Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Good News You Might Have Missed in 2013

thegatesnotes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 171 posts

Re: Good News You Might Have Missed in 2013

#111

Post by shutupalready »

yodsanklai wrote: post #110
shutupalready wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Over last 10 years, the sex workers in this area have reduced. Hardly anyone wants to ask if that is an overall benefit to society? The sex ratio for India is 108 men per 100 women [1]. For those under 15, the ratio is 113:100, so the problem is set to get much worse in the near future. If India (pop. 1.2 billion) were to have maximal monogamous relationships and no sex workers, you'd have 577 million happy couples…

That's a rather controversial comment you're making here. I'd rather see a man deprived of sexual intimacy than a woman constrained to prostitution for lack of better opportunity. The first fate seems largely less cruel than the latter.

> That's a rather controversial comment you're making here.

Yes, indeed it is. My comment is so politically incorrect that I dare not make it in real life. Yet I suspect that plenty of people (though probably not the majority) would agree, but can't speak out about it.

Re: Good News You Might Have Missed in 2013

#112

Post by icambron »

astine wrote: post #107
icambron wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Points 2 and 3 both sound like steps forward to me. Also: > middle income counties has also seen concurrent high real inflation on the ground which is highly under measured. What does that actually mean? "Real" is an economic term that doesn't make sense in that context. And if inflation's not being measured properly, how do you know in which direction it's off? Or more generally - you seem to think inflation is high…

When people say that inflation is not being properly measured, what they're likely referring to is the fact that some policy makers use the CPI Less Food and Energy which means that some of the biggest expenses for the majority of people, food and energy, are sometimes ignored when discussing the effects inflation.

That's not a measurement problem, though; that's a what-should-our-policy-response-be problem. Food and energy prices are actually easier to measure and compare year-over-year. There are good arguments for (and some against) excluding them from your monetary policy targets, but I've never heard of anyone doing it when discussing human wellbeing. But either way, it's still being measured.

The World Bank has inflation for middle income countries as 4.1% [1]. If you download their data sheet, you'll see that number is a GDP deflator, so no food/energy exclusion. That's not an ideal number, but it's not high either, and it's much lower than most previous years. They also have a CPI number, which is actually higher: 4.6%, but again not terrible. So my question still stands: does the GP think that number is wrong, and if so, why?

[1] http://www.worldbank.org/en/country/mic

Re: Good News You Might Have Missed in 2013

#113

Post by bluekitten »

rbanffy wrote: post #69
jblow wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is the other way around. If you are doing effective altruism, you want to make sure you have money coming in that you can be altruistic with. The bit about Walmart was especially badly done. If the author of this article thinks Walmart employees are poor on the same scale as the poor that the foundation targets, he really has no clue about world poverty. If the minimum standard of living throughout the world were…

So, your argument is that it's right to make Walmart employees poor in order to maximize profits because they are not nearly as poor as the poorest people in the world? If there is something poor here, it's the excuse.

How does buying a lot of Walmart shares make Walmart employees poor? I am frankly baffled here. Walmart buyers should probably get more blame here.

Have you ever spared a thought about who made the electronics you own and under what conditions?

Re: Good News You Might Have Missed in 2013

#114

Post by snowbunny »

rbanffy wrote: post #80
sliverstorm wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So what? If he is a sociopath, so what? Are you trying to insinuate he has dark ulterior motives for his charity efforts? If not, why is his personality worth a damn to the discussion?

> Are you trying to insinuate he has dark ulterior motives for his charity efforts? Dark ulterior motives? No. Being remembered as a philanthropist rather than a robber-baron is quite enough. Hs is doing good, but he is not doing good for the good of others.

By that metric, anyone who does any good can be discredited by saying that they did it because it made them feel good.

Re: Good News You Might Have Missed in 2013

#115

Post by wallflower »

jchrisa wrote: post #24
tptacek wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh for fuck's sake. How do you think a double-digit-billion endowment gets managed? By Bill Gates sitting around with a copy of the Wall Street Journal and a cup of coffee, picking stocks? No. The money manager roles for the Gates Foundation are extremely serious, and extremely high-status. The guy who runs money management for the Gates Foundation was the former CFO of Merck. Presumably, managing the endowment for a…

Universities can (and sometimes do) take a more ethical aim than some other funds. Example: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disinvestment_from_South_Africa...

