Billionaire gives away some of his fortune to help save the ocean: Norwegian Kjell Inge Røkke has decided to give "the lion's share" of his $2.7 billion fortune towards building a 596-foot marine research vessel, that's also designed to scoop up a major oceanic threat—plastic pollution.

Billionaire gives away some of his fortune to help save the ocean: Norwegian Kjell Inge Røkke has decided to give "the lion's share" of his $2.7 billion fortune towards building a 596-foot marine research vessel, that's also designed to scoop up a major oceanic threat—plastic pollution.
Billionaire gives away some of his fortune to help save the ocean: Norwegian Kjell Inge Røkke has...

I like these kind of billionaires

He rapes, but he also saves.

edit: Gold?! Thank you kind stranger! And thanks Dave! 😘

Bit harsh mate. He had a go. Was successful. He changed his ways. Now it looks like he intends to make a positive large scale difference.

There is not one person on this planet that has not had improvement of life due to exploitation.

we need more of these people.

EDIT: you can stop with the "hurr durr we should tax them instead" comments, no fucking shit they need to pay taxes. my statement was implying that "more billionaires should be more like this guy" rather than "there should be more billionaires".

Reminds me of how they'll soon only sell electric cars there. This guy, and Norway in general, is an example of what Democratic Socialism (chosen by the people as a reflection of their culture and values) is capable of, and how it should be differentiated from Soviet socialism (state control by those seeking to benefit from that control).

Also, Happy May 17th!

And he saves a lot more than he rapes!

What i gather from the comments is that he should not have tried to help because he is part of the problem. Fuck I hate the reddit community.

Nordic model has nothing to do with socialism, it is a social democracy, not democratic socialism.

No we don't. He's an offshore drilling and shipping magnate, so he's just part of the problem. And even if he spends every last øre he now has on cleaning up the world, it'll only make up for a fraction of the bad karma he's accumulated.

Instead of trying to empty the ocean with a spoon, we should address the root cause and stop throwing plastics everywhere.

Yes, but it still needs to be cleaned up. Plus, you cant brainwash the entire world in a way to completely stop plastic littering, and some plastics get into the ocean by accident.

... but he probably does rape.

I saw this simpsons episode.

And at the same time they're sitting there consuming the exact products only made possible thanks to guys like this.

Stupid, stupid people.

The third time I met OJ...

To claim it has noting to do with socialism is misunderstanding socialism.

In 1969 the Ohio Cuyahoga River caught fire due to heavy pollution.

In response, a man named Frank Samsel built a 56-foot boat, the Putzfrau (German: "Cleaning Lady") to clean the river. It had a massive suction hose to clean toxic liquids floating on the top of the river.

After reading about his actions, I always wondered if some group or government would begin building ships to go out and clean the Great Pacific Garbage Patch.

Bless you, Mr. Røkke.

minimum wages

No Scandinavian country has minimum wages. Every country in Scandinavia has strong unions.

He's also known for not wearing socks. And driving without a driver's licence.

Capitalist economic system tempered by strong social programs. really not that different from the US. Just more emphasis and respect for what is better done as a collective task.

To be fair, the majority of us in the 1st world are a net negative, environmentally speaking.

...which sums up USA a bit

"really not that different from the US" if you believe that almost free college (including housing, and other expenses), single payer healthcare (with maternal leave), minimum wages, etc. is not a big difference.

EDIT: yes, I'm wrong on some stuff. Some stuff I mentioned is even better, some is not like this (or is like this, but elsewhere in Europe)

One could quite readily debate that demand and the ability to exploit those resources would have existed regardless. And as such SOMEONE would have still been a drilling/shipping magnate, so a mitigation of harm is a lot better than nothing.

Unless you have the unrealistic expectation that that natural resource would remain untapped purely for environmental benefit without regard to the economic loss that would entail.

How do you suppose we do that? Who is going to pay for alternatives for all of the people and businesses who rely on it? What about everything else that is made out of plastic that ends up in the ocean?

The plastic-in-ocean problem is a lot more complex than we think. it isn't just about plastic bags from shops or plastic wrapping for products getting into the ocean through littering.

In the end, it doesn't change the fact that there is a lot of plastic in the ocean right now doing damage in many ways. I stand by my opinion that it is worth spending resources getting rid of it.

Luckily the US isn't the authority on definitions for the rest of the world.

Norway isn't socialist. Norway is social democratic.

It's ruthless capitalism coupled with a solid social safety net.

Business in Norway is as hard, or harder than the US one.

The no socks issue needs to be addressed. I suggest he keep some of the money and buy some, preferably in an outrageous colour scheme. Then he can get one with saving the world.

You're not allowed to do anything for yourself on reddit bro. Didn't you read the memo?

Just the simple fact alone that's he's a billionaire and not bill gates makes him instantly hated here

I would love to know how you are interfacing with the internet.

