71–80 of 495 posts
Maybe it’s just me, but I find it odd that Gates is the go to source for public health issues. His biggest contribution is money, which pays for really smart people to tackle these issues. So why not talk to the really smart people he hired?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> My key takeaways Against govt handling of covid: To be fair, there aren’t many governments ‘handling’ Covid in anything like a manner that has been good.
why would you even bring up the topic of being fair about something like this?
Maybe it’s just me, but I find it odd that Gates is the go to source for public health issues. His biggest contribution is money, which pays for really smart people to tackle these issues. So why not talk to the really smart people he hired?
Don't forget he gave a TED talk warning the world about the next pandemic. And obviously he knows a thing or two about high-level issues dealing with epidemics (which extend beyond just the medicine). Why would they just ignore him?
I'd like to understand more deeply why this is not happening.
Maybe it’s just me, but I find it odd that Gates is the go to source for public health issues. His biggest contribution is money, which pays for really smart people to tackle these issues. So why not talk to the really smart people he hired?
I think the summary is: this is really odd but it is even more odd how governments are unable to work on long-term topics unless shit hits the fan.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Indeed very wealthy unelected elites shaping public policy should leave a sour taste in all of our mouths.
I mean we have other unelected experts leading the pandemic response (eg Fauci) so does he need to go? Or is it just about the wealth? Bill Gates is there because his foundation is responsible for helping to eradicate diseases and coordinate pandemic responses, so without his wealth he certainly has experience in this field.
Nothing against the man. I'm distrustful generally in the richest people in the world wielding control that can make their friends even richer. I really doubt I'm alone.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The charitable take is he's still a socially awkward nerd. The uncharitable take is he's still as ruthless as he was during the embrace, extend, extinguish days and since the pandemic has been great business for him why shouldn't he be happy.
what business? His networth has been flat-ish compared to Bezos. Maybe someone else needs to be a bit more charitable.
I can't understand the 'microchip in vaccines' issue. You mean to tell me that my iPhone can't last a full day on a battery charge, however we have microscopic tech capable of tracking location data and relaying it somewhere and doesn't need charging once injected into the body? I'll take my microchip in space grey please.
Maybe it’s just me, but I find it odd that Gates is the go to source for public health issues. His biggest contribution is money, which pays for really smart people to tackle these issues. So why not talk to the really smart people he hired?
Bill Gates is a public health expert. He has been working on these problems with some of the smartest minds in the field for decades now. How long does someone need to be working on a problem before they're worthy of being a "go to source", in your opinion?
Maybe it’s just me, but I find it odd that Gates is the go to source for public health issues. His biggest contribution is money, which pays for really smart people to tackle these issues. So why not talk to the really smart people he hired?
It isn't just MSM folks that go to him. He's proven to be reliable over decades. That's the main reason, I think. There was a small reason to talk to him about public health at first, but over time it's grown into a huge reason. The question remains, is what is he reliable at? Why do I and so many others want to listen to him more over the years? I think it's because of the depth and breadth of issues he discusses. I…
So I’d think his accounts would be as easy and correct as some wiki articles or better, and at the same time would sound “irrelevant” to the public for the lack of emotional components to it.