Gates Pledges $750M to Vaccinate Children

chriskzoo5 writes "The Bill and Melinda Gates foundation is pledging $750M to vaccinate children worldwide over the next 10 years. Much maligned for his business practices, is this proof that sometimes the ends justify the means? Let's see if the Linux community can match his generosity."

Comments

viruses

[Bolshoy Pimpovich]

haha... against viruses... har-dee-har-har

Microsoft, not Bill

[shreevatsa]

"Let's see if the Linux community can match his generosity." There cannot be some charity contest between Linux and Windows! Anyway, most of the Linux community's displeasure is with Micro$oft and its activities, not Bill Gates the individual himself

Re:Microsoft, not Bill

[Daengbo]

Carnegie, Rockefeller, Mellon, and now Gates... The robber baron syndrome. It helps them psychologically deal with the things they've done to become super-wealthy.

Re:Microsoft, not Bill

[shreevatsa]

My point exactly.
The Linux community is all about charity, every line of code written, every time someone gets an OS for free, is generosity itself.
On the other hand, this continuous generosity means that they do not have zillions of dollars to publicly give away from time to time.
But you must admit that what Bill Gates gives to charity is indeed a good thing, and he has made many donations. Maybe a small thing for the richest man, but it's still a significant thing.

Re:Microsoft, not Bill

[Von Helmet]

Here's what Jesus thinks about that.

Re:Microsoft, not Bill

[jacobcaz]

• Carnegie, Rockefeller, Mellon, and now Gates... The robber baron syndrome. It helps them psychologically deal with the things they've done to become super-wealthy.

Actually, these people became super-rich because they know how to give their money to useful causes. Check out books like "The Richest Man in Babylon" by George S. Clason or just about any book by Napoleon Hill (Deepak Chopra is another good one, but some people get turned off because he's not as "western" of a writer).

You gotta give it to get it brother. And when Carnegie, Rockefeller, Gates, Morgan, etc. give they can give big.

There ain't nothing wrong with wealth! It's the rentless pursuing of wealth with no other purpose than to build riches that's wrong. Gate's wealth is a by product of his desire for a "computer on every desktop." The wealth is a result of filling a need (and a few predatory practices by the company he founded, I'll admit that). But look at every uber-wealthy person out there and most will fit Gate's M.O. - they were trying to fullfill a vision, the wealth just sorta tagged along.

Re:Microsoft, not Bill

[BlackHawk-666]

Neat, so we all win :-) He gets a cleaner conscience and we get children who aren't dying from polio, rickets, ebola, and all the other dieseases that plague the unfortunate. How could that ever possibly be a bad thing?

Re:Microsoft, not Bill

[LarsWestergren]

Well, I love Linux, but let's put things in perspective. A lot of people contributing to open source are students, or people who love programming. They are giving something (free time, programming talent) they have a lot of. So this quote from Jesus could be applied to us too.

This topic ("Well, as a percentage of his total wealth this is nothing") always comes up when Gates charity is discussed. First of all, he can't give away everything he owns at once, much of it (I presume) is tied up in stocks, selling all at once would cause companies and whole markets plummeting.

Besides, if you look at the total over time, as these people have done, you will see that it does in fact add up to quite a lot over the years. (Assuming, like I have, that the source is reliable).

* $1 billion over 20 years to establish the Gates Millennium Scholarship Program, which will support promising minority students through college and some kinds of graduate school.
* $750 million over five years to the Global Alliance for Vaccines and Immunization, which includes the World Health Organization, the Rockefeller Foundation, Unicef, pharmaceutical companies and the World Bank.
* $350 million over three years to teachers, administrators, school districts and schools to improve America's K-12 education, starting in Washington State.
* $200 million to the Gates Library Program, which is wiring public libraries in America's poorest communities in an effort to close the "digital divide."
* $100 million to the Gates Children's Vaccine Program, which will accelerate delivery of lifesaving vaccines to children in the poorest countries of the world.
* $50 million to the Maternal Mortality Reduction Program, run by the Columbia University School of Public Health.
* $50 million to the Malaria Vaccine Initiative, to conduct research on promising candidates for a malaria vaccine.
* $50 million to an international group called the Alliance for the Prevention of Cervical Cancer.
* $50 million to a fund for global polio eradication, led by the World Health Organization, Unicef, Rotary International and the U.N. Foundation.
* $40 million to the International Vaccine Institute, a research program based in Seoul, South Korea.
* $28 million to Unicef for the elimination of maternal and neonatal tetanus.
* $25 million to the Sequella Global Tuberculosis Foundation.
* $25 million to the International AIDS Vaccine Initiative, which is creating coalitions of research scientists, pharmaceutical companies and governments in developing countries to look for a safe, effective, widely accessible vaccine against AIDS.