OT: People have made arguments that Harvard is virtually a hedge fund

http://www.cnbc.com/id/100291522

http://theamericanscene.com/2008/05/12/is-harvard-just-a-tax...

Re: Good News You Might Have Missed in 2013

#116

Post by XorNot »

shutupalready wrote: post #111
yodsanklai wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a rather controversial comment you're making here. I'd rather see a man deprived of sexual intimacy than a woman constrained to prostitution for lack of better opportunity. The first fate seems largely less cruel than the latter.

> That's a rather controversial comment you're making here. Yes, indeed it is. My comment is so politically incorrect that I dare not make it in real life. Yet I suspect that plenty of people (though probably not the majority) would agree, but can't speak out about it.

The question is what proportion of sex workers truly, voluntarily, entered that profession (i.e. had viable access to alternatives, and chose not to pursue it).

It's a lot less then 100%.

Re: Good News You Might Have Missed in 2013

#117

Post by forrestthewoods »

techtivist wrote: post #96

It's a little unfortunate that rather than discussing the contents of the piece we are focusing on the individual But I would like to comment on the substance because that is the link that was shared; and avoid all the on and on conflicts about the author of the piece. I hate to be that guy, but while I appreciate the optimistic note (no pun intended), I think we really should introspect on how 2013 was actually a ye…

An increase in inequality isn't a first principle. I'll take a increased inequality that comes with an increase in absolute wealth over no change 10 out of 10 times. Quite frankly inequality isn't something I find particularly meaningful. Don't covet thy neighbor.

Re: Good News You Might Have Missed in 2013

#118

Post by coldtea »

jseliger wrote: post #86
tn13 wrote: post #22

As people in Tech industry we should be very proud of Bill Gates and what he has done with Microsoft and his charity work. A lot of people totally miss the point when they say "hey anybody could do all that if they have enough money". That is simply not true. Charity is not just about throwing money at poor, it is a far more difficult job than say building a company. Working for profit is simpler where clear regulati…

That is simply not true. Charity is not just about throwing money at poor This is an important and underappreciated point. Ken Stern makes it in his book With Charity For All , which I wrote more about here: http://blog.seliger.com/2013/06/02/with-charity-for-all-ken-... . In essence, we spend a lot of money on various charitable efforts without knowing what those efforts are really doing. Foreign aid is probably the…

>Since 1945, I've seen estimates that say the U.S. and Western Europe have donated in the neighborhood of $1 – $2 trillion (with a "t") dollars to various developing countries. It hasn't done much. Why not?

Because these money are not about helping those countries grow. It's about keeping them down, financing local lackeys, directing their progress in ways that benefit those giving the money, pushing political and cultural agendas, etc.

Re: Good News You Might Have Missed in 2013

#119

Post by Shamanmuni »

MetaCosm wrote: post #20
mateuszb wrote: post #4

Things you might have missed in 2013: The Gates Foundation's Hypocritical Investments http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2013/12/gates-foundat...

That article is so cringe-worthy. As if investing in McDonald's is in some way against the goals of the organization. The organization's goal isn't to reduce McDonald's stock price by a few points, or help people who can afford McDonald's eat more healthy. It is to combat, if not cure, Malaria, HIV, Polio, Tuberculosis, Pneumonia, various intestinal problems (millions die a year from diarrhea) and hundreds of other h…

Have you read about all the oil and coal companies that the Foundation invested in? Or the private prisons and military contractors? I mean, maybe they aren't a part of Bill's current pet project, but climate change and human rights are both very important issues, as important as diseases.

I'm shocked that the response seems to be "Where's the problem in investing in companies that make the world a worse place if he uses that money for other good purposes?". The good you can make doesn't magically erase the bad you made.

Re: Good News You Might Have Missed in 2013

#120

Post by braydenm »

If others in the tech industry are keen to contribute to having as big an impact on the world as Bill has, I encourage you to check out the Effective Altruism movement in your area. Effective Altruism overlaps with lean approaches and evidence based action, and many of the proponents are big names in the Valley: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effective_altruism
Post reply on HN