4 ms·

>he may have played loose with the rules ... he is one of the few who can tackle it head on, which ultimately will benefit everyone. He --may-- have? Let's no

>he may have played loose with the rules ... he is one of the few who can tackle it head on, which ultimately will benefit everyone. He --may-- have? Let's not whitewash history. He not only very much played loose with the rules, he outright broke the rules and trampled upon laws that caused far-reaching net damage to society in the process. Like yourself and most others, I'm certainly pleased that Gates has decided to give back a small portion of his overall plunder from society, but it also shouldn't act as a public relations whitewash that erases his past history. His charity doesn't simply erase his overall negative impacts upon society that runs easily into the trillions and also took away from charity by proxy and directly in the process as well for decades. We should teach future generations to give to charity, but in the process we shouldn't also instruct future generations that the way Gates amassed his ridiculous amount of money and power was acceptable and good for society overall. Despite what they and their lackeys would have many of us believe, society prospers without megalomaniacal billionaires. Billionaires reach that ridiculous, megalomaniacal status by pushing the externalities produced via their business growth upon the rest of society instead of paying it themselves. Once externalities are accounted for, there are very few organic, ethical ways to acquire and hoard that kind of wealth without stunting the rest of society in insidious ways. And, by the time one "gives it away", all the greater damage has already been done in the meantime. We don't need them. For example, the overwhelming majority of charity comes from small businesses and lower income individuals. The same individuals and small businesses that are drastically hurt and destroyed by the business practices of people like Gates and other billionaires. Keep in mind, large corporations and people like Bill Gates give only a tiny percentage of overall charity, but they (and their lackeys) spend vastly more on telling everyone about it through various public relations channels, etc. and that's why it distorts public perception on who really gives the lion's share to charity overall. Again, I'm very happy Gates is giving to charity, but let's not whitewash his overall net impact against society in the process. He accomplished some great good for society with his business and now his charity as well. But, for us to ignore all the harm he's caused with his past business practices over those decades isn't fair to society and it's a horrible lesson for future generations that may think they should emulate the methodologies billionaires like him use to acquire and hoard enough wealth to reach that "status". There's much more to the story of Bill Gates and his dire issues with externalities (and charity issues as well) that we shouldn't ignore in our haste to worship him and/or as someone else in this thread did... apply some sort of sainthood. edits: spelling/grammar

tim333 12y ago
>doesn't simply erase his overall negative impacts upon society that runs easily into the trillions Any source on that? I rather enjoyed using his products.
- sveredov 12y ago
  People also enjoy Coke and now they are friends with Type-2 diabetes.
- Cowicide 12y ago
  >>doesn't simply erase his overall negative impacts upon society that runs easily into the trillions >Any source on that? Here's some: http://blogs.edweek.org/teachers/living-in-dialogue/2012/07/the_gates_foundations_leverage.html http://blogs.edweek.org/teachers/living-in-dialogue/2012/07/... http://newint.org/features/2012/04/01/bill-gates-charitable-giving-ethics/ http://newint.org/features/2012/04/01/bill-gates-charitable-... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_%26_Melinda_Gates_Foundation#Criticism http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_%26_Melinda_Gates_Foundati...? