People of Lemmy, I dare you to name ONE billionaire that's done anything good.
People of Lemmy, I dare you to name ONE billionaire that's done anything good.
216 comments
-
-
It's pretty easy to come up with some things billionaires have done that are good. Bill Gates funding cures and prevention of diseases in the third world is one that comes to mind.
Now, if we're talking about finding an example of a billionaire whose life is on balance a good thing for humanity...that's pretty much impossible.
-
The submarine dude that got rid of a few more in one go?
-
That voyage killed a kid too, can't really call it a good act overall
-
Suleman Dawood was the youngest passenger on board. He was 19 and therefore an adult capable of making his own decisions.
https://www.cnn.com/2023/06/23/europe/titan-submersible-victims-intl/index.html
-
-
I wish for an explanation pls.
-
The OceanGate sub that imploded on the way to the Titanic.
-
-
Wasn't anywhere close to being a billionaire.
-
-
A single good thing that a single billionaire has done? The Gates foundation fighting malaria. I think that's good.
-
Taxing them would do even more good.
-
Is the topic of the thread called “Should we tax billionaires” or was it “I dare you to name one good thing a billionaire has done”?
-
Tax what though? There's no profit to tax.
-
For sure
-
-
Sure but, considering they use only 5% of the money they have for all there "good" projects and invest the ither 95% in fossil fuels. The gates Foundation is really only a little good because the law forces them to use min of 5%, to stay tax exempt. So if they didn't have to, would they still do it? I doubt that.
-
-
Mark Cuban is a bit of a wall street asshole, but he’s created a drug company to slash the prices of generic drugs for Americans: https://www.npr.org/2022/01/24/1075344246/mark-cuban-pharmacy#:~:text=Billionaire%20investor%20and%20Dallas%20Mavericks,of%20its%20online%20pharmacy%20Wednesday.
-
For sure! I wanted to make sure someone chimed in on this. I forwarded it to an elderly hospital roommate who was extremely appreciative.
-
Wrong
-
-
Didn't one of the Koch brothers die? That was pretty cool.
-
I’ve never wished a man dead, but I have read some obituaries with great pleasure.
-quote
-
Yup rest in piss
-
-
Anything good?
Then all of them. They are human beings, not black holes of pure evil.
-
I need a source for that.
-
-
Good acts do not make a good person. Plenty of billionaires have done good things, but they don't even come close to outweighing the bad.
-
I love a quote I read once in a thing about alignment. "If you fix twenty neighbor's roofs, you're Jimmy the Helpful Thatcher. But if you eat the neighbor's daughter, you're Jimmy the Cannibal, and no amount of additional carpentry assistance will change that."
-
A good act does not wash out the bad, nor a bad act the good. Each should have its own reward.
-
True, and they generally get ample praise for the good. The bad has, unfortunately, rewarded them with their billions.
-
-
Yeah, the wording of OP's question is dumb for this reason. What person on this planet has done literally only evil things? A better question would be more like "What billionaire is genuinely a good person and why?" Personally the size of my list of "overall good" billionaires is a rounding error but at least the thread would be more interesting.
-
-
Paul Allen funded a bunch of scientific and medical research, as well as quite a few museums and other public works around Seattle. He was the largest private donor to the fight against Ebola in Africa.
Sergey Brin is a big Wikimedia contributor, as came out a few years back when their donor list leaked.
-
also you should check out his card
-
It's even got a watermark.
-
TRY GETTING A RESERVATION AT DORSIA NOW!!!
-
-
-
You conveniently left out the definition of "good" so you can move the goalposts if you don't like the answers you get.
-
Most/all of them have done good things. A better question is are there any that have done enough good to outweigh the bad
-
There’s a lot. In the late 1800s it started becoming something of a tradition for billionaires to move on to philanthropy after their retirement. J.D. Rockefeller was worth several hundred billion dollars in today’s money. He gave away close to 200 billion of it.