Oops, that article was from year 2000. According to the BBC, he has now given away $7.1 billion since 1994.

Flamebait

[Anonymous Coward]

The Linux community will match it when they have as much money as Gates. Not many people or companies have $750Mil to give.

Is it possible to mod a news article as flamebait?

Re:Flamebait

[darco]

I think the part that he is referring to is the line that aid "Let's see if the Linux community can match his generosity". That line is most certainly flamebait.

Bill Gates has been very successful, and he wants to spread it around to good causes. Nothing wrong with that. It's almost expected from someone in his position. It's really silly to somehow pit his generosity against the linux/open-source/free-software community. The two have nothing to do with each other.

One could easily argue that the value to society of open-source and free-software exceed $750M by several times, perhaps more. Saying that Bill Gates is more generous than the open-source/free-software community is misguided and pointless. The two situations are incomparable.

I think it is great that Bill Gates is doing this. But is this article flamebait? Most certainly, if only for the line mentioned above.

Re:Flamebait

[darco]

Jesus christ, the guy gives 3/4 of a billion dollars to help children around the world get vaccinations, and all you can do is make accusations?

You, sir, are a true hater.

The Linux Community?

[Noryungi]

Well, maybe the "Linux Community" can't match that kind of donation, but I'd like to point out the obvious:

1. Mr Gates is the head of a company that sells software for a profit, while the 'Linux Community' often gives its software for free to all comers over the Internet. That's one big difference.
2. I don't think Mr Gates will have any money problems if he ever gets sick. While Patrick Volkerding -- the maintainer of Slackware, the oldest surviving Linux distribution out there -- who has been sick for several months, is asking people to buy Slackware version 10.1 to help him pay his medical bills...

The difference? One of them is someone who can afford to make such a generous donation, while the other is still making his software available for free over the Internet. That makes that last remark pretty insensitive and gratuitous, IMHO.

I know which one I admire the most. But, heck, that's a personal view.

Re:The Linux Community?

[Vellmont]

I think this is fine, and we don't need to belittle them for not having grossly wrenched as much money as possible from people's hands which they can now "generously" give back to causes supporting the poor in the third world.


Belittle? Who's belittling anyone? Stating that free software isn't some grand altruistic venture isn't belittling. "grossly wrenched as much money as possible?" This is software, not food or medicine. While Microsoft has a lot of highly questionable anti-competitive products, they're hardly pharmaceutical companies trying to enforce patents in 3rd world countries for AIDS drugs. (An example of an industry with little morals and high greed).

As far as Gate's generosity, he could easily have horded all his money like most billionaires do. No one is forcing him to give it all away. Heard any stories about Richard Bramson of Virgin giving away billions of dollars? How about Larry Ellison of Oracle? I sure haven't.

My box

[BladeMelbourne]

I would like him to pay for my Windows installation at work to be vaccinated from virus infections.

Will someone please think of the computers?
Oh wait, that should beWill someone please think of the children?

Bill Gates does lots of good

[egyber]

I am friends with the daughter of the head of the Gates Foundation... Bill has told her (my friend) that his goal is to give as much as possible of his money to charity. He actually really cares about the world and his foundation and its work is proof of his commitment.

Many may disagree with Microsoft's practices but Bill Gates is extremely committed to the world.

Re:Bill Gates does lots of good

[robvs68]

Of course it is great that Bill set up the Gates Foundation to help some of the less fortunate in the world. This indicates that he has some heart. However, it does not necessarily indicate that he cares as much as some may think.

Consider this:
Bill's a smart guy and therefore knows that the US government is going to take half of his net worth when he dies. So if he is worth $50B at death, the government gets ~$25B. Realizing this, Bill decides that he'd rather give that money to someone else (ie: the less fortunate in the world). So he creates the Gates Foundation to start siphoning off large chunks of his personal fortune. Let's say, for example, that he ends up giving 80% of his net worth to charity. That's $40B given the assumption above, leaving $5B for the government and $5B for his family.

Under this scenario Bill's family gets a much smaller piece of the $50B pie, but he probably doesn't feel too guilty about leaving his family a paltry $5B, especially since he is dictating where his money goes, not the government.

