amicus_curious <ACDC@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> "yttrx" <yttrx@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> news:QTUbh.3122$Yy1.954@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Erik Funkenbusch <erik@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> On 30 Nov 2006 22:43:08 -0800, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>>>
>>>> Gates Foundation expands worldwide Internet initiative
>>>>
>>>> ,----[ Quote ]
>>>>| Latvia's government will provide more than $21.1 million and
>>>>| Microsoft Latvia will provide more than $7.9 million in software.
>>>> `---- ^^^^^^^^^^^
>>>>
>>>> http://biz.yahoo.com/bizj/061130/1383732.html?.v=1
>>>>
>>>> Bill Gates and Microsoft see a win-win situation here. People are
>>>> locked in to Microsoft products and at the same time they are perceived
>>>> as generous. It's similar to the issue of coupons for settlement in
>>>> antitrust cases. Software does not cost anything to manufacture
>>>> (replicate rather).
>>>
>>> As usual, Roy, your dishonest headlines are no surprise.
>>>
>>> The part you "forgot" to quote said this:
>>>
>>> "The largest of the three grants will go to Latvia, which will use $16.2
>>> million of the Gates money to put at least three computers in every
>>> library
>>> and to equip buildings with broadband and wireless connectivity. "
>>>
>>> In other words, The gates foundation is providing money, not software.
>>> 16.2 Million, to buy computers. Microsoft Latvia is donating software,
>>> but
>>> the gates foundation is not, unlike what your dishonest headline
>>> portrays.
>>
>> Nice of bill and mindy to donate so much to the homeless and poverty
>> problem
>> right there in Seattle too.
>>
>> Oh wait...THEY HAVENT GIVEN A FUCKING CENT.
>>
>> Asshole.
>>
>>
> It seems rather ignoble to complain about Bill Gates' largess to the world
> and with such vulgarity as well. The truth of the matter is that tens of
> millions of dollars have been given to Seattle area chartities in addition
> to the grants given worldwide. Quite a bit of the money given by the Gates
> Foundation to Kinsgs County United Way finds its way to the homeless and
> proverty stricken.
>
> Being petty is not effective advocacy.
>
Actually, I know all about it. They're called "whales" in the charity
world. Within the confines of the world in which they made their money (the
ocean) they're graceful, potent beings. But put them on land (charity
work) and they flop around horrifically until someone has the decency to
roll them back into the ocean.
This comes from one of the more common psychological effects of having
made one's self a fortune---that the expertise required to do so perforates
the boundaries of the environment in which the money was gathered and
applies equally to any other environment in which the "whale" may become
involved.
To put it a bit more succinctly, Bill and Mindy think they know what
the world needs, and they're throwing their piles of money at it because
it makes them feel good. This is a noble pursuit, to be sure.
But it's also very highly inefficient and wasteful. For example, it would
cost just a little over 65 billion dollars to end world hunger forever.
If world hunger is ended, there are more healthy people. More healthy people,
more healthy workers. More healthy workers, more industry. More
industry, firmer economic stability. Firmer economic stability, fewer
border struggles, etc etc etc. But instead, Bill and Mindy throw billions
at the AIDS epidemic in africa because they think that buying more local
african labs and distribution points will help. The reality is that more
african labs and distribution points for pharmeceuticals will only mean
more powerful warlords and criminals, since more than 80% of the pharmaceutical
trade on the conteninent of africa is controlled by organized criminal
syndicates.
Which Bill and Mindys money in no way affects at all.
So you see, they're very noble and everything, but also very, very naive
when it comes to charity work. They're whales.
-----yttrx
--
http://www.yttrx.net
|
|