A more modern example that people have brought up is Bill Gates.
-
Yep, they are trying to buy a spot in heaven.
-
So they're ferengi, got it
-
-
-
This is probably a slightly misguided idea to go after them as bad people because as soon as they do do something "good" you leave the door open for people to think that perhaps on balance they're not so bad after all.
The problem of billionaires being billionaires is itself the chief complaint people should have. It doesn't matter if they're Mr Rogers and Santa Claus combined, because they can choose to be so entirely at will and can be selfish assholes too entirely at will. They can also be other things entirely, given they are actually human beings after all they can try to act on best intentions, but like all humans, with great ignorance or with flawed thinking. When you or I do that the consequences can be terrible, but mostly, we'd be unable to come close to the scale of impact these demi gods can leave in their wake, not to mention the "original sins" that allowed them to become billionaires in the first place leaving a legacy of nasty indirect consequences for society at large.
There's actually a lot of examples of billionaires philanthropy and as you likely expected to point out when people mentioned that, some of those acts hide less pure intention, but undoubtedly they probably really did do some good and that itself is enough to completely undermine your whole point that they never do anything good. The issue is that, with the sheer vast quantity of concentrated wealth and power they can wield, the society that supports them is bereft of a real voice in how it's resources are used. So much of the fruits of our labour end up closed off in private coffers and it undermines public institutions like democratic governments because while we may theoretically have a say in what they do, we legally have no say at all in how a billionaire spends his bucks (and I say his intentionally). They might say we oughtn't since it's their money and no one typically has a say in what the rest of us do with our money but as with most things, there's a point of extreme where this logic becomes perverse.
-
Can we as a society organize and innovate without billionaires? Even China changed their economy to make them possible.
Right now, writers are on strike. Hollywood workers could invest their time, make movies, and get paid afterwards. But instead, it takes people with money to do the funding.
How should big sums of money be managed? Bureaucrats work to a certain extend but hardly innovate. Which structure could ask a million people to invest a thousand dollars each and offer ethical profits?
-
-
Before anyone jumps on me, billionaires suck, without exception, for reasons I don't really need to go into here, you've all heard them a million times over, and whatever good they do does not offset that in the slightest. None of them probably have been or will be a net positive influence in the world.
That said, you can probably pick out a few good things that any individual billionaire has done (and you can absolutely feel free to debate their motivations for doing those things, many of them I'm sure we're done for tax reasons, vanity, etc.)
Some of the old robber barons like Rockefeller and Carnegie (Carnegie was not technically a billionaire, but if you adjusted his wealth for inflation he would be the richest person today by a pretty comfortable margin) funded a lot of universities, libraries, etc.
Bill Gates has done some good work with vaccines despite his shitty business practices with Microsoft.
Musk is overall a shithead, I don't like him, I don't like his companies, I don't even like his vehicles. That said, I think it's pretty fair to say that Tesla has helped (though he is not solely responsible) to kick open the door for EVs to start gaining wider acceptance and adoption. And SpaceX is doing some exciting stuff, though again I dislike a lot of their methods, disagree with a few of their goals, don't like how they're run as a company, etc. But long-term I think we need to have our eyes to the stars, whether it's for settling on other worlds, mining asteroids, asteroid defense, or if I dare dream it, building a Dyson sphere, or just for scientific advancement for it's own sake, and unfortunately SpaceX is one of the major players in that field now.
Bezos hasn't done anything too flashy that comes to my mind, and like musk he is also a shithead that I dislike for pretty much the exact same reasons, excuse me for not repeating them, but he does have and donate to quite a few charities.
Again, none of that is enough to offset the shitty things they do, but I'd be surprised if you could find any very rich people who haven't at least donated to a handful of charities.
-
An older example is Andrew Carnegie https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Carnegie who worked hard to create...
