthumous-prognosis-for-sup... Hugo Boss makes some really nice underwear and mens shirts but when Hugo Boss was alive he designed all the NAZI and SS uniforms. The original Hugo Boss is dead and is one suppose to "never forget" and punish those that came after him? http://www.nytimes.com/1997/08/15/business/hugo-boss-acknowledges-link-to-nazi-regime.html http://www.nytimes.com/1997/08/15/business/hugo-boss-acknowl... T.S. Elliot was anti semitic but he was pen pals with Groucho Marx (a jew) and had a photo of Groucho on his wall. Being friends with Groucho actually softened his points of view because Groucho stayed engaged. http://www.openculture.com/2014/02/groucho-marx-and-t-s-eliot-become-unexpected-pen-pals.html http://www.openculture.com/2014/02/groucho-marx-and-t-s-elio... Personality has many modules. In some areas within our personalities there is a bunch of lice. However, you support what you agree with and you aggressively question the bad.

113 points by rajeck 10y ago

When I think of the Koch brothers, I think of their support for the Mercatus Center, which is associated with a bunch of (libertarian-leaning) economists I respect and frequently learn from.

aaronbrethorst 10y ago

Meanwhile the Kochs have likely given around seven figures to ALEC[1], which has pushed aggressively for enhancing the laws[2] that Charles Koch is now, apparently, deeply opposed to. Maybe it's a turn of heart, but I'm rather skeptical. [1] https://www.thenation.com/article/alec-exposed-koch-connection/ https://www.thenation.com/article/alec-exposed-koch-connecti... [2] https://www.thenation.com/article/hidden-history-alec-and-prison-labor/ https://www.thenation.com/article/hidden-history-alec-and-pr...

themartorana 10y ago
"ALEC has proven expertly capable of devising endless ways to help private corporations benefit from the country’s massive prison population." Gross. "That mass incarceration would create a huge captive workforce was anticipated long before the US prison population reached its peak—and at a time when the concept of “rehabilitation” was still considered part of the mission of prisons." Are we finally admitting that that's no longer (never really was) a thing? Now maybe we can start to take responsibility for bolstering corporations that actively work to incarcerate people for profit? How is this different than slavery? Oh, if they're paid $0.20/hr they're not slaves? Edit: as pointed out below, the 13th Amendment says prisoners can be slaves. I hadn't considered it in that context.
- justinator 10y ago
  The Thirteenth Amendment covers this, "Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction." So...
- rhizome 10y ago
  Are we finally admitting that that's no longer (never really was) a thing? "Never" would imply that it hadn't ever worked, which...I take your point if that's what you mean, but as for even attempting to implement rehabilitation as a part of incarceration, that drive ended via both the Left and Right in the mid-70s after Robert Martinson[0], a Freedom Rider, published an essay[1] based on his thesis critique of the state of rehabilitation in prison at the time[2]. This was reinterpreted into the "Nothing Works" doctrine by the media and politicians, which resulted in the concepts and uses of prison being turned completely punitive within 10 years. Oh, if they're paid $0.20/hr they're not slaves? Nope! It's if you're in prison it's not slavery[3]. 0. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Martinson https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Martinson 1. http://www.nationalaffairs.com/public_interest/detail/what-works-questions-and-answers-about-prison-reform http://www.nationalaffairs.com/public_interest/detail/what-w... 2. https://www.ncjrs.gov/App/publications/Abstract.aspx?id=19591 https://www.ncjrs.gov/App/publications/Abstract.aspx?id=1959... 3. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thirteenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thirteenth_Amendment_to_the_Un...
- cperciva 10y ago
  How is this different than slavery? Oh, if they're paid $0.20/hr they're not slaves? I think the relevant question is whether the labour is forced. My understanding is that prison workforces are comprised of inmates who request to take part.
  - cderwin 10y ago
    And people who (from a legal perspective) chose to break the law. Why is it morally acceptable to hold criminals in prison but not to employ them (at will, from what I understand) for little compensation during that imprisonment? Is there such a big difference between imprisonment with no employment and imprisonment with under-employment?
    - themartorana 10y ago
      It's not a bad question. For me, imprisoning somebody should be a last resort and something we strive to avoid at all costs. In that light, does then taking advantage of someone in a (literal) captive situation, with no recourse for being taken advantage of, fit in the same worldview? While "voluntary", promising time reductions or other sentencing modifications for either participation directly or "good behavior" indirectly changes the meaning of "voluntary." Add the threat of solitary confinement or other unconscionable punishments for bad behavior (and capable of being used in a punitive or retaliatory fashion by guards and administrators) and "voluntary" becomes even less voluntary. It's easy to dehumanize prisoners as "lawbreakers" or cast them as people who gave up freedom flippantly. For me, taking advantage of prisoners to bolster private corporate profits - no matter their crime - is not a justifiable thing.
    - acjohnson55 10y ago
      Why shouldn't prisoners get full compensation for their labor?
      - Tinyyy 10y ago
        What does full compensation mean? The public market rate? Or the prison market rate because the risks and negative aspects of hiring prisoners mean that the demand for prisoners is low?
orangecat 10y ago
Will you be voting for Hillary Clinton? If so, does that mean you support mass surveillance and incessantly bombing the Middle East?
- addicted 10y ago
  Thats a terrible example for your point because the alternative is you improve the odds of electing someone who is even more likely to bomb the middle east, and does not just support mass surveillance, but thinks we arent doing enough of it. The alternative thinks that we should be asking people to answer questions such as thwir religion to be able to enter the country. Oh, and thinks that besides not bombing enough, the other problem is a lack of using nukes.
cderwin 10y ago
It seems to me that they just found common ground, like Charles Koch and Mike Rowe have. ALEC produces models for a huge number of laws, the vast majority with which the Koch brothers are politically aligned. To me it doesn't seem to be a stretch that the people who founded the Cato Institute and bankrolled the Libertarian Party would agree with a conservative legislative group on a whole bunch of issues, but not on prison sentencing reform.
jacobolus 10y ago
Jane Mayer fills in the context about the Kochs’ rebranding: http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/01/25/new-koch http://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2016/01/25/new-koch
- euroclydon 10y ago
  Great article. Thank you. It says the Kochs are using criminal justice reform to gut corporate executive's criminal liability for environmental violations.

