4 ms·

I hope it doesn't disrupt the Gates Foundation. I know there's people there doing really impactful research with good progress. It would be a shame for those la

I hope it doesn't disrupt the Gates Foundation. I know there's people there doing really impactful research with good progress. It would be a shame for those labs to wind down due to Bill and Melinda's split. Similarly, I was a Gates Scholar and it changed my life (no college debt). I hope none of the scholars or scholarship fund partners are affected, either.

jacquesm 5y ago
Exactly, the number of people 'downstream' from Bill & Melinda Gates is quite large, and this could easily disrupt a lot of important work. That said, they are both unlikely to make rash decisions that would have a negative effect on their image, that is what that foundation was all about in the first place.
- eecc 5y ago
  Uhm, perhaps that’s why it’s better to delegate this kind of impactful organizations non-personal institutions driven by long-term societal discourse and paid by the general public through taxation?
  - jacquesm 5y ago
    Absolutely.
  - graeme 5y ago
    The Gates foundation has an endowment of $49.8 billion. That isn’t annual additions. That is all the money. The US federal govt spends $85.9 billion a day. That is just federal, not state or municipal. https://datalab.usaspending.gov/dts/?start=20210330&end=20210430&frequency=today&category=All%20Categories https://datalab.usaspending.gov/dts/?start=20210330&end=2021... The US alone could very easily set up a foundation with similar funding. What makes the Gates Foundation special are the ideas and networks of the creators.
    - mjfl 5y ago
      Are you telling me that the private allocation of resources is more efficient than public?
      - ninjaku 5y ago
        There's a reason why the Soviet Union collapsed and China liberalized their economy
      - eecc 5y ago
        Private vs. Public is not the discriminating point, centralization is. The Soviet Union went down because it represented an attempt at strictly centralized management, coupled to punitive information management where any feedback was assumed to be dissent and swiftly repressed. As you may know, negative feedback systems are the key to stability and USSR is a case study of everything the opposite. China is hardly a legit market economy, more of a compromise to afford some autonomy of judgement and decentralization.

jacquesm 5y ago

Exactly, the number of people 'downstream' from Bill & Melinda Gates is quite large, and this could easily disrupt a lot of important work. That said, they are both unlikely to make rash decisions that would have a negative effect on their image, that is what that foundation was all about in the first place.

eecc 5y ago
Uhm, perhaps that’s why it’s better to delegate this kind of impactful organizations non-personal institutions driven by long-term societal discourse and paid by the general public through taxation?
- jacquesm 5y ago
  Absolutely.
- graeme 5y ago
  The Gates foundation has an endowment of $49.8 billion. That isn’t annual additions. That is all the money. The US federal govt spends $85.9 billion a day. That is just federal, not state or municipal. https://datalab.usaspending.gov/dts/?start=20210330&end=20210430&frequency=today&category=All%20Categories https://datalab.usaspending.gov/dts/?start=20210330&end=2021... The US alone could very easily set up a foundation with similar funding. What makes the Gates Foundation special are the ideas and networks of the creators.
  - mjfl 5y ago
    Are you telling me that the private allocation of resources is more efficient than public?
    - ninjaku 5y ago
      There's a reason why the Soviet Union collapsed and China liberalized their economy
    - eecc 5y ago
      Private vs. Public is not the discriminating point, centralization is. The Soviet Union went down because it represented an attempt at strictly centralized management, coupled to punitive information management where any feedback was assumed to be dissent and swiftly repressed. As you may know, negative feedback systems are the key to stability and USSR is a case study of everything the opposite. China is hardly a legit market economy, more of a compromise to afford some autonomy of judgement and decentralization.