I think that ship has sailed

Yea makes very little sense. These Billionaire tax dodgers are less charitable than people think. Their philanthropy is self serving. The lunch lady that volunteers her time at a homeless shelter is more honest and altruistic.

Actually Røkke isn't bad as loaded people go, AFAICT. Never heard him complain about paying his fair share of taxes, and has gone out of his way to keep the companies he has founded within the Norwegian tax system, unlike others who have moved their values to tax havens.

But makes less difference overall.

I like these kind of billionaires

Pretty sure I've seen how this is going to pan out on Archer.

People in countries with clean drinking water could stop buying plastic fucking bottles of water every lunch time

Good point. One might also point out that this guy probably did not know about the environmental effects of oil when he first founded the company. Also, his company probably created a lot of jobs which has helped shape the country for the better. Whether you like it or not, oil is still vital for sustaining a functional society. Better to be self-sufficient than to rely on foreign ressources. At least he is doing something about it now.

What else are we supposed to do? Build an underground network of pipes and transport clean water to every building in the country?

Mmm 'Li'l Kjell Inge Røkke's patented Animal Slurry'

Unions are strong largely because they have legal backing tho. Workers have rights which the unions can use to contest bad employers.

And if more than 50% of the enployes want to unionize the whole company has to follow 'tariff' wages, which is sort of like minimum wages but is different for every proffession and is usually slightly based on how long you've worked there, education and time of the day/week/year.

So politically we do actually sort of have a minimum wage, it's just a lot more nuanced.

He bought a computer made completely out of CARBON NANOTUBES

Another chance for Boaty McBoatface?

You're not allowed to do anything for yourself on reddit bro

They're actually criticizing that he was involved with something which science has shown will hurt a lot of people, I haven't looked into when and how much it was so don't know myself, but why strawman and create a different made-up criticism to respond to? Do you not like the criticism they have and are so frustrated that you can't respond to it, you have to make something up?

I was about to say... Just how many of us are calling the kettle black in this instance?

Sorry, but no.

Philanthropy does not excuse profiting off of exploitation.

Does the Walton family(Walmart) get a pass if they help 1,000 homeless people? Even though the spent decades paying tons of employees a non livable wage?

Do the Koch brothers get a pass for building 100 wind turbines in their hometown? Even though they made all their money off fossil fuels?

Philanthropy like this is NOT what we need. It allows rich to clear a conscious and gives an excuse for exploitation.

What we need are heroes that don't get media coverage for their actions. How about the CEO of Costco, who has made sure that all of his employees are paid very well? Where is his article? We also need people who fight for the laws that prevent this shit from happening in the first place. We shouldn't glorify philanthropy, we should fight for a society that doesn't need it.

Ssshhh you can't say that, you can only hate on rich people on Reddit.

More like he rapes, then pays for the abortion. What a gentleman!

Instead of trying to empty the ocean with a spoon

It's primarily a research vessel. They will probably be experimenting with various tracing paths, intakes and tools to increase the efficiency of garbage collection.

we should

As a business owner and psychology major, I'd say that trying to motivate people to change their daily habits (especially to more effortful) is an extremely difficult task that requires delicate expert leadership to pull off.

And verbal reprimanding is one of the trickiest and risikiest way of doing it. How did that work out for the global warming movement?

Furthermore, you are just saying "you should stop doing bad things" to the collective world population. Many of the billions of polluters dont have internet and many can't even read.

I'm going to go with Røkke here, its you and the other moralizers who are "trying to empty the ocean with a spoon". Researching effective ways of cleaning up the oceans seems considerably more realistic.

That's because even your main "left wing" party is actually very right wing by European standards (in an economic sense I mean). In my country there is no major party against a single payer healthcare system (the party that was against it got like 4000 votes out of 46 million people).

It's not semantics, they're socialdemocrats. They're capitalists who support a welfare state. There is nothing that could be remotely considered hardcore socialism about them.

Not saying your wrong in just curious what the difference is. I tried googling it myself and I keep getting that is a socialist form of government achieved through democratic means.

Check out the ocean cleanup project, they are doing exactly that. But by building floating 'filters' (i guess?), not ships.

Couldnt remember if this was chappelle or jim jefferies standup, but once you said 3rd time I met Oj, now I remember tis Chapelle. Thanks

More billionaires need to be like this, giving back to the earth that has been so generous to them, often they have taken so much from and benefited greatly but never give anything in return.

Massive props to this guy

People always get mad at oil industry folks, then they bust out their smart phone, sit down on their couch, grab a pop from their fridge and relax after doing chores like filling up the car with gas. If the demand wasn't there neither would be the billionaire.