daeken 10y ago

I've gained a massive, massive respect for Mike Rowe over the past 5-10 years. He works to make the world a better place through education and understanding, and this post is a perfect example of this. Kudos to him for speaking out and standing his ground, rather than crumbling to nonsensical public pressure.

hnpuff 10y ago
> Kudos to him for speaking out and standing his ground Come on. Koch is literally paying him. How is it brave to write a letter endorsing the person that is paying for you to run your charities? How is this not a paid endorsement?
- daeken 10y ago
  1) Unless he was paid on the condition of posting this (which seems tremendously out of line with his character), this isn't a paid endorsement. That's the definition -- an endorsement for which one is paid -- and no amount of linguistic gymnastics will change that. 2) It's brave because the Koch brothers aren't the only people he cares about, whether for money or otherwise. Posts in support of "bad" figures run a risk of losing credibility, support, funding, and partnerships; I strongly doubt that the check to his foundation was large enough to compensate for that.
cthulha 10y ago
I don't think the public pressure is nonsensical: Koch may be doing the right thing in some areas and not others. Why does it have to be so black-and-white? Can't people raise issues that they genuinely believe to be bad for the country they live in?
- marklyon 10y ago
  Some people wear such narrow ideological blinders that they're incapable of comprehending that this week's subject of two minutes hate might not actually be the all-encompassing embodiment of evil they've been told. They label everything they encounter as good (generally, where "good" is on the side of agreeing with them) and bad (generally, where "bad" transgresses by deigning even remotely disagree with the "good"). That sort of approach silences thought, innovation, argument and compromise. It's a sad state of affairs that serves only the leaders who utilize such simplistic division so that they can lock in votes with far less effort than is required to meaningfully solve real problems.

mabbo 10y ago

"The truth is, progress only happens when people find common ground and build something on it." Very wise words.

ebbv 10y ago

This is a fluff piece trying to make an arch-conservative who is constantly pushing for deregulation and removal of environmental protections sound like a softy because he donated a bunch of money to Rowe's foundation. I have no doubt that the Koch brothers believe the agenda they push is for the best, but that's because they are self centered people. If you dig below the surface of any of the seemingly not self interested stories told in this piece, they come from a place of total self interest. The Koch brothers employ former convicts because they know they can pay them low wages and work them hard in their factories because they're desperate for work. The Koch brothers push for deregulation of all industry, the hair braiding license is just a seemingly "common sense" deregulation story. Mike Rowe has long been far too cozy for my comfort to large corporations and conservative politics in general. He throws Bill Maher in here to make himself sound "middle of the road" or like he has views across the spectrum, but in general Mr. Rowe tends to be on the conservative side of issues, which is why it's no surprise to me that he's buddies with the Koch brothers. EDIT: I should add that you can be a conservative and be a principled person who isn't selfish (obviously), but the Koch brothers are not that. You can also be a selfish liberal too, so I don't mean to imply that conservatives have a monopoly on being an asshole.

