Bill and Melinda Gates announce one of the biggest charitable donations in history

[beesonthewhatnow]

That's precisely the point, fool.

When I told the forum that Klenner had documented 60 out of 60 polio cases with intravenously administered vitamin C, no-one here could believe it. I had facepalm after facepalm, from pretty much everyone on the thread, including yourself (I see you have not had even DrCarrot's reluctant grace to concede the point).

Now, just as I predicted, you have all switched tack. Somehow, a complete polio cure doesn't matter, or somehow, medical science 'moved on'. Of course, you don't have a fucking clue how it moved on, because there is no such paper which either refutes Klenner's findings or surpasses them.

Is there any thinking of yours but blind faith that current orthodox medical practice is the best there is?

Because while you make such faith-based pronouncements, there really is no helping you.

60 cases.

That seemingly have never been followed up or commented on.

 

[Jazzz]

Fucking hell, Jazzz, you actually linked to something credible . That's literally the first time i've seen you do that. It still doesn't really prove your argument that vitamin c is better than the vaccine. If you do a search for vitamin c treatment polio, the only entries that are specifically about treating it are 50 years old, then it goes dead. The vaccine was being tried at around about the same time and was licenced in 1962 so obviously the vaccine was deemed far more effective for treatment, and ultimately virtual eradication, than vitamin c.

Fair play for looking it up though.

Vaccination is not a treatment for polio.

Again, you are simply assuming that the medical establishment is concerned with working out what is best for you, and you come to the conclusion that the medical establishment works out what is best for you. Throw it away!

Then you might realise the truth, which is that the medical establishment is concerned with making money out of you.

 

[Jazzz]

60 cases.

That seemingly have never been followed up or commented on.

How often are you going to make my point, idiot?

Although wikipedia tells us they were commented on in the paper

Galloway, T. and Seifert, M. (1949) Bulbar Polyiomyelitis:favorable results in its treatment as a problem of respiratory obstruction. Journal of the American Medical Association, 141 (1):1-8

 

[becky p]

Your'e a distraction Jazz, a useful idiot for those who wish to discredit legitimate criticism of Gates. Notice how many times people attacking my argument have tried to mix my argument with yours?

For the record. I have nothing to do with the bonkers loonyism of Jazz. Please confine any criticism of my posts to things that I post please. Thank you.

After reading this barmy thread, I think its safe to say you have your own issues!
You really think you can read Bill Gates mind! You must be minted.

 

[dylans]

After reading this barmy thread, I think its safe to say you have your own issues!
You really think you can read Bill Gates mind! You must be minted.

If you wish to discuss tenofovir then please do.This is a real case. A real example. And real lives. All the rest if fluff.

 

[becky p]

If you wish to discuss tenofovir then please do.This is a real case. A real example. And real lives. All the rest if fluff.

No thanks. I would much rather you told me how you read minds.

 

[dylans]

No thanks. I would much rather you told me how you read minds.

What the fuck are you talking about. ?

 

[Sadken]

This is interesting stuff indeed. I don't see how Gates is still stacking mad paper though; he made $8.67 billion or so last year, apparently.

Paulie Tandoori.

 

[sihhi]

So there's a reasnable chance that he may not even be aware of the controversy. Have you emailed him or the foundation to point out your concerns? What did they say?

And do you think there's maybe a chance people are throwing the baby out with the bathwater when they line up to make demonstrably untrue comments like the one below:

You have selectively quoted that post to suggest I think Gates is a cipher.

In context, responding to your assertions of Gates as a benevolent person,
I suggested he was not but used an apparent benevolence for other reasons.

His wealth means others' poverty.

I support Gates as an inventor, but as a company owner and a manager, he destroyed rival innovations, ruthlessly extracted surplus from his workforce and used this operating system monopoly for the purpose of profit. He didn't give people things, any more than Carnegie gave bridges and buildings with his steelmaking techniques.

As a company owner he has striven to maximise profits to his investors, he is a hypocritical baron on the scale of Carnegie or Rockefeller.

Microsoft has meant massive investor rent-seeking behaviour that serves little economic or social purpose (endless versions of the same product for mega-cash, hostile takeovers), the use of entry barriers to limit the scope of any competition (Windows as a prerequisite across many parts of the world), the creation of false choice in Microsoft services and products, several instances of collusion between other companies.

Here is another example - aid provided via the Gates Foundation is being used as a lever to ensure that the CPV tightens Vietnam's intellectual property environment, hence profit for Microsoft.

PM gives Microsoft firm assurance on intellectual property

HA NOI — Prime Minister Nguyen Tan Dung assured Microsoft that Viet Nam would implement intellectual property regulations and asked the company to continue its preferential policies for software and IT development.

At his meeting with Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer in Ha Noi yesterday, Dung expressed his delight at seeing the co-operation between Vietnamese software developers and Microsoft grow rapidly bringing practical benefits to both sides.
..
He highly valued the efficient operation of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, which has funded a number of healthcare and education programmes for the poor in Viet Nam.