"The Carnegie Library, Carnegie Hall, Carnegie Institution for Science, Carnegie Corporation of New York, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, Carnegie Mellon University, Carnegie Trust for the Universities of Scotland, Carnegie United Kingdom Trust, Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, Carnegie Council for Ethics in International Affairs, Carnegie Museums of Pittsburgh, and the Carnegie Hero Fund"
He helped a lot with anti-imperialism and education, he's a large reason why there are public libraries in America, establishing 3,000 of them. He also helped space exploration by helping fund the 100-inch hooker telescope.
-
-
Whats with Bill Gates?
-
-
The question was about whether a billionaire had done anything good.
-
That article is much ado about nothing. He knew Epstein and met him occasionally. So did every other billionaire and politician. Unlike some other of Epstein's associates, there's nothing to suggest Gates indulged or was even aware of Epstein's excesses.
-
-
-
Elon musk he is slowly destroying twitter
-
As Hedberg said, say what you will about Hitler, he did kill Hitler.
-
... slowly? ...😅
-
He sacrificed billions for the destruction of twitter. I can respect that. Now do Facebook
-
-
I dont know her name
Jeff bezos ex wife, who has donated a lot of money to charity
-
MacKenzie
-
Well, not to diss on giving to charity but two technical arguments against. One is, you are acting as an additional tax on the worker (the source of the surplus) and then redirecting that tax to charity. It's fine but the elected government has democratically selected priorities that they can rarely fund so it is better to just give it to the treasury. And 2, just don't collect this tax in the first place, allowing the worker to spend it on the local economy.
-
Wrong
-
-
Chuck Freeney. He basically invented "Duty Free" stores and became a billionaire in the process. Then decided he should die "broke" and created The Atlantic Philanthropies secretly staking it with a little over a third of his wealth. In 2020 he closed the organization because he had given away the vast majority of his net worth. Mostly as grants to universities all over the world. He also may have low-key helped fund the IRA.
He's still got enough to live comfortably, and I'm sure his family is set up nicely.
-
Funding one of the biggest terrorist organisations of the 20th century doesn't sound like a very good thing to do... Same goes for all the other Americans who gave them money without realising they were (are) pretty much universally hated across all Ireland - much like how most Muslims hate IS
-
Wrong
-
-
What, do you think they just sit around smoking cigars and laughing evilly all day? Its not that they dont do anything good, their evik acts just offset it.
-
-
Chuck Feeney. He gave away everything to charities.
Edit: it was around 8bn.
-
Yeah I still find it hard to digest that someone with a conscience actually made that much money in the first place. I'd love to see how he arrived at this decision, and if he could convince others too.
-
I would imagine all the billionaires have done something good at least once.
-
And a hundred bad things because .
-
That wasn't the question.
-
-
-
-
Elon Must did pretty much destroy Twitter?
-
Bill Gates is the obvious answer. He's done a ton of good things through the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_%26_Melinda_Gates_Foundation
-
ITT: people who can't understand the difference between doing something good and being good.
Of course there are plenty of billionaires who have done good things, and pointing out all the ways they are still a shit person doesn't change that. Shitty people occasionally do good things, even if for shitty reasons.
-
-
Bill gates and Warren Buffet have both argued for higher taxes on the wealthy and have donated millions to solve social problems.
-
Have they donated to progressive politicians or made their donations to democrats contingent on changing tax policy? Words are wind.
-
-
I believe all billionaires have done something good. I don't think that makes them good people due to the staggering amount of wealth they withhold from the population.
Doing good things, doesn't make you a good person. Donating millions is nothing when you have billions.
If I had to choose a specific, I'd say Bill Gates. I've never fact checked it but I've heard he set up multiple charities and donates for helping children, seems like a great thing to do.
-
Gabe Newell is the least shitty billionaire I can think of, I'm not sure what he does for philanthropy though but at least it doesn't seem like he tries to influence the country for his benefit.