EGreg 10y ago
I'm a liberal, but does it occur to you that your perception of this may be majorly colored by your own bias? If you had read a similar piece with conservatives replaced by progressives, who would feature in it? George Soros? One can also say that your moral indignation is only surface-deep. For example: "The Koch brothers employ former convicts because they know they can pay them low wages and work then hard in their factories because they're desperate for work." First of all, they don't know when setting the initial salary who is a former convict and who isn't. And secondly, what exactly are you proposing would be better for the former convicts than this? The ex-convicts choose to work there over the alternative employment options. It seems that their self-interest, such as it is, benefits the ex-convicts more than your non-existent alternative.
- ebbv 10y ago
  Whoah buddy, I wasn't attacking you maybe you don't need to be so aggressive with me? > First of all, they don't know when setting the initial salary who is a former convict and who isn't. They don't have to know which individuals are. They put out there that they are willing/happy to hire ex-cons for these jobs and they will get them applying, and accepting lower salaries, lack of benefits, worse working conditions, no union, etc. The whole "We don't ask people if they were convicted of a felony" is a total charade meant to seem like they are benevolent but in reality they know they are hiring convicts. Which people should do, but they take advantage of it. > And secondly, what exactly are you proposing would be better for the former convicts than this? First off, the idea that I'm under some onus to offer a better solution when I call something out as terrible is ridiculous. I don't have to make you a three michelin star meal to tell you Applebee's isn't very good. Secondly, it's simple and obvious what I'm advocating in my original comment; paying people fair wages and providing them good working conditions and benefits and not taking advantage of their circumstance. Seems reasonable to me?

tptacek 10y ago

This is a great little piece, and I'm glad I saw it, and I wouldn't have seen it at all had it not been at the top of HN (despite the fact that most of what Mike Rowe writes somehow lands in my Fb feed), and I even agree with I think something like 98% of what it says. But it still feels like an almost textbook example of what shouldn't be on the front page of HN. Something Mike Rowe writes about the importance of the skilled trades, how they work, what the market for those people is like? Sure! But this piece is really just about politics and current events. In this case: politics I don't find very challenging (despite being a Democrat). But still: it's only interesting if you know who the Koch Brothers are and what their role in US politics tends to be. It would be neat if when things like this came up and got stuck to the front page, they could be replaced with something more important the same person wrote. Here, for example: same form, same author, basically the same content, without the horse-race political hook: http://mikerowe.com/2016/02/stopignoringskillsgap/ http://mikerowe.com/2016/02/stopignoringskillsgap/

daeken 10y ago
I would argue that this post sets a great example for businesspeople. Sometimes in business you're going to come across someone with a strong reputation -- negative or positive -- and being able to understand them is important. So often we look at a reputation and base our actions and decisions on that, which I believe is inherently flawed. We're all better off when different people can come together, understand each other, and work to make the world better, even if that's in a small way. So I think this is a great example of an HN post.
- tptacek 10y ago
  We'll see how much of the thread is about the skilled trades and how much of it is about the Koch Brothers role in horse-race US politics, and then we'll revisit.
  - daeken 10y ago
    I don't think that the direction of the discussion necessarily imbues the value of an HN post. I also don't think that the skilled trades themselves were the focus of the post; rather, the focus was on what the Koch Brothers did for his foundation, and how it contrasts with their reputation.

