Slashdot Mirror


Bill Gates's Plan To Improve Our World

An anonymous reader writes "Bill Gates has written an article in Wired outlining his strategy to improve people's lives through philanthropy and investment in technology and the sciences. He says, 'We want to give our wealth back to society in a way that has the most impact, and so we look for opportunities to invest for the largest returns. That means tackling the world's biggest problems and funding the most likely solutions. That's an even greater challenge than it sounds. I don't have a magic formula for prioritizing the world's problems. You could make a good case for poverty, disease, hunger, war, poor education, bad governance, political instability, weak trade, or mistreatment of women. ...I am a devout fan of capitalism. It is the best system ever devised for making self-interest serve the wider interest. This system is responsible for many of the great advances that have improved the lives of billions—from airplanes to air-conditioning to computers. But capitalism alone can't address the needs of the very poor. This means market-driven innovation can actually widen the gap between rich and poor. ... We take a double-pronged approach: (1) Narrow the gap so that advances for the rich world reach the poor world faster, and (2) turn more of the world's IQ toward devising solutions to problems that only people in the poor world face.'"

6 of 445 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Most of the problems listed have a single cause by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Religion is just one form of control. Get rid of it, and something else will be used, be it patriotism, racism, drugs, financial ruin or sports.

  2. Things have changed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Most of the hate for Microsoft was due to their monopoly status; not so much anymore. That monopoly let them sit on their laurels and collect money without needing to produce the best product quality. Today, MS the _underdog_ in a lot of hugely important markets. Furthermore, Gates is only a Chairman at MS anymore and has little or nothing to do with day to day operations. He's spent a an enormous amount of time, effort, and money sincerely trying (and in many cases succeeding) to make things a little better for humans everywhere. People need to let go of the hate, it's no longer useful in this context.

    1. Re:Things have changed by davydagger · · Score: 5, Insightful

      that said, they still sit on their lareuls and collect money via patent trolling.

      Bill Gates can talk about being a do-gooder when he renounces patent trolling, or more aptly sells his stock in monsanto, and denounces that too.

  3. Philantropy for dummies by Tom · · Score: 5, Insightful

    'We want to give our wealth back to society in a way that has the most impact, and so we look for opportunities to invest for the largest returns.

    Well, Mr. Gates, here's how:

    Don't take away their wealth in the first place.

    It's well-established fact that the poor make the best use of money. There is less waste and more immediate progress than with any organisation or institute. Micro-credits are a blasting success wherever they are granted in the interest of helping people. (they fail when the same banks that caused the housing bubble/burst get in on the game hoping to make a quick buck, because they don't screen the applicants).

    Monopoly rent is known to damage the economy disproportionately. For every $ you give to charity now, Mr. Gates, you've already taken two away.

    "Don't be a greedy bastard." is a much, much better formula for helping other people than giving away even most of your money. Because it's not a zero-sum game, it's not just redistribution of wealth, the 1% gain most of their wealth not just by taking it from the rest, but by causing damage in excess of their profit.

    --
    Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
  4. Re:Most of the problems listed have a single cause by rubycodez · · Score: 5, Insightful

    1. statistically, poor people likely to have a lot kids, whether religous or not. well off people do not, whether religous or not. most well off people in first world countries have a religion, but they don't even have enough kids to maintain population

    2. people do what they want and justify it whether they have religion or not, it's human nature

    3. Many religions have hard work and self-improvement as commandment

    4. Atheists also engage in crazy talk and actions, and have even outdone Hitler in body count on at least two occasions

    5. Science, engineering, medicine, psychology and philosphy have been used as basic for being self-righteous just as much as religion

    Humans are troublesome creatures, the problems will persist with and without religion

  5. Re:Fan of capitalism by Bogtha · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The problem I have with Bill Gates is essentially the broken window fallacy. Microsoft had a stranglehold on the computer industry. They held back the computer industry by years. A decade even! In the web development industry alone, we're still shaped by the impact Internet Explorer 6 left - which was released in 2001, twelve years ago. What economic value would Be Inc. have brought? What charitable donations would have resulted from that company? Or Netscape? Or any of the tens of thousands of companies Microsoft had a deleterious impact upon?

    He has since spent some of the money he earned holding back some of the most important industries in the world trying to help people. That's good. He didn't have to do that. But people judge that work as if it stands alone. It doesn't. The work he does with the money he has comes at the expense of the tens of thousands of companies that were held back or destroyed by the illegal and monopolistic actions he took.

    I think it's unlikely that, economically speaking, the actions he took were a net win for society. Yes, once he had the money, he did good things with it. But the cost to society for him to obtain that money is far too high in my eyes. Higher than the value he brought.

    Essentially, he took it upon himself to be Robin Hood. He stole from the rich - Western society - to give to the poor. However I don't see any reason to believe that the theft he perpetrated - the value he stole from society - was less than the value he brought to society. And I don't think it was his right to commit those crimes to do those things.

    By all means, judge him for what he has brought to society. But you should not do that without judging him for all that he has took from society as well.

    --
    Bogtha Bogtha Bogtha