__/ [ John Locke ] on Friday 20 April 2007 06:36 \__
>>
>>This is not about Microsoft being nice to poor people. At present, it's
>>unable to get /any/ money back, so it's trying to squeeze a few extra
>>bucks. Recall what Ballmer and Gates said about getting children "kind of
>>addicted". It's about lockin and control. Microsoft is not just a software
>>company (and neither is Google, which now boats profiles of many millions
>>of people).
>>
> Your're eactly right on this and I think what they're try to do is
> disgusting. How many of these people have ever benn to a 3rd
> world country ? I would say none.
I they go to such country, they bring the press with them (or look for it).
It's a public relations stunt. In other cases, there are hidden motives.
Here is a recent example, being a 'humanitarian' trip,
Gates promotes PC training in Colombia
,----[ Quote ]
| The government and Microsoft also two signed agreements Monday
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
| stressing Uribe's strong commitment to Microsoft products at a
| time other countries in the region are promoting the non-proprietary
| Linux operating system.
` ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070319/ap_on_hi_te/colombia_bill_gates
As Florida's Men and Black showed us, Microosft is deep in politics as well.
In case you have not read this, here's another something:
Politics and tech companies: follow the money
,----[ Quote ]
| Microsoft took first place with $651,100 given out, while
| Hewlett-Packard gave only $185,550, and Gateway gave a paltry
| $2,000. Microsoft's donations certainly illustrate well the true
| size of the company and the extent of its political concerns.
|
| [...]
|
| For instance, Microsoft's PAC spent $1.7 million in the 2006 election
| cycle, but only a third of this went to federal candidates. What
| happened to the rest? It went to local campaigns, paid out a few
| thousand dollars at a time to groups like "Boal for Iowa House" in
| Ankeny, IA. It also funded other PACs like the "Associated Republicans
| of Texas" and the "Blue Dog Political Action Committee." No race is
| apparently too small to be funded; even Indiana State Representative
| Terri Austin of Anderson, IN got $500.
| Lobbyists
|
| But the real money isn't even given to the candidates directly. It
| goes to lobbyists, which can be safer investments since they stand no
| chance of losing at the polls. The complete-year figures from 2005
| show that Microsoft spent $8.7 million on lobbyist expenses. Almost
| a million dollars of that money went to Covington & Burling, a
| lobbying firm that also represents the National Football League and
| the Pharmaceutical Research & Manufacturers of America. Microsoft's
| total spending on lobbying has risen substantially from the $4
| million it spent in 1998.
|
| [...]
|
| Where does it come from?
|
| Although some of this money comes from large employee donations,
| most of it does not. Take Microsoft, for instance; the Center for
| Responsive Politics says that the company received only $302,599
| from individual donors who gave more than $200 in this election
| cycle, only a small fraction of the $1.7 million actually spent.
| As is typical, much of this money came from the company's top
| brass, while the rest was made up of small contributions.
|
| The maximum individual contribution to a PAC is $5,000 a year.
| Melinda, whose occupation is listed in Federal Election Commission
| records as "homemaker," regularly contributes this amount, as does
| Bill. Steve Ballmer coughed up, too. Microsoft can use general
| company funds to support the PAC and its operations, but cannot
| give directly to candidates.
`----
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20061110-8194.html
--
~~ With kind regards
Roy S. Schestowitz | Bottom-post: as English goes from top to bottom
http://Schestowitz.com | Open Prospects ¦ PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
Tasks: 127 total, 1 running, 123 sleeping, 0 stopped, 3 zombie
http://iuron.com - knowledge engine, not a search engine
|
|
