Super unhelpful.
Gates says above, “Shouldn’t we, in our awareness of how little generosity there is, to help measure, should we get them a measles vaccine, or should we get them a measles vaccine, or should we do some climate related activity?”
Gate’s naivety has paradoxically helped empower those who believe in neither climate science nor the science of vaccines, and an administration whose first official act was moving to starve as many of the most vulnerable people in the world.
Between where we are now and “Superbad” outcomes, there is a lot of rough territory.
Stephen Schneider famously visualized a climate bell curve with “end of the world” on one side, and “good for you” on the other, being the two most unlikely outcomes.
There’s an awful lot to unpleasantness on that curve that sane people would like to avoid, for the sake of their children and other living things.
Below, good response from one of climate science’s smartest communicators, Daniel Swain:
This is excruciating. The actual logic of the situation is to double down on decarbonization and greatly increase transfers to those dealing with the consequences of greenhouse global warming.
Gates says above, “Shouldn’t we, in our awareness of how little generosity there is, to help measure, should we get them a measles vaccine, or should we get them a measles vaccine, or should we do some climate related activity?””
Funny how twisted a perspective a person gets when they get the feeling that taking care of health and well-being of the entire global public and infrastructure depends on “generosity”.
Most people do not have a net worth large enough to be reported by Forbes – unlike you, who they rated in May as having net worth of 115 billion dollars. And they don’t have the business opportunity to shelter lots of their wealth in a charitable foundation, where they are barely taxed on the investment income but still have control of how every penny is spent.
https://timschwab.substack.com/p/trump-wants-to-tax-the-gates-foundation
The link above includes this quote about Bill’s foundation’s ability to accumulate rather than disburse money:
“The Gates Foundation’s wealth has grown by around 65 percent since 2018, which is very difficult to square with the foundation’s supposed raison d’etre: giving away money.”
A healthier society would be addressing the needs of the public instead of allowing so much of the national wealth to rise up into fewer and fewer people’s hands, for them to pick and choose what they feel “generous” towards. The Foundation does some good – but why do billionaires feel they’re the ones to prioritize?