Re:Bill Gates does lots of good

[Peldor]

As the mega-rich go, Bill is easily the most charitable. Compare the Walton family (collectively worth more than Bill) and you'll find some real tight-fisted bastards (who've probably crushed 100 times the number of small businesses as Microsoft).

Re:Matching the generosity?

[Anonymous Coward]

I can't wait to see the look on some fly-covered African's face when we give him an OS and he has to edit a config file in order to get flash animations of food working on his box... we provide.

Linux community already donates

[scsirob]

There's many Linux clusters hard at work calculating new drugs and new treatments against illnesses.

Linux doesn't cost money, it costs effort. Linux also doesn't donate money, the community donates effort.

Re:Linux community already donates

[daikokatana]

So for every 1 million users of a free OS, the community has donated the equivalent of $100 million.

By stating this, you automatically assume that each and every one of those users WILL donate that $100 to whatever charity cause. I guess the numbers that donate will be "a bit" lower.

While I'm not Bill Gates' biggest fan, I still applaude his example. It's easy to say that, because he is so rich, it's easy for him to donate a lot of money. But you still have to do it.

Most people I know would never donate that (or any) amount of money, no matter how rich they were. And to be honest, nor would I.

Re:Linux community already donates

[ThaReetLad]

I'll take your wager.

Read up on the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation. You will see that Bill has given $27 Billion of his $50 Billion fortune for the charity to manage. IIRC they are having a really tough time giving it away because it earns more interest than it can donate in a co-ordinated fashion.

What ever you think of the guys software and business practices, it is hard to argue that he is an evil man in the face of his generosity.

Re:Linux community already donates

[Sj0]

DAmn straight. By demoninzing Gates in all situations, even donating money to save children, slashdotters/anti microsofters just prove that they're just as stubborn and stupid as many companies, like the member companies of the RIAA and MPAA or SCO, who get under *OUR* skin.

Re:Linux community already donates

[RockClimb]

Actually your numbers are just a little off. He is donating $750M over the next 10 years which comes out to $75M per year. That would be 0.18% of his net worth. Now, I'm betting he makes better than that in interest and dividends per year. So this is a tax shelter for him, nothing more, nothing less. It just happens to be a tax shelter that a some good will come out of.

People are missing that because of the large amount of money. For someone making say $50K a year this would amount to $90 per year. Don't get me wrong, I am glad to see some good coming out of the money.

Having said that, I donated more than yesterday, and I don't even make $50K a year.

Re:Linux community already donates

[Hrothgar The Great]

God, people like you make me want to puke. Your unabashed cynicism, backed up by NOT ONE single reference, but rather a horrid, confusing mess of paranoia and hatred, is like someone punching me in the throat repeatedly every time I read it.

I have a hard time believing that even someone as mind fuckingly insane as YOU can honestly believe that, because you dislike Microsoft Windows, donating money to VACCINATING CHILDREN is somehow ALSO BAD. Good lord, you are a disgusting caricature.

Re:Linux community already donates

[rincebrain]

The poster above, regardless of his Tinfoil Hat Rating, is not arguing that he hates Windows and so everything Gates ever did is bad.

He is arguing that there may be an ulterior motive behind what is done with the money.

By all means, praise Gates for donating money...but in doing so, do not forget the golden maxim: "What could he have accomplished by doing this?"

Admittedly, that strays into Tinfoil Hat territory as well. Look at it this way: you argue that the poster was claiming that what Gates did was bad because of one thing (Windows). I argue that you're claiming that what Gates does is good because of one thing (donating to charity).

People enjoy saying "Actions speak louder than words," but that is a logical fallacy. If I were to commit tax fraud for forty years, and then donate half of the money I possessed as a result of it (which would be a considerable sum) to charity, that would be seen as good. If people knew that I had stolen money from the government (regardless of whether the taxes are right, fair, just, et al.) to do so, they would decry me in the streets.

Just because one does something good does not mean that one is a good person. Keep that in mind.

Re:Linux community already donates

[ThaReetLad]

Unless he's Robin Hood. OK ok, I'm not seriously comparing Bill Gates to Robin Hood, but it's not too far off the mark. Like it or not, you, me and the US government are all rich, and the people Bill G is giving his money to are genuinely poor. As I understand it, when Bill dies virtually all his money will go to charity. OK his children will never have to worry about cash, but neither will be loaded.

