Apple Once Again Recognizes World AIDS Day In-Store and Online

[Gudi]

Further (from the same article), the couple plans to donate 95% of their personal wealth to charity.

Whats with those other 5%?
As long as they plan to remain billionaires, really nothing has changed for them.

Still further, Bill and Melinda Gates and Warren Buffet are the originators of The Giving Pledge, a campaign to encourage billionaires to leave most of their wealth to philanthropic causes.

And with "encourage" you mean Bill is a stalker annoying innocent self-made billionaires:

The two publications quoted Plattner as saying that Gates had been trying for years to get him to join the initiative, although he wouldn’t let himself be “pressured.” (Bloomberg)

The only reason Plattner agreed to remain listed as a member of the Giving Pledge (which he became to his own surprise) is because the rules are so loose, that he can keep control over the majority of his wealth and the shares in the company he founded for the rest of his lifetime. Who knows what his heirs will do? In the end a pledge is nothing but a pledge. A way to talk about what you might do without doing it.

As of July of this year, over 113 billionaires have signed this pledge. Not only is your claim about Bill Gates false, but Gates has helped to spearhead over 100 billionaires to give away the majority of their fortunes. Nobody in our civilization has ever had a greater impact on the philanthropic contributions of the wealthy than those three individuals.

And since when do we care what the wealthy do? Some of us do not life in an oligarchy. We can become the elected heads of our states without being millionaires or heirs to the throne. What are 113 buckets of water carried up a hill against a river constantly running in the opposite direction? With all those philanthropy one should think that poor people in oligarchies have a good life.

You're welcome to have whatever attitudes you want about the wealthy, but you must make sure that the facts actually agree with your attitudes. Do not make false statements here. Do your homework first. Thanks!

So the poor in America have a good life, because so many billionaires in that country have signed a sheet of paper? Facts! They don't mean what you think they mean.

I completely disagree. Bill and Melinda have given away more than enough.

The system that creates richness also creates poorness in the process. You can't have much more in your personal possession than someone else, without the other one having much less than you have. At least be honest and admit that you like it how it is.

 

[FloatingBones]

Assumptions are a good way to avoid coming in contact with facts.

This comes from the individual who claimed:

Ask Bill Gates why he contributes only $28b of his wealth to charity and keeps $73b for himself personally.

Would you care to address your assumptions? Do you realize your claim that Gates will keep $73b for himself is completely and utterly wrong?

If you're going to pontificate that others have avoided coming in contact with facts, the first step is for you to make sure you have established contact.

Please account for your incorrect statements here. Thanks.

Whats with those other 5%?

None of your darn business.

Once again, you have failed to account for your wrong claim that Gates will keep $73b for himself.

As long as they plan to remain billionaires, really nothing has changed for them.

So what? It's not good enough for you that Gates has agreed to give up 95% of his personal fortune to philanthropy?

And since when do we care what the wealthy do?

You seemed to care -- except that you didn't care enough to get your facts straight.

So the poor in America have a good life, because so many billionaires in that country have signed a sheet of paper? Facts!

The fact is that you just foisted a straw man into the discussion. Who said that?

The system that creates richness also creates poorness in the process.

So you claim. It's completely predictable that is part of your belief system. But simply stating the conjecture doesn't mean that it's true.

Where are your facts and reasoning to back up your claim?

 

[skorpien]

"It is better to light a single candle than to curse the darkness."

Yes, our society and economy are imperfect, but rather than take the position that all is hopeless and why bother, give to charity and contribute to a better world. Your actions may inspire others to do the same, and the more that happens the closer we are to achieving those philanthropic goals.

 

[Gudi]

Please account for your incorrect statements here. Thanks.

As of May 16, 2013, Bill Gates had donated US$28 billion to the foundation. (Wikipedia)

Once again, you have failed to account for your wrong claim that Gates will keep $73b for himself.

Net worth: US$ 76.8 billion (Nov 2013) (Wikipedia)

He might give more, he hasn't done so far.
I'm not in the business of predicting what another person might do in the future.

So what? It's not good enough for you that Gates has agreed to give up 95% of his personal fortune to philanthropy?

Why is it even his personal fortune? For what reason did he need to take so much money out of the company? We could have entered the age of 99¢ software decades ago. He himself invented the concept of software licenses and made everyone pay for each copy again and again. Who did this philanthropist help except his stockholders?

The fact is that you just foisted a straw man into the discussion. Who said that?

I said it, to illustrate what a "positive" effect the giving pledge of so many mostly american billionaires has on a society. Check the facts and you will see that countries which don't create so many billionaires in the first place, are far better off. The creation of billionaires itself is what creates poverty. Of course running the most expensive health care system in the world must create enormous wealth in a few hands. And of course AIDS remains a problem when one third of the nation has no health care. Thats what one would expect from any anti-social country.

