4 ms·
By decreasing the amount of wealth that is necessary for a human person to remain alive - for example by introducing a new vaccine that allows a large (5+) fami
by metra 17y ago
By decreasing the amount of wealth that is necessary for a human person to remain alive - for example by introducing a new vaccine that allows a large (5+) family in unsanitary conditions to have all of their children reach adulthood - these sorts of programs in undeveloped countries actually create more poverty then they solve.
Stated more simply: It is good that children in poor countries are dying because if they had lived then they would have created more poverty.
How is this getting any upvotes? marciovm, Gates isn't spending this money to play up his image to the American public and to tug at America's heart strings. He's doing this because it's right. Giving people vaccines to live is right. Letting them die because it might create less poverty isn't - it's missing the point that all lives are important.
I completely agree that empowering the economies of developing nations is a very high priority. Higher GDP's lead to longer life, lower infant mortality, more education, less children per mother (because the opportunity cost of having a child is higher once the mother gets a high salary), etc. However, researching vaccines is just as important and necessary for developing countries that are crippled by HIV/AIDS, malaria and tuberculosis.
- maxwin 17y agoI agree. Bill is saving tens of millions lives. I am disappointed that Marciovm'sfirst reaction is to judge Bill's great effort and criticize him as a person who just want to get good names. This certainly isn't true. Even if it is true, it is not important/relevant because he is still saving millions.
- marciovm123 17y agoOk, I guess I deserve ad hominem if I hinted at it. I grew up in Brazil and that makes you more cynical then growing up in California. When you live in a place like that, you learn that just because something sounds good doesn't mean it is. I'm also a graduate student at MIT working on cancer nanotechnology. When not being provocative online I spent all my hours in lab developing tools for oncologists to detect cancer earlier and treat it better. I have a patent from my undergrad research at Berkeley for a needle-free drug delivery device that is moving through animal trials to hopefully make injections less painful for people (even kids - think of the kids!). I also spent a ton of time making the MIT Clean Energy Prize into a national organization, to help students across the US get access to capital and mentorship so they can start clean energy companies when they graduate. Is that altruistic enough for you?
- maxwin 17y agoYes, Great work. I guess i just misunderstood what you said in the earlier post.
- fuzzmeister 17y agoWhile I am quite cynical about many situations in the world, I absolutely reject cynicism here: preventing the deaths of children is good. I don't care how poor their country is, or how likely they are to grow up into poverty. They still have a chance, even if a small chance, to grow up and make something of themselves. No child should ever be left to die because statistics say they will have something we judge to be a "bad" life.
- aneesh 17y agoChill out -- marciovm is a great guy. Regardless of which side you're on, it's a healthy debate to have.