• Welcome to the Internet Infidels Discussion Board.

Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation

 
 
 
NobleSavage

NobleSavage

Veteran Member
Joined
Apr 28, 2003
Messages
3,079
Location
127.0.0.1
Basic Beliefs
Atheist
The other thread on Bill Gates brought on the new topic.

The Gates Foundation is considered the largest foundation it the world. They are completely transparent. It was started with $30 some billion of Gates money. Warren Buffet and the Oracle guy Larry Ellison have donated their fortunes to the group as well.

Would we have been better off if the government redistributed their wealth? I'm going to go with a firm no.
 
Wait, you are arguing about wealth redistribution, you do know that these guys make more than the money they use to start foundations, you know like John D Rockefeller and JP Morgan?
 
NobleSavage said:
The other thread on Bill Gates brought on the new topic.

The Gates Foundation is considered the largest foundation it the world. They are completely transparent. It was started with $30 some billion of Gates money. Warren Buffet and the Oracle guy Larry Ellison have donated their fortunes to the group as well.

Would we have been better off if the government redistributed their wealth? I'm going to go with a firm no.
Click to expand...

As Nice Squirrel implied, you've set up a false dichotomy. These folks have more money than God and more than many generations of their families could ever need. Take more than half of it away in taxes and they still have so much left that funding these foundations require no real sacrifice on their part, just very big numbers changing on a hard drive somewhere.

In addition, Bill Gates has that money to spread around because his parents had money to send him to a very expensive grade school (Currently $30k per year) with highly paid teachers and state of the art facilities, including being among the first schools in the world to have a computer "terminal" in the late 1960's, which was brought there via the efforts of those motivated highly paid teachers. More redistributed wealth would pay for both facilities and better qualified (which requires better paid) teachers for all kids, so they could all get the massive "hand out" like Gates got growing up.
 
This need not be a false dichotomy. Assume Gates lost $36 Billion in taxes and never set up the Foundation.
 
NobleSavage said:
This need not be a false dichotomy. Assume Gates lost $36 Billion in taxes and never set up the Foundation.
Click to expand...

Why would we assume so? We can also assume he hadn't stolen access to the Harvard computers and was unable to work on his own projects.
 
NobleSavage said:
Nice Squirrel said:
Why would we assume so? We can also assume he hadn't stolen access to the Harvard computers and was unable to work on his own projects.
Click to expand...

Fine fuck it. Never mind.
Click to expand...

According to most conservatives, Gates is already way over-taxed. Yet, he still set up his foundation, suggesting that when the uber-rich has billions taken from them in taxes, it does little to impact their charitable giving. Theoretically this makes sense, since the actual impact upon their life is completely unnoticeable whether or not they give to charity when they have 20 billion or after the gov took 10 billion of it. Also, such philanthropy is as much about themselves and their "legacy" as anything, which is why their names are usually stamped all over everything they give. The personal incentive for such philanthropy still exists, even when the gov is already doing things with their tax dollars to help people, especially if they are getting personal credit.

Besides that, what valid inferences can be drawn from looking at a sample size of 1? Why focus only on Gates? What about all the rich people who use their wealth for social harm, such as funding The Discovery Institute, anti-gay organizations, and various anti-science organizations that oppose all forms of moral, social, and environmental progress (i.e., every conservative "think-tank")?


There is a great deal of "charity" that is given in order to harm people rather than help them.
 
OK, would the $36B Gates gave to charity (not including Buffet and Ellison's billions) have been better administrated by the government?
 
NobleSavage said:
OK, would the $36B Gates gave to charity (not including Buffet and Ellison's billions) have been better administrated by the government?
Click to expand...

Are you suggesting that wealthy people like Gates, Buffet, and Ellison should not be taxed at all, then?
 
NobleSavage said:
OK, would the $36B Gates gave to charity (not including Buffet and Ellison's billions) have been better administrated by the government?
Click to expand...

Yes and no. As per the criticisms posted, yes the government has been doing an excellent job on education with the exception of inner city African Americans. And Alabama and Mississippi. There is always room for improvement, but despite the hype, our schools are not failing. Yes, the foundation is blocking efforts of the World Health Organization to effectively manage the ebola outbreaks in Africa.
 
