OKC vs Tulsa Billionaires

[Pete]

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...3oUNHx1RAGTzLg

George Kaiser, a 76-year-old Oklahoma banker and oilman giving away almost his entire $10.5 billion fortune, wants higher taxes on his own industry. He’s bankrolling trendy neighborhoods in Tulsa, an early-childhood education program and a movement toward criminal-justice reform. Kaiser says his priority is to wean the state’s economy from “cyclical, commodity-based industry.”

Harold Hamm, founder of Oklahoma City oil-and-gas giant Continental Resources Inc., has fought to keep things as they are: lean budgets, lax environmental regulations and low fossil-fuel levies. With a net worth of $13.8 billion according to the Bloomberg Billionaires Index, he funds the state’s most conservative politicians while arguing for higher taxes on wind turbines sprouting on the rolling hills. Hamm, 72, has promised to donate most of his money to “causes that will enable people with ambition and tenacity to achieve their goals.” So far that’s included millions for research on what he calls the “American energy renaissance”—a doubling of oil production since 2011.

[jonny d]

Because OKC sucks, that's why! Jkjk! I really wish this wasn't an OKC vs. Tulsa issue. This is a Kaiser vs. Hamm issue. I know plenty of well to do people in OKC who love to donate time, money, services, etc. to people in need, and to causes that affect a larger number of people. But I get it, OKC is seen as selfish in this article.

[Pete]

The issue is how both men use their wealth and influence to affect their respective communities.

[HangryHippo]

The issue is how both men use their wealth and influence to affect their respective communities.

And the difference is night and day.

[jerrywall]

The interesting difference is that one man is the child of sharecroppers and started out pumping gas and eventually built his empire and fortune and one inherited the family oil business and leveraged that into an empire. Wonder how that influences their worldview and actions.

[catch22]

The interesting difference is that one man is the child of sharecroppers and started out pumping gas and eventually built his empire and fortune and one inherited the family oil business and leveraged that into an empire. Wonder how that influences their worldview and actions.

One sees the benefit of society succeeding (a rising tide lifts all boats) while one sees the benefit of only himself succeeding. Pretty stark contrast between the two.

[jerrywall]

One sees the benefit of society succeeding (a rising tide lifts all boats) while one sees the benefit of only himself succeeding. Pretty stark contrast between the two.

Way to oversimplify, and not really the observation I was making.

[dankrutka]

George Kaiser certainly views the world through his wealth considering the things he donates to (e.g., parks, arts, misguided Teach for America program...) , but also through the lens of his parents fleeing Nazi persecution during the Holocaust (e.g., seeks unity in the community). There's a lot of people who came from poverty who dedicated their life to the people in the community. Harold Hamm shows up to the capital personally to fight teacher payraises. It's certainly interesting to think how each community would be different if the two men traded places.

[OKCRT]

Way to oversimplify, and not really the observation I was making.

Sheesh,makes it sound like good vs evil.

[jonny d]

The issue is how both men use their wealth and influence to affect their respective communities.

And my issue with the issue is that it is not an OKC vs. Tulsa thing. Should say Hamm vs. Kaiser. We know OKC doesn't have the philanthropical wizard than Tulsa does. But it isn't OKC's fault.

[Pete]

Nobody is saying it's OKC's fault but since you brought it up...

Leadership in OKC has abetted Hamm a great deal.

Millions in job incentives, sold him the Santa Fe Garage in a sweetheart deal, and allowed his influence on lots of other issues.


Kaiser has donated billions to things that directly benefit Tulsa and Hamm had taken millions from the state and city, ironically while pouring tons of money into right-wing causes under the guise of smaller government and lower taxes.

[Bunty]

If Kaiser ever gets done with his generosity toward Tulsa, he can start on OKC.

[dankrutka]

If Kaiser ever gets done with his generosity toward Tulsa, he can start on OKC.

He already did: OKC Thunder.

[jerrywall]

Does someone have an obligation to focus their philanthropy at the city level? Personally, I'm a pro local guy, but if someone chooses to focus more on diabetes research or what have you, rather than arts and parks, more power to them.

[BG918]

It's certainly interesting to think how each community would be different if the two men traded places.