You might be confusing socialism with communism. Its true that USSR was not socialist, but it was communist (non-marxian). Socialism does not imply ownership of production by the people. It implies control and or regulation so that these means are to the benefit of the people. This is usually accomplished by taxes, and other measn of redistributing. In practice it usually refers to public benefits such as healthcare and the like. It is in other words perfectly konsisten to have a society which is both socialistic and capitalistic. (ex. norway / denmark / sweden)

What is wrong with drilling and shipping? It fuels the world economy. I'd rather not be sitting in a cave being warmed by a fire.

Sad but true, a lunch lady can never have the same impact someone like the bill and Melinda Gates foundation

 Rokke got his start selling fish off a boat in Seattle before returning to his native Norway where he built a fleet and earned a reputation as a ruthless corporate raider.

Doesn't sound very socialist to me.

This should be called The Plastic Sturgeon.

Unions are strong largely because they have legal backing tho. Workers have rights which the unions can use to contest bad employers.

Those are rights that the unions have forced the government to make into law. Nobody gave workers any rights, the worker rights in Norway exist because workers made the government give them rights through the unions.

The roots of the socialist movement in Norway were based on dangerous working conditions, exploit... has absolutely nothing to do with Socialism. Unless Norwegian workers own the means of production. In that capacity, the USSR was also not Socialist. People have been misusing that term for so long, it basically means whatever the hell the population wants any point in time. At least people have some basic understanding about Nazism before they use it frivolously as a slur. Most people don't know the first thing about Socialism before they use it favorably in one context or dismissively in another.

No, I can cut off the rest and eat it.

Just like I can with a human.

Nothing. Everyone in this thread is so edgy that if they had their way, we would be sitting in a cave warmed by a fire. They don't understand that big businesses need to exist to make the world function. Or they do, but they want to shame the individuals who make them a reality.

You can just reduce the amount of plastic wrapping used everywhere to the minimum, and it should already solve most problems.

Your problem is against the social class, not individuals. There is a difference. Your comment is basically saying we do not need billionaires with massive fortunes to help the world? They should just sit there on a huge pile of cash and be a part of the problem. I do agree that some billionaires should not have been allowed to exploit earth's resources for their own gain, but that is not the point here.

It also owns something like 1-2% of all stocks and bonds in the world and only around 5 million people.

Beer's expensive though.

I don't understand this idea that any fossil fuel magnate is inherently immoral. Yes, fossil fuels are terrible for the environment and we should be working to move to a completely renewable power source. However, they also are a major reason why our society is at it's greatest point in history.

Do you not use a car? Heating or electricity? Because if you do, you're a massive hypocrite.

You mean you've read one sentence definition provided by Google and felt too overwhelmed to open Wikipedia?

Socialism is a range of economic and social systems characterised by social ownership and democratic control of the means of production;

Social democracy is a political, social and economic ideology that supports economic and social interventions to promote social justice within the framework of a capitalist economy,

I saw this Archer episode, doesn't go well

Just like the old gypsy woman said!

The loudest among redditors are the most self rightous of all.

Bunch of keyboard warrior who will hate a guy for trying to do something good while they sit on their asses

Yeah people can be such puritanical wankers. We are all part of the problem because we buy products that use the systems he runs. At least he is doing something positive with the wealth he has accumulated. More good than most holier than thou individuals here will ever do.

If you put it in contrast to what you earn, nope.

No, you might be confusing Socialism with Social Welfare and Communism with Socialism.

Socialism means the liberation of the worker from the oppressive regimes of the workplace so that they have self-determination and representation. Do you think the USSR was representative of the interests of the workers?

While we're at it, do you think the USSR was a stateless, money less society that held all property as the common heritage of the people? Then it also wasn't Communist. Ah, but you added "non-Marxian" so I imagine it means the exact diametrical opposite of Communism.

Oil and related industries is 12% of Norwegian GNP.

Norway isn't Saudi Arabia, it's Denmark+oil.

That's major point of being rich - You have power and resources to save the world.

Shame some people are greedy and don't have any empathy about natural environment. Myself when moved from smaller city to a bigger one I started appreciating connection with nature. I can't imagine living in a world where there is only concrete and no possibility to find this connection. That would be a nightmare.

We should all be thankful for each of such people.

Anyway, cleaning Ocean is very important - but what is the ratio of cleaning/polluting it ? If we clean 100 tons while dumping 150 tons - it's not going to save environment, it will only extend the deadline... We need to fight this problem at both fronts - rich companies like coca cola etc. must stop using so much plastic! And governments must include special fee for buying plastic bottles just like it is with glass one's.

and if you think you can't change the world because you don't have such resources - you are wrong. Stop buying plastic-bottled water yourself, get a filter like brita or tap filter or whatever. Be the change you want to see...

Just more emphasis and respect for what is better done as a collective task.

That falls under that line.

As a system of government it is really not that different. When discussed in the context of -isms, as was the case.