Nice Squirrel said:
NobleSavage said:
OK, would the $36B Gates gave to charity (not including Buffet and Ellison's billions) have been better administrated by the government?
Click to expand...

Yes and no. As per the criticisms posted, yes the government has been doing an excellent job on education with the exception of inner city African Americans. And Alabama and Mississippi. There is always room for improvement, but despite the hype, our schools are not failing. Yes, the foundation is blocking efforts of the World Health Organization to effectively manage the ebola outbreaks in Africa.
Click to expand...


http://www.gatesfoundation.org/Media-Center/Press-Releases/2014/09/Gates-Foundation-Commits-$50%20Million-to-Support-Emergency-Response-to-Ebola

To date, the Gates Foundation has committed more than $10 million of the $50 million to fight the Ebola outbreak, including $5 million to WHO for emergency operations and R&D assessments and $5 million to the U.S. Fund for UNICEF to support efforts in Liberia, Sierra Leone and Guinea to purchase essential medical supplies, coordinate response activities, and provide at-risk communities with life-saving health information. An additional $2 million will also be committed immediately to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to support incident management, treatment, and health care system strengthening.

In August, Nigeria responded to the current crisis by opening an Emergency Operations Center (EOC) in Lagos, with support from the foundation and the Dangote Foundation. Leveraging expertise and lessons from the national polio program, the EOC has been at the center of an aggressive push by the federal and state governments to contain the spread of the virus, and there is cautious optimism that this prompt action may have helped avert a broader outbreak.
Click to expand...
 
Nice Squirrel said:
NobleSavage said:
OK, would the $36B Gates gave to charity (not including Buffet and Ellison's billions) have been better administrated by the government?
Click to expand...

Yes and no. As per the criticisms posted, yes the government has been doing an excellent job on education with the exception of inner city African Americans. And Alabama and Mississippi. There is always room for improvement, but despite the hype, our schools are not failing. Yes, the foundation is blocking efforts of the World Health Organization to effectively manage the ebola outbreaks in Africa.
Click to expand...

Where I live the Catholic schools do a better job. The average cost to educate a student in a Catholic school is between $6,000-$8,000. The cost to educate a student in the public school is between $10,000-$14,000.
 
doubtingt said:
NobleSavage said:
Fine fuck it. Never mind.
Click to expand...

According to most conservatives, Gates is already way over-taxed. Yet, he still set up his foundation, suggesting that when the uber-rich has billions taken from them in taxes, it does little to impact their charitable giving. Theoretically this makes sense, since the actual impact upon their life is completely unnoticeable whether or not they give to charity when they have 20 billion or after the gov took 10 billion of it. Also, such philanthropy is as much about themselves and their "legacy" as anything, which is why their names are usually stamped all over everything they give. The personal incentive for such philanthropy still exists, even when the gov is already doing things with their tax dollars to help people, especially if they are getting personal credit.

Besides that, what valid inferences can be drawn from looking at a sample size of 1? Why focus only on Gates? What about all the rich people who use their wealth for social harm, such as funding The Discovery Institute, anti-gay organizations, and various anti-science organizations that oppose all forms of moral, social, and environmental progress (i.e., every conservative "think-tank")?


There is a great deal of "charity" that is given in order to harm people rather than help them.
Click to expand...

And my tax dollars go to wars I don't support and the killing of children by drones.
 
NobleSavage said:
Nice Squirrel said:
Yes and no. As per the criticisms posted, yes the government has been doing an excellent job on education with the exception of inner city African Americans. And Alabama and Mississippi. There is always room for improvement, but despite the hype, our schools are not failing. Yes, the foundation is blocking efforts of the World Health Organization to effectively manage the ebola outbreaks in Africa.
Click to expand...

Where I live the Catholic schools do a better job. The average cost to educate a student in a Catholic school is between $6,000-$8,000. The cost to educate a student in the public school is between $10,000-$14,000.
Click to expand...

So it's more expensive at a Catholic school.

Figure half the public school budget is special ed, something the Catholic school doesn't have to pay for.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom