• teawrecks@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      55
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      15 days ago

      Ask me how I know you only read the headline.

      more money should go toward “improving lives” and curbing disease and poverty.

      “Climate is super important but has to be considered in terms of overall human welfare,”

      The headline is deliberately misleading and honestly should be corrected or removed.

      Please put in slightly more effort next time, thanks.

      • scintilla@crust.piefed.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        18
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        15 days ago

        Kinda shocked that after all the recent info coming out he thinks that it’s not going to be a “climate disaster” lmao. Headline is deliberately misleading but that doesn’t make bill less of an idiot.

      • Rothe@piefed.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        14 days ago

        We read more than the headline. His argument makes no sense at all. Please do yourself the fabour of putting more effort into your replies.

        • teawrecks@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          14 days ago

          Which part makes no sense? You don’t believe that climate spending needs to be considered in terms of overall human welfare? Or you believe that statement doesn’t make sense to you? Or…

    • aeronmelon@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      15 days ago

      His philanthropy was always a response to how much people hated him because of Microsoft. He is so thin-skinned and can’t stand even legitimate grievances against him.

      • JoshuaFalken@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        18
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        15 days ago

        I’ll take a thin skinned billionaire that donates some of those billions to feel warm and fuzzy over a thick skinned one that laughs from a balcony as people lose their homes.

          • JoshuaFalken@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            14 days ago

            Well sure, in optimism land, why not go for them all. In the real world, that wouldn’t be possible given the amount of insulation they have and protection they can afford.

            My meaning here is that if the choice were presented between guillotining one of them that donates money occasionally, and another that doesn’t so much as pretend to give a damn, I’m going to point at the latter.

              • JoshuaFalken@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                14 days ago

                From a quick search, there are around 3,000 billionaires with over ten trillion US dollars combined. Even if we assume the poorest of them only have a handful of security personnel, a socialist revolution in terms of pitchforks and guillotines wouldn’t get far up the ladder.

                These individuals have politicians strung up as marionettes, so the world’s militaries aren’t going to help. Surely if more than two of these billionaires end up Thompson’d, the military would probably be used to protect them.

                The revolution that could work is pretty straightforward, but it has a barrier to entry. People need to vote. Not just for the top either, but all the way down to city councillors. We’d need to see landslide elections to overcome gerrymandering, but if we managed to elect a significant number of incorruptible politicians all at once, mountains could be moved in one cycle.

                Oh to dream.

        • ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          14 days ago

          I’ve checked the numbers once. Gates donated to his foundation $20B and today the foundation has over $70B. Bill, through his foundation, controls 3x more money they he donated. He’s using foundation’s grants to influence policy and research at a global scale. This is not about helping anyone, it’s about excreting power over governments while improving his public image.

          What he should be doing instead? Paying taxes.

          • JoshuaFalken@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            14 days ago

            Forgive me but while I could agree the primary purpose for his actions may not be philanthropic intent, it certainly has some positive butterfly effects - like the research you mention. Maybe it’s not about helping anyone, but that’s not to say that it doesn’t help anyone.

            Regardless this isn’t the place to get into the minutiae. My point was that if we put the ten digit club in a cage and told them only one is allowed back out, I’d prefer Gates find victory than someone like Musk.

      • Tollana1234567@lemmy.today
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        14 days ago

        hes also in epstein files, thats why hes been going hard to reivent his image. His vaccine thing has been accused of nothing more than a scheme by african countries.

  • cogitase@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    77
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    15 days ago

    Bill Gates said too many resources are going toward climate change instead of issues like welfare and poverty…

    In the letter, Gates called out the “doomsday view” of climate change and said leaders need to make a “strategic pivot” to focus on issues that have the “greatest impact on human welfare.”

    “It’s the best way to ensure that everyone gets a chance to live a healthy and productive life no matter where they’re born, and no matter what kind of climate they’re born into,” he wrote.

    The “generative AI” part of the headline is not particularly relevant to the article, but is a great test to see who reads the article before rushing to comment.

  • Fedizen@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    20
    ·
    edit-2
    14 days ago

    Bill Gates charitable donations do real good but they are paltry sums compared to what taxing him would do. Its best to view billionaire donations as at best a guilty conscience and at worst insincere marketing.

    This isn’t an ‘either or’ question and framing it that way is deliberate. As though his money alone couldn’t fix both issues for years.

    Tax the rich and make them taste reality again. They need to be taxed, its good for them. Ease their guilty consciences of all this sinful monetary excess.

    • Omgpwnies@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      14 days ago

      His “donations” are to his own charity, that he then gets to use to reduce his tax burden. Billionaire philanthropy is another avenue of profit for them, nothing else.

    • Mangoholic@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      13 days ago

      The organization he donates from donates 5% of that money to fight climate change and 95% is invested into fossil fuels. Its just to clean his image nothing more.

    • zd9@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      15 days ago

      To those friends and people that would always say that to me, I always said he just has a good PR team. His malaria work is genuinely good, but still not even a drop in the ocean of the good he could actually do if he contributed his fair share.

  • oyo@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    ·
    14 days ago

    Billionaire’s Disease is indiscriminate. We must all work to end its plague upon society.

  • Phoenixz@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    14 days ago

    Don’t worry, climate scientists who have investigated this issue for decades now, bill Gates says it’ll be fine

  • BarqsHasBite@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    15 days ago

    I believe he was anti green energy before, then made a pivot, and I guess he’s back.

    *Now that I read it

    In a letter published Tuesday ahead of next week’s COP30 U.N. climate summit, Gates argued that too many resources are focused on emissions and the environment, and that more money should go toward “improving lives” and curbing disease and poverty.

    “Climate is super important but has to be considered in terms of overall human welfare,” Gates told CNBC’

    • Peruvian_Skies@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      15 days ago

      What he said isn’t exactly wrong in and of itself. Only in the context of when and why he said it. Of course we have to keep human welfare in mind, but the climate crisis has reached a point where all human welfare in the not so distant future depends on how heavily we address environmental issues right now. And he’s only saying that to save face.

  • NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    15 days ago

    First, no editorialized headlines. Second, I have no opinion on the guy but he’s sounding more just wrong than evil here.

    • Rothe@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      14 days ago

      He was at the techbro oligarch meeting with Trump, kissing his ring recently. The guy is definitely evil.