[Wolves] OT:Bill Gates the modern day Robin Hood?

[Wayne Morris]

Simon Morris wrote:

>On 11/04/06, Kevanf1 <kevanf1 at gmail.com> wrote:
>  
>
>>On another mailing list that I have subscribed to for years there is
>>an ongoing argument.  Argument because I totally disagree with the
>>other short sighted idiots who think Bill Gates is the modern day
>>messiah/Robin Hood/other saintly figure.  Why?  Because Billy boy has
>>donated x billion dollars to a charity.  It's getting to the stage
>>where I may unsubscribe from that mailing list, I don't want to but
>>this is really getting to me.
>>
>>So, any arguments I can use to show that BG and co. are not so saintly
>>would be greatly received.  I have tried the strings attached one and
>>the wonderful donations of MS software that then locks in many third
>>world users to Microsoft.  These other guys just don't see it.  Their
>>argument is that it's worth the strings to have billions poured into
>>this charity.  I'm sorry but I totally disagree.  To me it's like the
>>criminal drug barons funding a drug rehab clinic while still peddling
>>their wares and causing a vicious circle.
>>
>>Or have I got it wrong?
>>    
>>
>
>Bill Gates private charity donations are different to Microsoft
>corporate donations.
>
>His work in finding a cure for HIV and his other private charitable
>ventures are to be applauded IMO (and why not - he has more money than
>he could possibly spend in his lifetime)
>  
>
Hmm,  if you are a drug dealer and made millions out of a cartel should 
you get *any* congrats for giving a few percent to charities?
No difference in whether they are private or company donations, the 
money was still made from the same source.

If you've got more money than you can spend in many lifetimes, is 
handing some out worth applauding or to be expected?

Some churches believe in 'tithing' - giving 10% of income - does Gates 
follow this?


>Microsofts donations of software to developing countries could be
>viewed in two ways - I think you are correct to be debating your side
>of the argument. Giving software to developing countries is an
>admirable intention (This was one of the reasons behind Ubuntu,
>right?) but then following that up a year later with chargable
>bills... The thought of countries spending thousands of US dollars on
>software when the average person earns a dollar a day makes me feel
>queezy (and very fat)
>
>Rgds
>--
>~sm
>Jabber: mozrat at gmail.com
>www: http://beerandspeech.org
>  
>
Personally, I think Bill Gates appearance at Live 8 soured the whole 
event - he could have funded most of what the event was in aid of, but I 
think his appearance
was a  publicity stunt.
Is the old thing true that if he dropped £50 on the floor, it wouldn't 
be worth the effort picking it up as he earns more in the time it would 
take?

But Microsoft selling software to countries that can't afford it can't 
be worse than Western countries selling arms to countries than can't 
feed their own people,
so perhaps MS (bad as they are) are the last target to chase?