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

hnpuff 10y ago

This is a paid endorsement for the Koch Brothers. Am I missing something here? Mike Rowe talks about how the Koch brothers financially support his activities, and oh yeah, of course they are great people. How is this being taken seriously on Hacker News?

toodlebunions 10y ago

Why is this on Hacker News?

daeken 10y ago
From https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html > On-Topic: Anything that good hackers would find interesting. And > Please don't submit comments complaining that a submission is inappropriate for the site. If you think a story is spam or off-topic, flag it by clicking on its 'flag' link.
- toodlebunions 10y ago
  Fair enough. Seemed very off topic.

tsomctl 10y ago

"But I was most surprised by his commitment to reinvigorate the skilled trades." Why is he surprised? Koch Industries relies extensively on skilled laborers. Wikipedia lists Koch Industries' produces as "Asphalt, chemicals, commodities trading, energy, fibers, fertilizers, finance, minerals, natural gas, plastics, petroleum, pulp and paper, ranching". With the exception of commodities trading and finance, all of these require fabricators, electricians, pipe fitters, millwrights, machinists, heavy equipment operator, and a whole bunch of other trades. Even if they have enough employees, having more people trained in these trades allows them to hire better employees. From a more pessimistic point of view, having allows them to pay workers less.

aresant 10y ago

[deleted]

Hondor 10y ago
Donating to politicians doesn't directly get laws passed. Voting for them does, and voting is only done by individuals no matter their wealth. If the people of Florida want solar, they shouldn't vote for that anti-solar governer. It's their democratic choice.

Mz 10y ago

(Although I must say, this is the first time my proximity to the “wrong guy” has brought about the demise of a ten-year celebrity crush. That one stings.) Eh, if it makes Mike Rowe feel any better, I crush on him and, off the top of my head, I can only think of a couple of other celebrities I crush on. Glad to see him doing this kind of work and kudos to him for building bridges and getting shit done. To hell with the folks writing him hate mail over him collaborating with the "wrong" people in order to do good works. Refreshing to read something about the need for labor and skills on HN instead of basic income.

driverdan 10y ago

This applies to HN because it's relevant to raising money and ethics of charity. Would you accept a funding round from a person or company who has done things you strongly disagree with? Does the "good" you can do with that money outweigh the "bad" that person or company has done? There are a lot of people out there who would be fantastic investors for you, provide great mentorship and guidance to your company along with the money but who are generally considered to be bad people. Do you take their money? If the topic interests you I recommend learning about effective altruism: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effective_altruism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effective_altruism

rajeck 10y ago

FWIW, I thought this would be of interest to hackers as I think Mike Rowe exemplifies the hacker ethos of crossing boundaries to get a new perspective on problems. If all you do is sing from the same hymn sheet all the time, you're going to get the same song </strained analogy>

mempko 10y ago

I guess that's one way to handle cognitive dissonance. Sorry Mike, you could have just ignored the hate mail and kept on truck'n. Or you could have said "Yeah, he is Satan, but I will take his money because I'm fine with ripping off the devil". This is a fluff piece and you made it very clear you know who butters your bread.

SCAQTony 10y ago

My mother was a closet racist but I loved her very dearly. She donated to many charities, set up fund raisers for drug rehab centers and always picked up the check no matter how many people were at the table. I separated her bad judgement knowing damn well it was wrong and illogical and appreciated the good; I still continued to love her despite some ugly thoughts she had. I like Gaugin's paintings even though he was a syphilic pedophile who left his family so he could have sex with teens in the south pacific... I separate the man from the work because it is good work. I would have had him put in jail if I could too. http://hyperallergic.com/111730/posthumous-prognosis-for-supposedly-syphilitic-gauguin-via-his-teeth/ http://hyperallergic.com/111730/posthumous-prognosis-for-sup... Hugo Boss makes some really nice underwear and mens shirts but when Hugo Boss was alive he designed all the NAZI and SS uniforms. The original Hugo Boss is dead and is one suppose to "never forget" and punish those that came after him? http://www.nytimes.com/1997/08/15/business/hugo-boss-acknowledges-link-to-nazi-regime.html http://www.nytimes.com/1997/08/15/business/hugo-boss-acknowl... T.S. Elliot was anti semitic but he was pen pals with Groucho Marx (a jew) and had a photo of Groucho on his wall. Being friends with Groucho actually softened his points of view because Groucho stayed engaged. http://www.openculture.com/2014/02/groucho-marx-and-t-s-eliot-become-unexpected-pen-pals.html http://www.openculture.com/2014/02/groucho-marx-and-t-s-elio... Personality has many modules. In some areas within our personalities there is a bunch of lice. However, you support what you agree with and you aggressively question the bad.

eatplayrove 10y ago
That's not how it works though. There is no harm in you liking Gaugin's paintings now, because he is dead, and by liking a painting, you don't enable his pedophilia. I will not judge Koch, but if you view him in a bad light, you have every right to question Rowe, because Rowe and Koch enable each other.

SCAQTony 10y ago