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_litigation http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_litigation --- (Some homework: Calculate an estimate of all the harm to all these businesses and, by proxy, consumers above) http://lists.essential.org/1998/info-policy-notes/msg00047.html http://lists.essential.org/1998/info-policy-notes/msg00047.h... (It goes way back) http://www.aaxnet.com/topics/msinc.html http://www.aaxnet.com/topics/msinc.html (It keeps going) http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=304701 http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=304701 (download the PDF there) --- Observe the many examples here: http://thismatter.com/articles/microsoft.htm#tq1 http://thismatter.com/articles/microsoft.htm#tq1 http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=241988 http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=241988 (download the PDF there) http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=502822 http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=502822 (download the PDF there) http://www.forbes.com/forbes/1998/0907/6205050a.html http://www.forbes.com/forbes/1998/0907/6205050a.html (FORBES mag) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Microsoft#Vendor_lock-in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Microsoft#Vendor_l... --- History of Anticompetitive behavior and consumer harm: http://unctad.org/en/Docs/ditcclp20082_en.pdf http://unctad.org/en/Docs/ditcclp20082_en.pdf http://highered.mcgraw-hill.com/sites/dl/free/0072487933/46617/microsoft_case.pdf http://highered.mcgraw-hill.com/sites/dl/free/0072487933/466... (a very enlightening read) http://www.cptech.org/ms/harm.html http://www.cptech.org/ms/harm.html http://www.netaction.org/msoft/world/part1.html http://www.netaction.org/msoft/world/part1.html http://www.netaction.org/msoft/world/table.html http://www.netaction.org/msoft/world/table.html http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/1016972/nvidia-blames-microsoft-stock-write http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/1016972/nvidia-blam... http://www.cnn.com/TECH/computing/9901/11/microrise.idg/ http://www.cnn.com/TECH/computing/9901/11/microrise.idg/ http://www.infoworld.com/t/platforms/your-loss-their-gain-327?page=0,0 http://www.infoworld.com/t/platforms/your-loss-their-gain-32... http://www.fool.com/cashking/1998/cashkingport981118.htm http://www.fool.com/cashking/1998/cashkingport981118.htm http://www.kuro5hin.org/?op=displaystory;sid=2001/6/21/61725/2457 http://www.kuro5hin.org/?op=displaystory;sid=2001/6/21/61725... http://www.maxframe.com/DR/Info/fullstory/ca_sues_ms.html http://www.maxframe.com/DR/Info/fullstory/ca_sues_ms.html --- Microsoft entered into anticompetitive and exclusionary agreements with OLSs and ISPs: http://www.justice.gov/atr/cases/f3800/msjudgex.htm#vii http://www.justice.gov/atr/cases/f3800/msjudgex.htm#vii - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - The effects of anti-competitive business practices on developing countries and their development prospects: http://unctad.org/en/Docs/ditcclp20082_en.pdf http://unctad.org/en/Docs/ditcclp20082_en.pdf The Gates Foundation investments include companies that worsen poverty in developing countries, pollute heavily and supports pharmaceutical companies that don’t sell into the developing world. Also, he’s doing it wrong with malaria. By pouring most contributions into the fight against such high-profile killers, Gates is diverting staff from basic care. This form of “brain drain”, pulls away trained staff from children and those suffering from other common killers. The focus on a few diseases has shortchanged basic needs such as nutrition and transportation. Gates-funded vaccination programs have instructed caregivers to ignore – even discourage patients from discussing – ailments that the vaccinations cannot prevent. The Gates Foundation harms global health by diverting resources from other important local health care services. The foundation diverts medical professionals from other parts of developing nations’ health care systems; the health care systems’ ability to provide care diminishes (except in the area the foundation funds) and the charities do more harm than good. (This has been backed up by several prominent investigations, please look it up) The Gates Foundation is also undermining public education and exerts too much influence over public education policy without being accountable to voters or tax payers. The reforms include closing neighborhood schools in favor of privately run charter schools, forcing standardized tests which have been proven to harm education (just ask teachers, educational professionals, etc.). What should we learn from this? It’s better to have decentralized sources of charity coming from many sources instead of one collective source. Unfortunately, Gates helped to hinder and in many cases completely detroy entities that would have not only given vastly more to charity, but would have also done it in a far more diversified and effective manner. It’s very ironic. Bill Gate’s monopoly helped usher in an era of rampant malware for decades because of the lack of platform diversity. http://cryptome.org/cyberinsecurity.htm http://cryptome.org/cyberinsecurity.htm All of this above together cost average consumers and businesses worldwide in the trillions (many of whom were able to give less to charity because of this). Many businesses and consumers were rail-roaded into using subpar products and services via his unethical, anti-competitive, monopolistic business practices. The sick irony: He’s now using those same ill-gotten profits (that hurts the world in the past, present and future with a lack of diversification) and is giving it to the developing world in an ironically non-diversified manner and hurting them as well. As Bill Gates was with Microsoft, he’s too arrogant to look at the big picture externalities. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Typical question I get is to please source small businesses and individuals giving more to charity. It's not terribly easy to find good sources because Google's search algorithms (which are written basically by editors, by the way) will give precedence to all the multiple, corporate media Public Relations that merely offers deceiving articles about the "Top 10 corporations who give to charity", etc. For example, this corporatist Public Relations piece: http://money.msn.com/investing/companies-giving-the-most-to-charity http://money.msn.com/investing/companies-giving-the-most-to-... While you're there at that Public Relations piece above disguised as a news article, please read the informative first comment at the bottom about "how to lie with statistics” as well. Here's the reality with vital externalities at play that a lot of the corporate media would like us all to ignore: -- Corporate giving accounts for just 5% of the total giving in 2013. Yes, you read that correctly, just FIVE PERCENT and that's not just an anomaly for 2013. It's always very low compared to everyone else. The vast amount of all charity is given by small businesses and (especially) lower income individuals. Not just a few huge corporations and some billionaires like Gates. What corporations and billionaires like Bill Gates really do is spend a vast amount of money on Public Relations to advertise the fact that they give money to charity. It creates the public illusion that major corporations and people like Gates give the lion's share of money to charity when that's completely and utterly untrue. It's a classic example of manufacturing consent. Of course, this information tends to give people cognitive dissonance since they've been basically indoctrinated via Public Relations to believe otherwise: http://i.imgur.com/MFdTOaq.jpg http://i.imgur.com/MFdTOaq.jpg But, here's the reality: http://www.nptrust.org/philanthropic-resources/charitable-giving-statistics/ http://www.nptrust.org/philanthropic-resources/charitable-gi... And this here. http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:6S23Fn6wKNMJ:http://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay%3Dcontent.view%26cpid%3D42%2Bwho+gives+the+most+to+charity+more+than+corporations&hl=en&gbv=2&&ct=clnk http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:6S23Fn6... Then, of course, there's this: Why Don’t Corporations Give to Charity? http://www.slate.com/articles/business/moneybox/2013/08/corporations_don_t_give_to_charity_why_the_most_profitable_companies_are.html http://www.slate.com/articles/business/moneybox/2013/08/corp... And finally, this: Why the Rich Don't Give to Charity http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2013/04/why-the-rich-dont-give/309254/ http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2013/04/why-the-... - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - >I rather enjoyed using his products. So do I, (at least some of Microsoft's products, anyway) including the positive influence MS has had on other products created by other companies. As I said in my first post in this thread above, Gates has also provided a lot of good in the world with his efforts in business and charity, there's no denying that and he should be commended for it (as he already is quite vociferously all over the place). But, I'm not here to parrot his Public Relations that's already disseminated nearly everywhere online and offline. Just stab in any general direction if you want to know about what a great a guy he is. I'm here to talk about his net effect on society and I am therefore presenting the side of Gates that a lot of the corporate media (and otherwise) would like to forget and whitewash in the face of his Public Relations, power and control.

tim333 12y ago

>doesn't simply erase his overall negative impacts upon society that runs easily into the trillions Any source on that? I rather enjoyed using his products.

sveredov 12y ago
People also enjoy Coke and now they are friends with Type-2 diabetes.