I'm not going to argue that he doesn't do bad stuff, but that's what capitalism is all about . Do whatever you can get away with(if you read Marx you see that's the kind of thing which he said would bring down capitalism eventually). If you don't like it, go move to Cuba.

As it happens I don't agree with you about Microsoft destryoying software engineering. I should make clear that I have my MSDN subscription paid for by my employer, but Microsoft really look after their 3rd party developers, because they know that they can make windows stronger by helping and encouraging software development. Some of the Microsoft visual tools are leaps and bounds ahead of their competitors, and their new technology is cool too. OK Avalon is clearly an attempt to lock out firefox, but what do you expect?

Let's see if the Linux community, etc.

[ettlz]

Vaccinating children worldwide can only be a good thing. Indeed, Microsoft pumps a lot of money into various charitable causes --- again, only a good thing.

But what does this have to do with the Linux community? Microsoft's raison d'etre is profit, and given the amount it makes, it has a social obligation. In this way, it fulfils it. The Linux community is driven by the product itself, not sales figures. "Let's see if the Linux community can match his generosity" is not only irrelevant, it verges on being not very nice.

Rubbish

[FunWithHeadlines]

Of course the ends don't justify the means in this case, yet nevertheless this is a good thing the Gates Foundation is doing. It's not an All or Nothing proposition. Gates can be a convicted monopolist who does awful things in the business world while simultaneously spending his money on humanitarian things. Doesn't justify his business crimes. Hey, look at Andrew Carnegie. Similar to Gates in the business world, but he spent his money on lots of good things such as libraries.

If a gangster throws a block party for his neighbors, it doesn't justify all the people he killed in his work. It's still a nice party, and he's still a gangster.

Re:Matching the generosity?

[blastedtokyo]

No you can't, the child's dead before they might possibly be productive (let alone afford) a computer.

Because if the child's not vaccinated, there's a good chance they'll be one of the 10 million who die every year before the age of 5 (source: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/ArticleNews /TPStory/LAC/20050125/VACCINE25/TPInternational/Eu rope).

Re:Small Percentage

[Mr_Silver]

Okay let's say Bill is worth 50 billion dollars on paper. 750 million is something like 1.5% of his total worth?

Given that there are plenty of weathly people who give nothing to charity, anything Bill gives is better than that - whatever the percentage.

Is this a huge amount for him? It would be like if I had a hundred bucks and I gave the homeless guy on the street a $1.50

Unless you live in your parents basement and own nothing, I very much doubt you are worth only $100.

Your post makes it sound like you don't think that his 750 million is particulary generious. Given that he didn't have to make the donation and could have easily kept the money for himself (benefiting no-one but him), I would say you're wrong.

chriskzoo5

[Paradise Pete]

This story looks like both a troll and flamebait, and it gets me to wondering about the submitter. What a shocker. He's a known troll.

Re:Small Percentage

[millwall]

First of all, I'm quite sure that 750 million is more than 1.5% of his total assets.

Second of all, even if it's only 1.5% of his assets, it's a good thing, how many of you have donated 1.5%?

Why don't we all try to donate 1.5% of our assets instead of whining about the poster's flamebait.

credit where credit is due

[MC68000]

I am not exactly a fan of Microsoft, but come on. The knee-jerk anti Microsoft tilt of /. is amazing. I can see it now. There will be some post rated funny talking about how little Gates has spent to vaccinate Windows PCs against viruses, and it will completely trivialize what is being done here. I can't understand how anyone could come up with any negative aspect of this $750 million gift. Does an orphan in Guatemala care about how terrible Windows is? At least give the guy credit where credit is due.

Re:Matching the generosity?

[im_thatoneguy]

"Mommy I'm starving... and thirsty. Also the malaria is really starting to kick in bad, where is all the kindness when we need it.?"

"Well honey, we don't have any medicine, food or safe drinking water. But good news, you can now browse the internet without any risk of your personal information being stolen thanks to a great man named linus and his band of merry men!"

"But mommy, we don't have a computer, or electricity."

"Don't worry sweety. I'm sure as soon as we can safely browse the world wide web, all your troubles will go away."

Re:Er

[dncsky1530]

well it is bill gates that donated the money, not the microsoft windows community. While i dont use MS products Bill Gates is a very generous person compared to many other billionaires, and an article ofhis generosity should not be turned into a flame war. It is probably the wording of the story that will cause this.