-
Oh wow I've never really considered Gabe's wealth, he would be exceedingly wealthy, wouldn't he?
-
Google said he's worth just shy of 4 billion.
-
-
I love Valve, but I really don't understand why gamers give Steam so much praise. It is a closed platform filled with DRM on which you don't truely own a copy of the game (unlike gog), and on top of that they take a 30% cut of every sales and transactions which is enormous for small studios to pay. Support is poor and the algo/front page distribution of traffic and promotions is a black box.
Don't get me wrong, Gabe seems like a sensible human, and Steam is successful because it offered such a great service to players. But it's been almost 20years now since Steam, and I have not seen Valve slow down the greed. They don't need the money as this point. They don't need 30% of every game sale on PC. This is just as greedy as the other company people hate.
-
-
I have billions of Zimbabwe dollars and I picked up litter for 2 hours a few weeks ago. So there's at least one!
-
Some posts mention people giving away billions in their later life. That sounds great.
However, you need to ask yourself how much of their obscene wealth was created by screwing someone else over? Essentially nobody can get so rich without taking money out of the pockets of other people. You can't just generate money out of thin air.
-
You haven't looked beyond the surface of Gates philanthropy. His involvement diverts focus away from critically acclaimedneeded work in these regions for his pet projects - the science doesn't dictate the focus, the whims of the billionaires do.
-
Brian Acton is the only billionaire I can think of that hasn't been a net negative.
Co-founded WhatsApp, which became popular with few employees. Sold the service at a reasonable rate.
Sold the business for a stupid large sum of money, and generously compensated employees as part of the buyout.
Left the buying company, Facebook, rather than do actions he considered unethical, at great personal expense ($800M).Proceeded to cofound signal, which is an open, and privacy focused messaging system which he has basically bankrolled while it finds financial stability.
He also has been steadily giving away most of his money to charitable causes.
Billionaires are bad because they get that way by exploiting some combination of workers, customers or society.
In the extremely unlikely circumstance where a handful of people make something fairly priced that nearly everybody wants, and then uses the wealth for good, there's nothing intrinsically wrong with being that person.
Selling messaging to a few billion people for $1 a lifetime is a way to do that.-
Makes sense that suddenly becoming billionaire with every intention to not remain one by turning into a force of good is arguably one way to be a decent human. In other words, the only good billionaires are those not trying to be, or remain billionaires.
There is also a point where you have to be smart and patient with how you distribute your money, or else you simply risk some other greedy asshole to pocket it.
-
Hell, I'll take someone who wants to be a billionaire, as long as they do it without exploitation. It's just that that's nearly impossible to do, since very few people actually individually create a billion dollars worth of value.
-
-
-
This query is counterproductively reductive. Every human alive, even the worst of them, has done at least one good thing. Many even do their bad things because they were misled to believe they were doing an overall good.
The point should be that it doesn't matter what good they've done, because the state of being a billionaire necessarily requires one to have done more net bad to the world than good. You could save a million lives by your own hand, but if you're a billionaire, it is a given that you have destroyed far more lives than that. No billionaire's heart was ever weighed by Anubis and judged worthy of the Field of Reeds.
All of them, without exception, end up as greasy streaks on the gleaming teeth of Ammit.
-
Markus Persson made a pretty cool game you may have heard of.
-
He also started to go crazy after selling Mojang.
Sometimes I wonder if that came from the Money or if it would've happened anyways.
-
I suppose money sort of liberates you from social pressure.
-
You can shitpost and be multiple kinds of terrible from a different plane of existence with that amount of fuck you money.
-
-
-
In these comments: People who think someone can accumulate obscene personal wealth and then give a small percentage away makes them good. But if someone dares suggest taxing that obscene wealth they are a monster.
-
Not to defend billionaires, but this post sets an incredibly low bar. I imagine that all people, billionaires included, have done something good in their lives.
-
Very true.