Cowicide 12y ago
>>doesn't simply erase his overall negative impacts upon society that runs easily into the trillions >Any source on that? Here's some: http://blogs.edweek.org/teachers/living-in-dialogue/2012/07/the_gates_foundations_leverage.html http://blogs.edweek.org/teachers/living-in-dialogue/2012/07/... http://newint.org/features/2012/04/01/bill-gates-charitable-giving-ethics/ http://newint.org/features/2012/04/01/bill-gates-charitable-... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_%26_Melinda_Gates_Foundation#Criticism http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_%26_Melinda_Gates_Foundati...? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_litigation http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_litigation --- (Some homework: Calculate an estimate of all the harm to all these businesses and, by proxy, consumers above) http://lists.essential.org/1998/info-policy-notes/msg00047.html http://lists.essential.org/1998/info-policy-notes/msg00047.h... (It goes way back) http://www.aaxnet.com/topics/msinc.html http://www.aaxnet.com/topics/msinc.html (It keeps going) http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=304701 http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=304701 (download the PDF there) --- Observe the many examples here: http://thismatter.com/articles/microsoft.htm#tq1 http://thismatter.com/articles/microsoft.htm#tq1 http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=241988 http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=241988 (download the PDF there) http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=502822 http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=502822 (download the PDF there) http://www.forbes.com/forbes/1998/0907/6205050a.html http://www.forbes.com/forbes/1998/0907/6205050a.html (FORBES mag) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Microsoft#Vendor_lock-in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Microsoft#Vendor_l... --- History of Anticompetitive behavior and consumer harm: http://unctad.org/en/Docs/ditcclp20082_en.pdf http://unctad.org/en/Docs/ditcclp20082_en.pdf http://highered.mcgraw-hill.com/sites/dl/free/0072487933/46617/microsoft_case.pdf http://highered.mcgraw-hill.com/sites/dl/free/0072487933/466... (a very enlightening read) http://www.cptech.org/ms/harm.html http://www.cptech.org/ms/harm.html http://www.netaction.org/msoft/world/part1.html http://www.netaction.org/msoft/world/part1.html http://www.netaction.org/msoft/world/table.html http://www.netaction.org/msoft/world/table.html http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/1016972/nvidia-blames-microsoft-stock-write http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/1016972/nvidia-blam... http://www.cnn.com/TECH/computing/9901/11/microrise.idg/ http://www.cnn.com/TECH/computing/9901/11/microrise.idg/ http://www.infoworld.com/t/platforms/your-loss-their-gain-327?page=0,0 http://www.infoworld.com/t/platforms/your-loss-their-gain-32... http://www.fool.com/cashking/1998/cashkingport981118.htm http://www.fool.com/cashking/1998/cashkingport981118.htm http://www.kuro5hin.org/?op=displaystory;sid=2001/6/21/61725/2457 http://www.kuro5hin.org/?op=displaystory;sid=2001/6/21/61725... http://www.maxframe.com/DR/Info/fullstory/ca_sues_ms.html http://www.maxframe.com/DR/Info/fullstory/ca_sues_ms.html --- Microsoft entered into anticompetitive and exclusionary agreements with OLSs and ISPs: http://www.justice.gov/atr/cases/f3800/msjudgex.htm#vii http://www.justice.gov/atr/cases/f3800/msjudgex.htm#vii - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - The effects of anti-competitive business practices on developing countries and their development prospects: http://unctad.org/en/Docs/ditcclp20082_en.pdf http://unctad.org/en/Docs/ditcclp20082_en.pdf The Gates Foundation investments include companies that worsen poverty in developing countries, pollute heavily and supports pharmaceutical companies that don’t sell into the developing world. Also, he’s doing it wrong with malaria. By pouring most contributions into the fight against such high-profile killers, Gates is diverting staff from basic care. This form of “brain drain”, pulls away trained staff from children and those suffering from other common killers. The focus on a few diseases has shortchanged basic needs such as nutrition and transportation. Gates-funded vaccination programs have instructed caregivers to ignore – even discourage patients from discussing – ailments that the vaccinations cannot prevent. The Gates Foundation harms global health by diverting resources from other important local health care services. The foundation diverts medical professionals from other parts of developing nations’ health care systems; the health care systems’ ability to provide care diminishes (except in the area the foundation funds) and the charities do more harm than good. (This has been backed up by several prominent investigations, please look it up) The Gates Foundation is also undermining public education and exerts too much influence over public education policy without being accountable to voters or tax payers. The reforms include closing neighborhood schools in