Re:Er

[essreenim]

is this proof that sometimes the ends justify the means?

No, this goes some of the way to making up for the means - still positive. But it does not justify the means.

For all you using this to bash Gates...

[Sheetrock]

You make me ill.

If you need a Free Software example to follow, turn to that of the author of Vim who has used his work to entreat users to donate to the needy in Uganda. But don't piss on a $750 million donation to some of the worst off on this planet; that's really low class and unless you've solved the problem already don't disparage the people who are taking a crack at it.

Re:Matching the generosity?

[jb.hl.com]

However, we can provide these children with a free open-source operating
system that runs will on older machines, and comes with thousands of applications,
tutorials and how-to's.

Except THAT ISN'T WHAT THEY NEED OR WANT.

They need food water and vaccines, how fucking Stallman-compliant your operating system is way down the list of priorities.

Flame-Bait, Pure and Simple.

[data1]

The very airs the submitter adopts is obviously geared towards riling up a negative response against Gates. I think most slashdotters will realize this and see the donation for what it is - providing help to the less fortunate and not an avenue to decry Gates for not giving 99% of his net worth.

Re:Er

[Platinum Dragon]

It is probably the wording of the story that will cause this.

If I had mod points, I'd mod you up.

If we could moderate stories, I would have voted this one down. The act itself is worthy of praise, especially contrasted with Gates' business tactics. The submitter had no reason to insert those last two statements except to provoke negative comments. The "Linux Community" will have a helluva time being able to donate $750 million to people who desperately need some form of necessity, because many (most? almost all?) members of that community don't have anything close to the available cash or equivalents that Gates has at his fingertips.

"Do the ends justify the means?" Fuck no, and shame on the submitter for even turning this into a dicksize contest and inserting controversy where none should be needed. Gates' generosity does not justify his company's monopolistic tactics aimed at wiping out healthy competition (as a believer in the free market might say). I can donate $25 towards the purchase of necessary vaccines, and that in itself is a good act. Does the amount of money involved make the means any more or less justifiable? What is the metric for justifying the means?

Re:Er

[ajs318]

Some of us think that health is more important than "intellectual property". If it wasn't for the big patent-wielding pharmaceutical companies charging whatever they like for life-saving drugs and vaccines, do you suppose the cost that the WHO has to bear would be any less?

If only it was as easy to steal chemical formulas as it is to steal software .....

Slashdot makes me laugh

[Disc2]

some guy has donated a HUGE amount of money to charity, and all he get's is

"it's only loose change to him, I'm not impressed" oh come on, how many of you have honestly donated %1.5 of your assets?
and
"the linux community is providing free software for the people in deprived countries, I know which I prefer" yeah, and I'm sure they'll be greatful for the free sopftware when they have terminal illnesses.

some people really need to grow up. Whatever your feelings on Bill Gates as head of the evil empire, I do not see how you can possibly castigate him for his acts of charity.

Re:Er

[Amiga Trombone]

What are you talking about? Gates has always been a huge charity donor.

I always find it humorous when rich people are lauded for giving away their money, and damned for earning it in the first place.

In the process of earning his money, Gates' licensing DOS and it's descendants to all comers created a standard hardware platform for personal computers, thereby forcing hardware vendors to compete on price and innovation. This in turn spurred rapid technical innovation and price reductions, making computers affordable enough that nearly everyone could own one. This in turn facilitated the growth of ancillary hardware, software, and tech support industries, providing thousands, if not millions, of people a living. The propagation of personal computers in turn allowed for the explosive growth of the internet, which in turn created a demand for broadband service, thereby triggering a revolution in the communications industry as well.

And you could go on all day listing the scientific advancements and economic opportunities made possible by the availability of cheap computing power.

Bill Gates may have given $10 million for AIDS awareness in Africa, but for all that, how much of an impact has that made on AIDS? Damn little, as far as I can see.

Ironically, while the wealthy are damned for earning their money and lauded for giving it away, Gates, like most of the filthy rich capitalists, did more for the "Good of Society" and the advancement of humanity in the process of earning his money than he will ever conceivably be able to do by giving it away.

Re:Er

[Frenetic_Alphabet]

Well Said!

There are two issues here.

The first being that Bill Gates is donating a sizeable amount of money to charity and that is wonderful and very kind. Regardless of all the people that hate Bill Gates, donating money to a charity is still a very noble thing to do, you have to at least admit that.

