[Gllug] Bill Gates To Leave Microsoft

[Paul M]

On 16/06/06, Mike Brodbelt <mike at coruscant.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> On Fri, 2006-06-16 at 11:22 +0100, Richard Jones wrote:
> > On Fri, Jun 16, 2006 at 11:08:23AM +0100, ben fitzgerald wrote:
> > > I'm no MS fan but <smashie+nicie_voice>he does a lot for charity,
> > > mate</smashie+nicie_voice>
> >
> > But would the world have been better if all that PC "rent" money that
> > he forced out of people had stayed with the people?
>
> I actually doubt it. I'm no fan of Gates or of Microsoft, but the wealth
> he has amassed in one place has made it possible for him to do things
> that, were the cash still spread out thinly, couldn't happen.
...
> There's a good possibility that the work done by the Gates foundation
> will save the lives of thousands in developing countries, and it may
> also contribute towards a cure for malaria and other diseases, many of
> which have received little attention for a long time due to the
> demographic they affect. I think that whatever one may think of Bill
> Gates and Microsoft, it's difficult to refute that he's doing real good
> with the foundation these days.

I do have a healthy respect for the work the Gates foundation does
with tropical
diseases but  I think there is an argument to be made that masssive
concentration
of wealth is inherently unhealthy at a societal level, and profoundly
undemocratic. Its
only luck that Gates has chosen to put his wealth towards something that is an
undoubted social good, rather than something that isn't it. Putting
that much power into
the hands of anyone individual is just not good, particularly since there is no
accountability.

It is also worth rembering that not all of Gates' philanthrophy has
been so benevolent. He has certainly put a lot of computers into
librarys in poor areas but, unsurprisingly, the
program was conditional on them running Microsoft software, helping to
encourage the futher accumulation of wealth. Had such a program been
funded, instead, from taxes
raised on such massive wealth, there would have been a degree of democratic
accountability. Furthermore the decisions as to what software should
be run could
have been made according to the needs, and best interests of the end
users, rather
than the person giving the money.

Paul M.
-- 
Gllug mailing list  -  Gllug at gllug.org.uk
http://lists.gllug.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/gllug