favor of privately run charter schools, forcing standardized tests which have been proven to harm education (just ask teachers, educational professionals, etc.). What should we learn from this? It’s better to have decentralized sources of charity coming from many sources instead of one collective source. Unfortunately, Gates helped to hinder and in many cases completely detroy entities that would have not only given vastly more to charity, but would have also done it in a far more diversified and effective manner. It’s very ironic. Bill Gate’s monopoly helped usher in an era of rampant malware for decades because of the lack of platform diversity. http://cryptome.org/cyberinsecurity.htm http://cryptome.org/cyberinsecurity.htm All of this above together cost average consumers and businesses worldwide in the trillions (many of whom were able to give less to charity because of this). Many businesses and consumers were rail-roaded into using subpar products and services via his unethical, anti-competitive, monopolistic business practices. The sick irony: He’s now using those same ill-gotten profits (that hurts the world in the past, present and future with a lack of diversification) and is giving it to the developing world in an ironically non-diversified manner and hurting them as well. As Bill Gates was with Microsoft, he’s too arrogant to look at the big picture externalities. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Typical question I get is to please source small businesses and individuals giving more to charity. It's not terribly easy to find good sources because Google's search algorithms (which are written basically by editors, by the way) will give precedence to all the multiple, corporate media Public Relations that merely offers deceiving articles about the "Top 10 corporations who give to charity", etc. For example, this corporatist Public Relations piece: http://money.msn.com/investing/companies-giving-the-most-to-charity http://money.msn.com/investing/companies-giving-the-most-to-... While you're there at that Public Relations piece above disguised as a news article, please read the informative first comment at the bottom about "how to lie with statistics” as well. Here's the reality with vital externalities at play that a lot of the corporate media would like us all to ignore: -- Corporate giving accounts for just 5% of the total giving in 2013. Yes, you read that correctly, just FIVE PERCENT and that's not just an anomaly for 2013. It's always very low compared to everyone else. The vast amount of all charity is given by small businesses and (especially) lower income individuals. Not just a few huge corporations and some billionaires like Gates. What corporations and billionaires like Bill Gates really do is spend a vast amount of money on Public Relations to advertise the fact that they give money to charity. It creates the public illusion that major corporations and people like Gates give the lion's share of money to charity when that's completely and utterly untrue. It's a classic example of manufacturing consent. Of course, this information tends to give people cognitive dissonance since they've been basically indoctrinated via Public Relations to believe otherwise: http://i.imgur.com/MFdTOaq.jpg http://i.imgur.com/MFdTOaq.jpg But, here's the reality: http://www.nptrust.org/philanthropic-resources/charitable-giving-statistics/ http://www.nptrust.org/philanthropic-resources/charitable-gi... And this here. http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:6S23Fn6wKNMJ:http://www.charitynavigator.org/index.cfm?bay%3Dcontent.view%26cpid%3D42%2Bwho+gives+the+most+to+charity+more+than+corporations&hl=en&gbv=2&&ct=clnk http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:6S23Fn6... Then, of course, there's this: Why Don’t Corporations Give to Charity? http://www.slate.com/articles/business/moneybox/2013/08/corporations_don_t_give_to_charity_why_the_most_profitable_companies_are.html http://www.slate.com/articles/business/moneybox/2013/08/corp... And finally, this: Why the Rich Don't Give to Charity http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2013/04/why-the-rich-dont-give/309254/ http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2013/04/why-the-... - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - >I rather enjoyed using his products. So do I, (at least some of Microsoft's products, anyway) including the positive influence MS has had on other products created by other companies. As I said in my first post in this thread above, Gates has also provided a lot of good in the world with his efforts in business and charity, there's no denying that and he should be commended for it (as he already is quite vociferously all over the place). But, I'm not here to parrot his Public Relations that's already disseminated nearly everywhere online and offline. Just stab in any general direction if you want to know about what a great a guy he is. I'm here to talk about his net effect on society and I am therefore presenting the side of Gates that a lot of the corporate media (and otherwise) would like to forget and whitewash in the face of his Public Relations, power and control.