I was just trying to draw attention to some of the comments that are defending them. You'd think from some in here that a little smidge of philanthropy in retirement makes it all okay that one person can hoarde enough personal wealth to feed millions.
-
-
Are we really seeing people say we shouldn't tax billionaires? I wouldn't say that. But this post is basically rage baiting. Like. Yeah. There definitely have been Billionaires who have given all their money away. Or at least the majority of it. They exist. I get why people think Billionaires shouldn't exist. I'm all for taxing them. I'm all for changing regulations to disallow such a large accumulation of wealth and then hoard it so it can't circulate and do what it's meant to do. But are we really suggesting that the majority of people don't think we should tax Billionaires?
-
Yes. Well, some saying we shouldn't tax billionaires more and others saying that the money is better off with one private individual setting up companies and charities, rather than leaving that to governmental entities.
To me, someone paying only ~25% tax when earning millions per year is obscene.
-
-
Reread the title. The question has nothing to do with billionaires being good people.
-
Reread my comment. I'm commenting on the content of the comments.
-
-
-
Not a modern "billionaire", but you can make an argument that Andrew Carnegie spent a lot of his fortune on things that weren't awful.
-
Trick question.
The billionaires who do good don’t want their names attached to their deeds because that defeats the purpose. The point of altruism is you don’t want credit.
(Seriously there aren’t many, though, because if you’re hoarding money, you’re a horrible person.)
-
-
is this a psyop? surely its a psyop
youd probably have a hard time naming one billionaire that hasnt done anything good
theyre still a shit thing to have, practically never got the money they have by being a good person and shouldnt exist in the same world as homeless people, starvation or massively underfunded public projects
-
-
I was looking for irl billionaires, but this is such a great comment.
-
-
David Koch died, which is a very good thing he did for humanity.
-
Bit of a gimme, though, isn't it?
-
-
MacKenzie Scott, Bezos's ex. She's given more than $14 billion to charity.
-
Philanthropy is just a tax break and PR move.
-
And a way of manipulating world politics.
-
-
The problem isn't a billionaire that's done anything good, the problem is a billionaire who has done more good things than bad.
Those don't exist.
There's no amount of good you can do to make up for the amount of exploitation you had to do in order to get to be a billionaire.
It doesn't mean that a billionaire can't do anything good. It just means the world would still be better off without them.
-
What if you make an app or a game and sell it for 2 Billions dollars?
-
What if you take a shit, turn around, and find 2 billion dollars in the toilet?
-
-
-
Notch made Minecraft.
He's been a little shit since then, but at least Minecraft is pretty cool.
-
I think his actions as a billionaire are more telling.
Minecraft is just a knock off of Infiniminer anyway and Zachtronics are much more deserving of the billions. Love all their games. What else has Notch done?
-
-
Jack Dorsey bought me lunch once.
-
They've all done at least one good thing that's a insanely low bar that's very subjective. Name one that isn't more good than harm in the world? They don't exist.
-
What? They're greedy humans who are doing things that have terrible consequences out of selfishness, not mustache twirling cartoon villains out to destroy the world for destruction's sake. I'm sure every single billionaire in the world has done something good at some point. That doesn't justify the kind of wealth disparity that makes their existence possible though.
-
Wrong
-
-
Mike Cannon-Brookes (co-founded Atlassian) has set up a 1.5b green fund to invest in green energy projects
-
Wrong
-
-
Bruce Wayne.
-
Millburn Pennybags or Uncle Pennybags gave you $200 every time you passed go.
-
He owed society much more than that, do no.
-
-
Bill Gates. (Has donated money to charity and founded one himself).
-
Has donated money to his own charoty to aviod taxes and then did donations to manipulate world politics for his own agenda
There, FTFY
-
He donated money before having founded his charity.
-
-
-
A better question might be “name a billionaire that does more good than harm to the world”? Although personally I think that’s an impossibility.