It is a matter of how the dials are set, not which dials are on the board - so to speak.

Jesus Christ. Why every single time there's a highly upvoted post or comment, people always mislabel things???

It's Social Democracy, not Democratic socialism. Get it right.

"Profitable" - I seriously doubt that. I don't know much about manufacturing, but I imagine it'd be cheaper to just produce new plastic than to hunt out for scrap plastic throughout the ocean, reprocess it, and sell it back.

So do nothing at all then ?

We can nitpick semantics, but in practice, the social arrangements in Norway/Scandinavia would be considered hardcore socialism in the US.

What if I don't use plastic? Checkmate mate.

The biggest reason for plastic pollution in the ocean are not the pet bottles some guy throws into the ocean after the beachparty this weekend. Its mostly in less developed countries where its cheaper to throw all the plastic into the sea rather than coolect the waste.

There exists a lack of understanding of the impact when a whole vilage throws their plastic truckwise into the ocean + there must be no financial deficit for better ways of wastemanagement to move people to do so.

The point of being rich isn't to save the world. They work for their money like anyone else. They can do with it what they please. It may be nice and better for everyone if they use it like this, but they are under no obligation and shouldn't be.

Though I think the sentiment was, we need more billionaires to be like these people, rather than, we need more billionaires.

This feels like an exchanged I'd see in Peep Show

Socks are just pants for feet.

"...but surely he does rape" - David Mitchell

God yes, it's coming in clearly :)

It's not socialism. The definition of socialism:

a political and economic theory ... which advocates that the means of production ... should be owned or regulated by the community ...

That means no private ownership of any productive assets unless it's economic use is regulated by the community.

Nordic countries follow a social capitalistic system, like many European countries (in various forms and intensities). It is important to note that social =/= socialism; they have vastly different implications. If you believe in private ownership and private control (ie: if you own a factory, you can decide what the factory should produce) you believe in a form of capitalism, not socialism. If you believe that the town mayor / community should be allowed to decide what your factory produces, then you believe in socialism.

Capitalism comes in many forms and flavors - but if you fundamentally believe that the shit you work for should be your shit and you should be allowed to do with it what you think is best, then you're in support of Capitalism fundamentally, although you may still disagree with the particular form & flavor of capitalism practices in your region.

Everyone interested in this should check out the awesome work The Ocean Cleanup guys are doing

You could almost say it's Capitalism with a human face!

You can rape mother earth as long as you leave money on the dresser.

That's the same logic as "don't blame the hitman, blame the person who hired". You can blame both!

Pretty much everything is expensive in Norway.

But perhaps hes raped more than he has saved so far? Let's wait and see if he eventually ends up saving more than he raped?

But at the end of the day, does that justify the means if hes 51% saving and 49% raping?

More like he rapes, then pays for the trauma therapy.

I can't wear socks in the summer, sorry fam

Im sure your layman understanding of the situation trumps this billionaires team of people.

Yes, because they've taxed all other cars so much that they cost about the same as an electric car.

However, there's a whole bunch of problems with electric cars in Norway and the legislation with them.

First of all, Norway gets a lot of snow, which completely puts some roads out of use until they're cleaned. Non-electric cars have no problem here and can stay for quite long in a nice, warmed car. Electric cars however, will drain very fast if you leave the AC on.

Secondly, there's various legislation surrounding electric cars and a lot of benefits, that quite a few people deem unfair. Like the aforementioned situation, where EV's get priority in the waiting line to drive on as the road is plowed from the snow.

Thirdly, electric cars are a bitch to charge. It'll take you around 30 minutes to charge a Tesla to 80%, while 1/3 of the time you can fill up your car full of petrol, get coffee at the petrol station and some food to go.

So while it may sound alluring and great to people outside of Norway. Norwegian people aren't all supportive of this due to the reasons I've mentioned and various others (I don't know all of them)

Not to mention the fact that it drastically lowers the type of cars you can get. There's only a few dozen of fully-electric vehicles as compared to the hundreds of models and dozens of brands of petrol-driven cars.

There's also the issue of what to do with trucks that often carry 40 tons of goods in them. They kinda have to be petrol right now. And remember, a single heavy-truck is going to pollute a lot more, sometimes more than 200 cars & there's quite a lot of them so you're only very slightly impacting the overall picture while compromising a lot on comfortability.

There are plenty of animals who are also net negatives in that respect, should we get rid of them too?

Because of the oil boom since the 1970s, there has been little government incentive to help devel...

Looks like they're starting to wonder that, too.

While collage/uni is free ( except paid ones like BI ), housing is definitely not free, nor is any other expense really.

Students get a 7800kr loan ($923) [edit: per month] in which 40% is free, and 60% has to be paid back if they graduate. If they don't the entire amount has to be paid back with interest (though small).

e: Also book costs are exorbant, though you usually dont need to buy them