In a way George Kaiser's generosity lets the city of Tulsa off the hook on certain things. Take Gathering Place, if Kaiser hadn't donated that the city certainly wouldn't have done it. Same for Guthrie Green, the Bob Dylan Archives, streetscape work in the Arts District, new river trails, expanding Turkey Mountain Urban Wilderness area, etc. If anything by Kaiser donating these things that should free up the city to do other large and ambitious projects, the same ones that OKC has to fund themselves. Transit for instance could be something the city could be doing more to promote but there are no current plans for a streetcar or commuter rail like what OKC is doing.

[catch22]

Does someone have an obligation to focus their philanthropy at the city level? Personally, I'm a pro local guy, but if someone chooses to focus more on diabetes research or what have you, rather than arts and parks, more power to them.

I’m not discounting his contributions, I used to be a patient at the Hamm Diabetes Center. However he donated to OU for that because he has it too, so it does benefit him personally by having more research into diabetes.

[Isaac C. Parker]

Hamm and Kaiser are both signatories of the famous "Giving Pledge" where billionaires promise to donate half of their wealth within their lifetimes (or in their wills) to charitable causes. I have a ton of respect for both of these people.

[PhiAlpha]

George Kaiser certainly views the world through his wealth considering the things he donates to (e.g., parks, arts, misguided Teach for America program...) , but also through the lens of his parents fleeing Nazi persecution during the Holocaust (e.g., seeks unity in the community). There's a lot of people who came from poverty who dedicated their life to the people in the community. Harold Hamm shows up to the capital personally to fight teacher payraises. It's certainly interesting to think how each community would be different if the two men traded places.

That’s a big oversimplification. Hamm wasn’t fighting teacher pay raises, he was fighting the methods used to generate the revenue needed for them.

[HangryHippo]

That’s a big oversimplification. Hamm wasn’t fighting teacher pay raises, he was fighting the methods used to generate the revenue needed for them.

In effect, wasn't that fighting them?

[PhiAlpha]

In effect, wasn't that fighting them?

If you want to see it that way, sure. Though it makes it sound like he’s an old a**hole hell bent on keeping teacher salaries low. Had the only recommended source of revenue for their raises not been a gross production tax increase, I highly doubt he would’ve cared.

[dankrutka]

That’s a big oversimplification. Hamm wasn’t fighting teacher pay raises, he was fighting the methods used to generate the revenue needed for them.

He certainly wasn't out there advocating for funding solutions. I'm sorry, but he was opposing them. Legislative solutions are often frought with compromises and imprefections, but that was a pretty easy one to get right in my opinion. He took his stand and opposed teacher pay raises during a crisis.

[dankrutka]

Had the only recommended source of revenue for their raises not been a gross production tax increase, I highly doubt he would’ve cared.

I agree. I don't think he cares about issues like teacher salaries that he sees outside his personal and business interests (which I think is naive because perceptions of education quality have a huge effect on all aspects of society, incuding local oil and gas companies). Whereas, even though I disagree with some of Kaiser's education initatives (e.g., Teach for America), he actually is involved in the community to find ways forward. Hamm gets in the way if it doesn't benefit him or his company, including during a crisis.

[Rover]

Ah... doesn’t OKC miss Aubrey now? We haven’t had another Uber wealthy citizen step up yet. Tulsa wealthy families have historically been more civic minded in their philanthropy. OKC has Funk and Hamm now. Nuff said.

[Pete]

Ah... doesn’t OKC miss Aubrey now? We haven’t had another Uber wealthy citizen step up yet. Tulsa wealthy families have historically been more civic minded in their philanthropy. OKC has Funk and Hamm now. Nuff said.

One thing about Aubrey... Yes, he was generous but the huge percentage of what he gave was not his funds but Chesapeake's.

When he was forced out at CHK all that giving pretty much dried up, the most notable example being the Boathouse Row initiatives. They got into big financial trouble when he was out at CHK and the money immediately stopped flowing, long before he died.

[TheSteveHunt]

George Kaiser certainly views the world through his wealth considering the things he donates to (e.g., parks, arts, misguided Teach for America program...) , but also through the lens of his parents fleeing Nazi persecution during the Holocaust (e.g., seeks unity in the community). There's a lot of people who came from poverty who dedicated their life to the people in the community. Harold Hamm shows up to the capital personally to fight teacher payraises. It's certainly interesting to think how each community would be different if the two men traded places.

Kissinger came from a family similar to Kaiser's...