4 ms·

If there's a chance to help more lives elsewhere I think he should do it. Why should he limit himself to America? I don't really understand what you're trying t

If there's a chance to help more lives elsewhere I think he should do it. Why should he limit himself to America? I don't really understand what you're trying to get at with this comment.

chris_mahan 13y ago
I just want to point out that there are very poor, desperately poor people in America, and that perhaps his statement "But we don’t have everyday experience with the problems of the poorest. We don’t see people living in extreme poverty next door or pass by them in a slum down the street. " might lead some to think otherwise. Yes, there are worse places, and while I've never traveled to Mumbai, I do know people who live there, and there are plenty of people with money there, and it's not all slums. There are rich everywhere, and there are poor everywhere. The reasons for poverty are diverse. It's not: America is rich and India is poor as he seems to show. But what do I know...
- crapshoot101 13y ago
  Chris, I've lived all around the world - I literally have not seen worse poverty than Indian slums (and yes, this includes multiple countries in Africa). From a marginal benefit perspective, the gains in India are enormous.
  - chris_mahan 13y ago
    Ok, so what can he do? I mean, let's say he spends 10 billion dollars, on 100 million people. That would be $100 each. I don't suppose there is any way to insure that all these people get their $100, because of the problem of distribution, identity verification, etc. You can't mail them a check. You can't mail them cash. You can't trust local delivery men to do the job (they'll pocket it and say they delivered, or they'll get robbed). If you try to provide a service, you'll get knocked down by the bureaucracy. Look at the fiasco around providing identification cards for the poor (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unique_Identification_Authority_of_India https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unique_Identification_Authorit...). In my opinion, the best way to help the poor in India is to help India become a more prosperous nation, and as such, help the development of education, industry, public safety, environmental safety, research and development, and cultural identity within diversity. This is something the governments of India (national, state, and local) have generally pursued vigorously since independence more than 60 years ago. That the problem with poverty and illiteracy is still so pronounced only demonstrates the magnitude of the task. Look what a long letter I write... I would suggest that the only way to help the people of the slums is for the rest of the people of India to want to help the people of the slums. There has to be a mindset that the majority of people in India adhere to, namely, that poverty is not acceptable, and that the factors that enhance poverty are to be remedied, even if this means pushing aside long-held traditions and ways of doing things. Which is a tall order, even for Bill Gates. So instead he goes after specific problems, such as polio, and it's all good, don't take me wrong, but, huh, it's not nearly as impressive in the grand scheme of things as it's made out to be.
    - crapshoot101 13y ago
      I think this is an absurd standard. For want of perfection, he should do nothing? What he's doing has shown clear impact. I'm a skeptic on much of NGO land, but the Gates foundation is better than most and has hard gains to show for it. Gates is working in India on education, on environmental safety, on sanitation (seriously - I've heard talk repeatedly that his number one goal right now is a better toilet / sanitary mechanism) - these are things that will directly advantage India in the long run. As for the Indian government... well, the road to hell has been paved with good and not so good intentions - suffice to say that has not always been the goal. FYI separate topic, but the UID is a success story by any standard (its the world's largest biometric database by some distance) - and enables a reduction in the wastage in the traditional channels you identified (aka, the politician cut).
      - chris_mahan 13y ago
        I hear you. I think he's doing good, true, better than nothing.

If there's a chance to help more lives elsewhere I think he should do it. Why should he limit himself to America? I don't really understand what you're trying to get at with this comment.

chris_mahan 13y ago

I just want to point out that there are very poor, desperately poor people in America, and that perhaps his statement "But we don’t have everyday experience with the problems of the poorest. We don’t see people living in extreme poverty next door or pass by them in a slum down the street. " might lead some to think otherwise. Yes, there are worse places, and while I've never traveled to Mumbai, I do know people who live there, and there are plenty of people with money there, and it's not all slums. There are rich everywhere, and there are poor everywhere. The reasons for poverty are diverse. It's not: America is rich and India is poor as he seems to show. But what do I know...

crapshoot101 13y ago
Chris, I've lived all around the world - I literally have not seen worse poverty than Indian slums (and yes, this includes multiple countries in Africa). From a marginal benefit perspective, the gains in India are enormous.
- chris_mahan 13y ago
  Ok, so what can he do? I mean, let's say he spends 10 billion dollars, on 100 million people. That would be $100 each. I don't suppose there is any way to insure that all these people get their $100, because of the problem of distribution, identity verification, etc. You can't mail them a check. You can't mail them cash. You can't trust local delivery men to do the job (they'll pocket it and say they delivered, or they'll get robbed). If you try to provide a service, you'll get knocked down by the bureaucracy. Look at the fiasco around providing identification cards for the poor (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unique_Identification_Authority_of_India https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unique_Identification_Authorit...). In my opinion, the best way to help the poor in India is to help India become a more prosperous nation, and as such, help the development of education, industry, public safety, environmental safety, research and development, and cultural identity within diversity. This is something the governments of India (national, state, and local) have generally pursued vigorously since independence more than 60 years ago. That the problem with poverty and illiteracy is still so pronounced only demonstrates the magnitude of the task. Look what a long letter I write... I would suggest that the only way to help the people of the slums is for the rest of the people of India to want to help the people of the slums. There has to be a mindset that the majority of people in India adhere to, namely, that poverty is not acceptable, and that the factors that enhance poverty are to be remedied, even if this means pushing aside long-held traditions and ways of doing things. Which is a tall order, even for Bill Gates. So instead he goes after specific problems, such as polio, and it's all good, don't take me wrong, but, huh, it's not nearly as impressive in the grand scheme of things as it's made out to be.
  - crapshoot101 13y ago
    I think this is an absurd standard. For want of perfection, he should do nothing? What he's doing has shown clear impact. I'm a skeptic on much of NGO land, but the Gates foundation is better than most and has hard gains to show for it. Gates is working in India on education, on environmental safety, on sanitation (seriously - I've heard talk repeatedly that his number one goal right now is a better toilet / sanitary mechanism) - these are things that will directly advantage India in the long run. As for the Indian government... well, the road to hell has been paved with good and not so good intentions - suffice to say that has not always been the goal. FYI separate topic, but the UID is a success story by any standard (its the world's largest biometric database by some distance) - and enables a reduction in the wastage in the traditional channels you identified (aka, the politician cut).
    - chris_mahan 13y ago
      I hear you. I think he's doing good, true, better than nothing.