Discussion in 'world politics, current affairs and news' started by editor, Jan 29, 2010.
reminds me when he managed to shame the american government by giving vastly more than they did to an earthquake relief fund... they ended up quickly revising how much they were going to give
Conclusive proof that the controllers are trying to kill us all, imo.
I warmed to Gates slightly after he mocked Italy's lack of foreign aid budget recently, choosing to chide Berlusconi at spending more effort on his hair transplants than aid.
This isn't charity, it's poison.
If Bill Gates really wanted to help, he'd provide clean water - I believe this sum would cover that for the whole of Africa twice over.
There's times I wish we could add more than 5 of these for your posts, Jazzz.
Well I'd be in favour of more smilies, I'm sure you could sort it.
But tell me, would you care to guess at the proportion of money Bill Gates spends on clean water, compared to drugs and vaccines?
What would you think is reasonable - given that hundreds of millions are without clean water?
I even forgive him for ME for that.
It really isn't though is it. It's going to save millions of children from a horrific needless death.
Lets not get ahead of ourselves.
There's still no excuse for Vista.
Look, we can have the debate about whether vaccines are beneficial or harmful many times over. But what really cannot be denied at all is that clean water/sanitation is far, far more beneficial to health than any number of these shots. Suppose you have the choice - filthy water for life and any vaccine you wished, or clean water and no shots? Instinctively one has no doubt.
And Bill Gates spends, if my recollection is correct, less than 1% of his total on water and sanitation. That may be fair sum, but it is lip service with his total.
How much have you given Jazzz?
You need both. One without the other is pointless.
More to the point, no one else is going to do this.
In a way he is robbing from the rich (who foolishly opt to be early adopters of his malware) and giving to the poor.
He also gives viruses to the rich, and reduces viruses in the poor.
plus he is even kinda funny
Proof that smoking dope will ruin your life....
That's because no one else can since he has accumulated and sucked up so much wealth.
Mankind passed the point in the early 1980s where each human could have water, food, basic injections housing, books with the resources on earth.
His rotten system has denied people ever since.
Bill Gates if he was serious which he isn't would abandon all his wealth and place it under direct democratic control of people in all the countries' whose labour he has exploited.
shut up you knob
Yeah, cos that'll work just fine won't it?
Oh, and considering the sums of money and the energy he's putting into this, I'd say he's fairly serious about it.
10 BILLION dollars and still twats on here find a way to moan, awesome
This is actually wrong, but hey don't worry about that.
He's serious about his foundation and the prestige he will derive from it, but he's not serious about public health - for children or adults.
His Foundation is one which is parasitic upon poverty - poverty which CEOs like him create.
His Foundation creates the problems which it then "solves" with great fanfare.
I remember him boldly declaring that the Millennium Development Goals couldn't possibly not be achieved.
Serious epidemiologists recognise unaccountable foundations
In any serious analysis of anyone about the issues, the diversion of resources into the vast ineffiencies of state capitalism would be avoided. It's based on a broad equality, the disabled and sick would receive more than others.
Perhaps you're right on a technicality, the so-called "problem of scarcity" was in fact resolved earlier than the 1980s.
It's not moaning, the point is for all of us here to analyse more deeply what's going on.
If someone tosses you a £2 coin in the street you might be happy, but if you recognise him as the same guy who's been organising burglaries on your house and your neighbours' house over the past years, you'll approach the situation differently.
I think that's a fair point. But its also fair that there are many easily curable diseases, and if thats what they want to spend his money on its up to them.
I agree though, if I were in that position, it would be better to spend money on infrastructure that would last into the future, (such as water), rather than pharmaceuticals that gets used up and leave the next generation wanting. But still, I guess its up to them.
Separate names with a comma.