3 ms·

Without entering the debate regarding whether Gates foundation does more good than damage, it seems a bit of a stretch to say that this is unrelated to his earl

Without entering the debate regarding whether Gates foundation does more good than damage, it seems a bit of a stretch to say that this is unrelated to his earlier business practices. It's fair to imagine that those practices have contributed to put him in a situation where he can do what he does now.

clarkevans 7y ago
Conversely, those same practices prevented others from being in a position where they could have likewise been generous. The iron fist of concentrated power, even when wrapped in a velvet glove of generosity, is simply bad for society.
- BubRoss 7y ago
  Interestingly, one of the things short sellers noticed from investigating corrupt and dishonest companies is that they frequently use charitable deeds to compensate for the damage they do as a company.
wootie512 7y ago
Is there a debate about whether or not his foundation is doing more good than damage? I'd like to learn more about it. I find it interesting how difficult it seems to do philanthropy that has long lasting benefits without damaging some party.
TheOtherHobbes 7y ago
Based on his history, it's absolutely fair to question his competence and his judgement. The Microsoft years proved that he was good at making money using dominate-a-market monopolist techniques. That's exactly the wrong personality profile for someone trying to do effective philanthropy, which requires unusual empathy and cultural sensitivity, as well as tactical cleverness. Gates - arguably - demonstrated the latter, albeit only in a very specific and (IMO) self-serving way. He also made plenty of spectacular strategic errors at Microsoft which harmed MS customers, MS competitors, and computer users in general. So his record of strategic foresight is patchy at best. And there is no evidence at all that he has any unusual talent for empathy or cultural awareness.

clarkevans 7y ago

Conversely, those same practices prevented others from being in a position where they could have likewise been generous. The iron fist of concentrated power, even when wrapped in a velvet glove of generosity, is simply bad for society.

BubRoss 7y ago
Interestingly, one of the things short sellers noticed from investigating corrupt and dishonest companies is that they frequently use charitable deeds to compensate for the damage they do as a company.

wootie512 7y ago

Is there a debate about whether or not his foundation is doing more good than damage? I'd like to learn more about it. I find it interesting how difficult it seems to do philanthropy that has long lasting benefits without damaging some party.

TheOtherHobbes 7y ago

Based on his history, it's absolutely fair to question his competence and his judgement. The Microsoft years proved that he was good at making money using dominate-a-market monopolist techniques. That's exactly the wrong personality profile for someone trying to do effective philanthropy, which requires unusual empathy and cultural sensitivity, as well as tactical cleverness. Gates - arguably - demonstrated the latter, albeit only in a very specific and (IMO) self-serving way. He also made plenty of spectacular strategic errors at Microsoft which harmed MS customers, MS competitors, and computer users in general. So his record of strategic foresight is patchy at best. And there is no evidence at all that he has any unusual talent for empathy or cultural awareness.