Gates Retreats From 'Doomsday' Climate View, Prioritizes Aid To Poorest Countries
- Reference: 0179905466
- News link: https://news.slashdot.org/story/25/10/29/1356258/gates-retreats-from-doomsday-climate-view-prioritizes-aid-to-poorest-countries
- Source link:
In [1]a blog post , Gates wrote that climate change will have serious consequences but will not lead to humanity's demise. He acknowledges that some climate advocates will call him a hypocrite given his own carbon footprint and his 2021 book warning that climate change could be as deadly as COVID-19 by mid-century and five times as deadly by 2100.
The poorest countries receive less than 1% of rich countries' budgets at their highest level and that this share is shrinking as wealthy nations cut aid and low-income countries struggle with debt, he wrote. Rising temperatures are now inevitable and that the current consensus suggests Earth's average temperature will be between two and three degrees Celsius higher than 1850 levels by 2100.
[1] https://www.gatesnotes.com/home/home-page-topic/reader/three-tough-truths-about-climate
Gates and what he wants to say can fuck right off (Score:4, Informative)
until he starts paying taxes like everybody else.
Fuckhead billionaires...
Re: (Score:2)
He has no earned income because, like all billionaires, he's arranged to have no income in order to dodge taxes.
I'm mad at the loopholes, but I'm also mad at the fuckers who exploit the loopholes, because just because being a selfish asshole is legal doesn't make it okay to be a selfish asshole.
Interesting (Score:4, Insightful)
He needs to change his ways for the new Administration and disavow climate change before they make him go away.
Actually worth a read and debate (Score:3, Informative)
Yes, I was outraged by the first words in the headline of the slash dot post, and immediately ready to cancel Bill Gates (and most of my life I’ve been a Bill Gates/M$ hater, though I was happy when he retired and seemed reasonably serious about philanthropy - as billionaires go he’s better than average). But I did RTFA, his long blog post. It makes for a terrible headline, but if you actually read it, he is still clear that climate change is a big problem and he still wants us all to help solve it and cut emissions. And although I’m not sure I agree with him on a shift in priorities to improving health and agriculture and reducing poverty with a partial de-emphasis on emission as #1 priority, I think he makes a pretty good case, and I felt like I learned something. His new stance is unfortunately subtle, which doesn’t work in today’s media (including /., but at least they provided the link so I could read for myself). So go ahead and insta-pillory me if it feels good, but I suggest you RTFA first, and then make specific cases to bolster your argument. I would say I found about 10 assertions I wanted to yell at him about, but about 30 assertions that were pretty solid and made me think a bit. I think he might even be right, but I would argue all he will do is damage b/c of how the right/anti-climate folks will distort and simplify his message to ‘Don’t worry about global warming, even Bill Gates says we will be fine and the doomsayers are wacko’, which if you cherry-pick you can do. His intended audience is I think the COP30 in Brazil, and those are thoughtful folks who can handle nuance, buuuuut then there are Americans.
Re: (Score:2)
Many of us are reading this while at work or school, and don't actually have time to both:
1. read the article
2. post snark.
Obviously, number 2 is the higher priority, so most of us will ignore your admonitions to read the article and possibly mod you down for being so audacious.
Re: (Score:1)
> His intended audience is I think the COP30 in Brazil, and those are thoughtful folks who can handle nuance, buuuuut then there are Americans.
Ah yes, COP30 in Brazil. The climate conference that required the destruction of the Amazon rainforest to build a four-lane road to travel from the private planes to the conference. Amazing show of support for saving the planet. [1]https://www.bbc.com/news/artic... [bbc.com]
[1] https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c9vy191rgn1o
Really, Bill? (Score:1)
Nevermind that climate change itself will increase the spread of disease and poverty conditions...
Just donate 25% of your wealth to eliminating poverty and really make a change.
ennui (Score:2)
Billy got tired of playing with one of his toys, now likes another toy better.
Triage (Score:2)
Or in this case, harm reduction.
Sounds like he's realized the climate is screwed and we are completely incapable of thinking far enough ahead to do anything about it.
As the effects of climate change continue to appear, we can address them on a case-by-case basis...if those effects directly involve anything we care about right now.
Meanwhile we should forget about fixing the root cause and apply our efforts where they might have some effect.
Decided to crap all over it (Score:2)
Gates is into "AI" now. "AI" consumes enormous amounts of energy at the expense of the climate.
So he has chosen to become a climate change denier, because it serves his interests.
Maybe? (Score:2, Interesting)
Is it possible Gates found it was more lucrative to monetize aid to poor countries than climate aid?
Re: (Score:1)
Yes.
Re: (Score:2)
> Is it possible Gates found it was more lucrative to monetize aid to poor countries than climate aid?
Precisely my first thought. He figured out some way to make more money by making it look like he's helping poor countries. Probably a nice lack of regulations in poor countries. Regulations that make it really difficult to set up a nonprofit / charity and then rake money in from it hand over fist.
Re: (Score:2)
Gates donates vaccines to chosen poor countries specifically to avoid production of generic medicines. This means that the people in other poorer countries that don't have their own drugs manufacturers end up not getting the medicine.
Re: Maybe? (Score:1)
Even GretaT quit the hot air band wagon. No more money in it.