-
Do you mean net good (more good than bad) or is a good thing like "established public libraries" acceptable even if he also oppressed workers and stifled unions and bought government officials and stuff?
-
How many libraries is enough libraries to offset it though? That's the question. 5 libraries? Probably not. 10000 libraries? ...🤷
10 billion libraries? Now you're oppressing people in a whole new way. That's more than one library per person. Surely not scalable.
-
Well that's why I asked OP if this is "net" calculation (good - bad) or if just the good counts.
By my evaluation I don't think any billionaire (or equivalent using PPP calculations) has ever or could ever do enough "good" to overwrite the "bad" they have to do to accumulate that much wealth, unless they literally spend it all on improving people's lives including getting down in the trenches themselves.
-
-
-
That one brought a couple friends and his billionaire son down and unalived together.
Probably unintentional, but that one moment saved the planet a lot of hurt down the line I'm sure.
-
Current Agha Khan founded the Agha Khan Development Network which has done a fair amount of good in the developing world.
-
MacKenzie Scott
-
She enabled Jeff's rise for far too long.
-
-
Anything? That seems like an easy goal to score on. Maybe you mean "done good overall"?
-
Jeffrey Epstein, when he killed himself, probably.
-
Thus ensuring Trump's compromat would not get revealed. Suuuure he killed himself...
-
Pretty sure he didn’t kill himself any more than Prince Andrew doesn’t sweat.
-
-
My two cents:
- The current problem is rather that relatively many rich people are trying to do good things. The vast amount of private donations and privately funded NGOs, etc., have a strong influence within traditional, often national, political and governmental processes. This has had good and bad consequences and has been done with good and not so good intentions. Even if all consequences were good, the question remains to what extent we object to the fact that the choices of where to put money have been made by individuals and not arrived at through democratic processes, which can also lead to good or bad consequences.
- It is unfortunate that "effective altruism" has become the trendy moral framework for many wealthy individuals, especially within Silicon Valley, to make decisions about where they put their money and how. Effective altruism is a questionable moral theory because it is primarily about the question of "how" to act and less about why. The theory suggests no underlying value system. As a result, it remains a values-free form of consequentialism, unlike, say, utilitarianism, a form of consequentialism that does propose an underlying value, namely happiness - and thus happiness maximization as a goal. Moreover, "effective" is a vague term, which also remains relatively free to fill in.
The free-fillability of effective altruism combined with the inherently individual choices of, well, individuals, currently creates friction between wealthy individuals and democratically elected bodies.
This is imho the current issue we need to think about, regardless of any "goodness" of consequences. Where do the responsibilities, rights, duties, freedoms and liabilities of wealthy individuals start, lie and end with respect to those of democratically elected governments, other representatives of the people, and, of course, 'regular' citizens.
-
A single good act does not a good man make.
-
How about no? Stop deepthroating billionaires, please.
-
The amount of exploitation and destruction of the environment that it takes to accumulate 1 billion dollars can never be offset by any amount of “good” that is done by money. If I extract resources and a exploit a community and get a billion dollars, then turn around and give every cent back to that community, surplus value will still be lost.
-
Came to say essentially this but looking at the fact that one person having that much money with all the shit going on is absurd.
-
-
All have turned aside; together they have become worthless; no one does good, not even one. Romans 3:12
You're right. There's no billionaire who has done good. But there's also no human who has done good either.
-
Give me a billion dollars and I'll donate some to the ravioli foundation.
-
Kanye West made "Graduation".
That's not to excuse the gigantic list of awful things he said and did (especially recently), but finding ONE thing a bad person did isn't hard.
-
Batman
-
Some of them have died already. That is good.
-
Bill gates and Warren Buffet have both argued for higher taxes on the wealthy and have donated millions to solve social problems.
-
Elon Musk. I know you guys hate him somehow but. HE DID build reusable rockets. HE DID build electric cars. HE DID restore Free Speech even though you guys somehow don't agree with that because people now can say anything they want and you can't live in your own little bubble without any criticism anymore (on twitter). And that's not what left wingers want lol.
