Injecting this money may create inflation and accidentally increase poverty as more money becomes freely available and circulating.
Could be in some way better to just destroy it ?
381–390 of 704 posts
Injecting this money may create inflation and accidentally increase poverty as more money becomes freely available and circulating.
Could be in some way better to just destroy it ?
His foundation really does seem to do a good job with 'effective altruism'. There's a reason they're marked as secondary beneficiaries on all my accounts. Also, as a recommendation, you guys should look into whether your employer matches charitable donations to 501Cs in any amount. I find giving a solid chunk of my discretionary budget to charity every year lends a sense of purpose to a job that wouldn't otherwise ha…
Have to disagree about the 'effective' part. Gates seems to have had a knack for massive inefficiencies and negative externalities in every way that he has impacted the world. Think of how many man-hours (measured in human lifetimes) have been wasted due to the shortcomings of various MicroSoft programs. Weigh that against his health initiatives in the third world. Or the impact of dimming the sun by depositing massi…
You could pick some slightly less sci-fi measures like "number of trivially preventable deaths from diseases for which we have vaccines", for example.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> A government is an entity with authority to tell you what you have to do If it is authoritarian, perhaps, but even that is still a matter of a group of people. Most seem to believe that government should be democratic. You may not find yourself in a democratic state, but that would only continue to contribute to what makes the day funny. Perhaps you didn't read the entire thread and are posting this without underst…
No, all governments have the authority to tell people what to do. Some governments operate within a legal framework that limits that authority in many ways, but if an organization has no authority over the people who live in a given area then it isn't a government.
But, again, that government is the very people we're talking about, at least as far as a democracy goes. Although even in the case of an authoritarian government, the individual authority is only as strong as the people are willing to go along with recognizing it, so it is not really that much different. No magic here, just people.
You could maybe compensate all the people and companies you put out of business by throwing your weight around in the 80s and 90s. Maybe throw Jerry Kaplan a billion or two for fucking up his launch of the Go Communicator. Seeing downvotes, which means you haven't been around long enough to remember all the shit Gates pulled back in the go-go 90s. ANY new technology would instantly get a press release from Microsoft…
My (bigger) problem with his legacy is Windows on every government (or otherwise important) computer and all the botnets and compromised elections, espionage and destruction enabled by it over the years.
Any system will eventually attract corrupt people.
>While I respect anyone’s decision to spend their days playing pickleball, that life isn’t quite for me—at least not full time. I’m lucky to wake up every day energized to go to work Bit of an unfair comparison though.. Most people dont retire from a job where you're literally handing people money. That said, I'm a huge fan Bill's work post-microsoft :)
Still the same greedy asshole though.
Say what you want, but I respect this a lot. Sure as hell beats giving it all to your kids.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The state goes out of their way to encourage it. Let's say you just won the startup lottery and you've got a significant amount of now tradable stock. Some of which was early exercised and the cost basis is effectively zero. Some of which was RSUs or non-qualified options and you owe ordinary income. And that you're way over into the top tax brackets. If your zero cost basis stock is Qualified Small Business Stock (Q…
That is not their argument. You lowering your tax rate and giving that money to charity isn't magicking more money into the world, it is just a different allocation. The government's tax income is allocated by the masses (in theory anyway). It is fair and dispassionate. Philanthropy / charity is picking winners and losers based on your personal whims, and for many it is about gaining social capital.
In order to improve global health or address other issues that impact countries beyond where you live, the government (even an idealized version without waste, corruption, or political games) might not be the most effective way to accomplish this.
How much power is concentrated in the hands of individuals... It's great that Gates is choosing to use that power philanthropically, but it also raises questions about the long-term role of private wealth in solving public problems.
He talks about this in today's NY Times interview and he is pretty unsparing against Elon Musk in particular for his role in killing USAID. Says he is directly complicit in killing children while at the same time, he is technically still a signatory of the Giving Pledge.
>The Gates Foundation’s mission remains rooted in the idea that where you are born should not determine your opportunities. Arguably he's already done so much for billions of people. Had typing on computers not became the main way businesses communicate , anyone with bad, handwriting would be stuck in menial work. When I was growing up in the 90s my hand writing was so bad it was assumed I would never amount to anyth…
Is this satire? Bill Gates didn’t invent computers, he just started the company that won the PC revolution, very talented and intelligent, but also well placed and lucky.