Secondly there's the asinine comment about whether or not the Linux community can match his generosity...I don't think you can even compare the two considering the differences between them. One is a major multi-national company and the other is a large group of people working on a more or less free product that doesn't generate mass amounts of revenue. Now why did the OP have to go and fuck up a story with a positive spin by making it into a bitter competition and finger pointing fiasco?

I can match Gates' genorosity.

[cgenman]

Let's see, expressed as a total of my reserve capital... minus outstanding debts... carry the one... I've donated twice as much as Bill, with my 20 dollar donation to the Tsunami relief fund.

In general I find the kind of people likely to give their money away, are not the kind of people likely to have any money to give.

(No offence meant to Mr. Gates, as he has given a lot more of his money to charitable causes than a lot of people, and even more importantly he seems to really care about them. No matter what you think about his business practices, the Bill and Melinda gates foundation has the largest endowment of any chairitible organization created in recent memory and will be doing positive things for the world long after the man has taken his blue screen of death to the black screen of death. Plus the B&M tend to be focused on practical things, and are pretty good about how they deal out grants.)

Bullshit Article

[Tom]

This entire article just blew up my bullshit detector.

First, the Borg icon - this is the Gates Foundation, not Microsoft. As much as I despise Gates, his Foundation is doing a lot of good things.

Second, the business practice hit. Again, this is not Microsoft donating anything to anyone, it's the Gates Foundation. While Bill's money is largely M$ stuff, the shot is just cheap and unwarranted.

Three, the dig at the Open Source community. I'm sure if the community had as much money as Gates, we'd be matching his donation before the day is up, just to show it. But we don't. You can't compare the rich man's $1000 donation to the poor man's $100 donation. No matter how you compare it, in one way or the other it won't be fair.

Finally, the article as a whole - what the f*ck has this to do with "news for nerds" ??? And if it's "stuff that matters", how come we don't read about any similar donations made by other people or foundations?

Both the article author and the editor who let this through should be ashamed of themselves. I'm sure at least 20 more worthy articles were left out today.

Re:What about Old Europe?

[Handbrewer]

Why are you proud as a citizen of a country when one citizen does something good? Why does it make you feel superior?

Come back when YOU do something good instead of just throwing flamebait around. I honestly dont care which country gave most, but if we look at money divided in number of citizens of each contry, "old" europe is still in the lead. But i think its good we all chipped in to help the victims of the Tsunami. So stop using it as a dickwaving contest.

Unbelievable

[truesaer]

The number of people who are acting like this is some kind of paltry donation just because Gates has a net worth of 50 billion is unbelievable. First, a lot of his assets are not liquid. You can just sell 30 billion of Microsoft stock by clicking a couple buttons in your eTrade account. But that isn't the real point...the real point is that

1) You can only give so much to a single cause. Its not necessarily possible to even handle huge donations even if you spread them around to a bunch of groups because there just aren't enough people to use the funds.

2) Gates has donated billions in the past and will donate many billions in the future. This is just one single donation. Whats the big fuss? Its like arguing that dropping a dollar in a Salvation Army kettle makes you cheap despite the fact that you donate to lots of other charities throughout the year.

You have to dig pretty deep...

[TANSTAAFL_Guy]

OK, so maybe this is a little redundant. But it seems that only a few slashdotters can tell the difference between Bill, Microsoft, and the Gates Foundation ...

Bill is the wealthiest man in the world. But what many people forget is that Bill comes from money, OLD MONEY. His family are the kind of people who sit on boards of directors and have dinner with US Senators kind of money. The kind who drop out of Harvard and not some state school. And they are also the kind of people who don't just phone it in to Jerry Lewis every year or give to the office United Way campaign to get that warm-and-fuzzy feeling, but who create friggin' foundations. Bill provided some serious seed money to create the foundation's endowment, which was then invested and grown and is gradually being given away to worthy causes. Its not like Bill's personal signature is at the bottom of each check the Gates Foundation hands out (at least, I wouldn't think that he is that hands on).

Yes, Microsoft is the evil empire blah blah blah ...

And the Gates Foundation does good things in the world. Only a drooling idiot would argue that providing funding to fight AIDS or vaccinate children against common (and some not so common) diseases is somehow bad. Go take your dumb ass and your tinfoil hat and crawl back inside your parent's basement. If only more of the truly wealthy people in this country felt a similar responsibility to give something back to their communities, the nation, and the world instead of just buying another Ferrari or vacation home...maybe the world would be just a slightly better place...maybe.