-
His EMPLOYEES build reusable rockets. His EMPLOYEES built electric cars. Even if he participated in this process he would be on a supporting role. Similar to a janitor on spacex, a guy that maybe enables the real pros to do good stuff. (the janitor may actually be more important than musk tbh)
He did NOT restore free speech on twitter. Many activists a still being silenced every day. He gives their data to authoritarian goverments who have journalists executed. Free speech is about freedom from goverment retaliation and he actively aids goverments in suppressing free speech.
-
Yikes lol
-
His employees built reusable rockets. His employees were not even the first to create electric cars, and he's not even the founder of Tesla. He did NOT restore free speech anywhere. People that were hating on him still got banned iirc (I might be wrong). All he did was create a payment service with his friend (PayPal), used the money to buy an electric car company (Tesla), hired people to build satellites and rockets for him (SpaceX), and decided to buy a dying social media company to revive it (Twitter), failing miserably in the process.
Link to prove Twitter failure:
https://en.shiftdelete.net/twitter-x-loses-over-30-of-users-in-two-months/
https://www.gizmochina.com/2023/09/10/twitter-downloads-dropped-30-post-rebranding-to-x/
Link for twitter bans (People that were sharing his location):
https://edition.cnn.com/2022/12/17/business/elon-musk-twitter-ban-reverse-conditions/index.html
-
-
Elon Musk. Without him, electric cars wouldn't be the almost-mainstream thing they are today. We also would be a decade behind on space launch.
-
Now name everything bad Elon did!
-
I'll give him Space X pushed us forward but Tesla existed without him. His contributions there may have happened anyways.
-
Wrong
-
-
Li Ka-shin is another good answer. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Li_Ka-shing who gained a bunch of money like Bill Gates and started his own foundation: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Li_Ka_Shing_Foundation which works towards education reform, the foundation constantly builds and donates to universities to help them further the reach of impoverished students. Additionally, they support a lot of medical services and research to help impoverished areas of HK.
-
Double dog dare me?
-
JK Rowling donated so much money that she's no longer a billionaire!
-
She should really take Jesus's advice, give away all her wealth, and live in the streets in sackcloth.
-
-
Mansa Musa
-
About the only complaint I have about him is that he still owned slaves.
-
-
Michael Kelly caused Blockbuster to go out of business.
-
Tony Khan created AEW and seems to genuinely care about his employees. He put on a private plane this week so the wrestlers could attend the funeral of Bray Wyatt and still make it to Dynamite
-
Wrong
-
-
-
Chuck Feeney
216 comments
Sure.
Bill Gates and the Gates Foundation will probably eradicate polio.
Before people jump on the bandwagon about how Gates is evil and problematic, that there are no virtuous billionaires, and a government or an NGO or an equivalent should have been the one to do it... I know. But the question was "name one billionaire that's done anything good," and I think it's pretty difficult to argue that eradicating polio isn't good.
On same tone, Warren Buffet.
He has also donated billions in the same charity and largely lives controversy free.
The company he’s synonymous with is very much not controversy free
Yeah, dude is asking the wrong question.
However, one can posit that the Gates Foundation is creating a market for vaccines that aren't of interest in the industrialized nations.
I'm not sure that subsequent doses are going to be provided as generously as the first ones.
That's not how vaccines work. The illness is already there, it's not like people get sick after you introduce a vaccine into the system. So the "market" has always been there and every dose administered is great.
The point of eradication is that once a disease is gone, you don't need to vaccinate against it any more. You've probably never been vaccinated against smallpox, for example.
You do know Gates left day to day operations from Microsoft for like 20 years ago and his foundation has nothing to do with Microsoft?
Bill gates, also the guy who spent loads of time on epsteins island banging children. I guess it evens out /s
Source on that?