So you claim. It's completely predictable that is part of your belief system. But simply stating the conjecture doesn't mean that it's true. Where are your facts and reasoning to back up your claim?

Right in the sentence behind that one. Inequality creates rich and poor. Without the spread between super rich and super poor, there is only one level of wealth. Either all can afford the AIDS medicine or no one can. And within modern industrial societies it's really not that hard to create a system where everyone can have his basic needs covered. Good health care and education are actually the norm in most western countries, even among the english speaking. It's a mystery why one country fails to care for themselves.

 

[Renzatic]

As of May 16, 2013, Bill Gates had donated US$28 billion to the foundation. (Wikipedia)

Net worth: US$ 76.8 billion (Nov 2013) (Wikipedia)

He might give more, he hasn't done so far. I'm not in the business of predicting what another person might do in the future.

Considering you're judging him a hypocrite over something he hasn't done yet, I'd say you'd at least like to be.

 

[MyMac1976]

Assumptions are a good way to avoid coming in contact with facts. Like when people assumed only gays could get AIDS. Also I can change my nationality to whatever you want, if that helps with your argument. Do you want me to become German? Here is something that may help you to decide.

Number of people with HIV infection:
• Germans ~78.000
• Americans ~1.100.000

Though who knows what those estimates are worth in a country where 30% of the population have no health insurance? So keep up the good work of raising awareness for (RED)™ iPhones. It's what you need the most.
It's an interesting world we are living in. So many stupid believes.

----------

The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation is by far the largest private foundation in the world. So he must be a role model for anyone who thinks that simple donations without any system changes can cause something good. Meanwhile the company he created is fighting with patent lawyers to increase income inequality and create the very poverty his charity wants to overcome.

The irony doesn't stop there. It is the same patent system that makes those life saving medicine so highly expensive. And Microsoft as a company is known for copying their competitors intellectual property. So his whole fortune was build on patent infringements. Which are nothing but another form of arbitrary property right, a.k.a. reasons to deny the poor access o stuff they need.

Nice rearrangement of the deck chairs on the Titanic. If you honestly think, we are near ending poverty worldwide, ask the people of Detroit or any British city for that matter. If the capitalistic system is creating so much poverty in its homeland, how should it eliminate it worldwide? This is ridiculous. Millennium Goals – nice plans for the year 3000.

And that has nothing to do with my point.

 

[Gudi]

Considering you're judging him a hypocrite over something he hasn't done yet, I'd say you'd at least like to be.

I'm not judging him personally, not in present nor in future. I'm questioning the whole concept of charity with the worlds biggest donor merely as an example. The richest man in the world could have donated all his money yesterday and it wouldn't change a thing. If your whole work life consists of nothing but making as much money as possible, it doesn't matter what you do with the money after your retirement. You could as well put it in a barrel and bury it in the dessert. The damage is already done the first time you have evaluated somebody by his usefulness to your business. I don't need someone with your skills, so go away and find work elsewhere. And I don't care how much money you need for a living, I am paying you according to your labor market value and nothing more. Oh by the way, I don't like paying taxes either, so don't think you can have my money in form of unemployment benefits. Its not my problem how or if you can make a living. No really, this ist the right price for my life saving medicine, you either have that money or you (die) can't have it.

I am not telling you anything new:
IMDB: They Live (1988) – Put these on!

 

[Gudi]

And that has nothing to do with my point.

You had a point? "... and coming from a German it makes it worse."
No you haven't had a point. Let me show you what a point is.

Yes, our society and economy are imperfect, but rather than take the position that all is hopeless and why bother, give to charity and contribute to a better world. Your actions may inspire others to do the same, and the more that happens the closer we are to achieving those philanthropic goals.

Doing something is better than doing nothing and giving an example might lead to something bigger more meaningful. Like when Warren Buffet complained about paying less income tax than his secretary and argued for higher taxes on his income class. Making donations is only an escape solution in a country that refuses to tax its people properly. In Sweden no one needs to sign a Giving Pledge. Its already signed for you.

"If class warfare is being waged in America, my class is clearly winning." – Buffet 2003

"It's class warfare, my class is winning, but they shouldn't be." – Buffet 2005

"There’s class warfare, all right, […] but it’s my class, the rich class, that’s making war, and we’re winning." – Buffet 2006

"My friends and I have been coddled long enough by a billionaire-friendly Congress. It’s time for our government to get serious about shared sacrifice." – Buffet 2011

 

[MrSmith]

Why not cancer charities? Not fashionable and left wing enough?

 

[Eraserhead]

Why not cancer charities?

Because they don't fund health problems in developed countries...

Not fashionable and left wing enough?

Any evidence Gates is left wing?