The prime minister asked the foundation to continue implementing its Viet Nam programmes in the near future, especially those facilitating human resources training and internet connection in rural areas.

http://vietnamnews.vnagency.com.vn/...-firm-assurance-on-intellectual-property.html

 

[editor]

Microsoft's co-founder Paul Allen is also now pledging the greater part of his fortune to philanthropic ventures:

Microsoft co-founder Paul Allen says he is committing most of his estimated $13.5 billion (£8.7 billion) fortune to philanthropy after his death.

Allen follows in the footsteps of former business partner Bill Gates and billionaire investor Warren Buffett, who have both pledged the vast majority of their wealth to philanthropy.

Allen, the 37th richest person in the world according to Forbes magazine, co-founded Microsoft in 1975 with Gates and resigned as an executive in 1983 as he overcame a first bout with cancer, although he has since been treated for non-Hodgkin's lymphoma.

He has been involved with philanthropy in the US Pacific Northwest for 20 years, largely through his Paul G. Allen Family Foundation, handing out more than $1 billion in grants and funding for local projects.

"I also want to announce that my philanthropic efforts will continue after my lifetime," said Allen. "I've planned for many years now that the majority of my estate will be left to philanthropy to continue the work of the foundation and to fund non-profit scientific research."

He gave no details of how his fortune would be directed to philanthropy after his death. Unlike the Gates Foundation, which has an independent $34 billion endowment for grant-making, Allen funds his own foundation's grants directly....

http://www.pcpro.co.uk/news/359524/microsoft-founder-pledges-8-7bn-to-philanthropy

 

[dylans]

Microsoft's co-founder Paul Allen is also now pledging the greater part of his fortune to philanthropic ventures:

Oh good. I hope they can give some of it to the poor women in Cambodia and Africa they used as human guinea pigs for the profits of drug companies

 

[Streathamite]

Oh good. I hope they can give some of it to the poor women in Cambodia and Africa they used as human guinea pigs for the profits of drug companies

Paul Allen was involved in organising Big Pharma trials in the 3rd world?
I doubt it.

 

[dylans]

Paul Allen was involved in organising Big Pharma trials in the 3rd world?
I doubt it.

No idea. I know Gates was (and is)

 

[ska invita]

Thirty US billionaires pledge to give away half their fortunes to charity

Bill Gates's and Warren Buffett's campaign draws in top names including George Lucas and Michael Bloomberg
http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2010/aug/04/us-billionaires-half-fortune-gates

So much money...but its all going to stop disease (medicine)? What is the point in that? Invest in peoples infrastructure so they can help themselves no?

 

[Jeff Robinson]

Bill Gates: raising minimum wage 'cause(s) job destruction. If you really start pushing it, then you're just making a huge tradeoff'.

Scum. Sub-human scum.

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/sus...ising-minimum-wage-does-cause-job-destruction

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

That story is on CNS News, owned by Brent Bozell III, and operated by Media Research Center:

The Media Research Center (MRC) is a politically conservative content analysis organization based in Alexandria, Virginia, founded in 1987 by activist L. Brent Bozell III. Its stated mission is to "prove—through sound scientific research—that liberal bias in the media does exist and undermines traditional American values" and to neutralize the perceived liberal bias of the mainstream media.[1]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_Research_Center

 

[purves grundy]

Twat. Thing is, his is not 'just another opinion' - this guy can convene decision-makers at the highest level. It carries real weight.

Having said that, I know some small organizations that I really like which have received dosh from GF (though in each case through larger, more corporate charirites - the trickle-down theory is alive and kicking within both state aid and philanthropic aid. Take 10% off in management fees at each level.) So my feelings are more mixed here.

 

[Johnny Canuck3]

Twat. Thing is, his is not 'just another opinion' - this guy can convene decision-makers at the highest level. It carries real weight.

Having said that, I know some small organizations that I really like which have received dosh from GF (though in each case through larger, more corporate charirites - the trickle-down theory is alive and kicking within both state aid and philanthropic aid. Take 10% off in management fees at each level.) So my feelings are more mixed here.

Do you think it's ever possible for the minimum wage to be too high?

 

[purves grundy]

Too high with regard to what? You could probably see how it would be too high to be non-problematically maintained within an economy built along neoliberal lines.

I think having no maximum permissible level applied to the fortunes which the tiny few like Gates make is where we should be focusing more attention. Then the nature of the previous question would change.

 

[Jeff Robinson]

Too high with regard to what? You could probably see how it would be too high to be non-problematically maintained within an economy built along neoliberal lines.

I think having no maximum permissible level applied to the fortunes which the tiny few like Gates make is where we should be focusing more attention. Then the nature of the previous question would change.

Are you seriously suggesting that the wealth discrepancy between Bill Gates and the workers in Congo's coltan mines and China's sweatshops is anything less than optimal?

 

[purves grundy]

Are you seriously suggesting that the wealth discrepancy between Bill Gates and the workers in Congo's coltan mines and China's sweatshops is anything less than optimal?

I know, call me a raving red nutbag, but something about it just doesn't seem quite right. ..

 

[weltweit]

Do you think it's ever possible for the minimum wage to be too high?

I think at some level there must come some undesirable effects, but what that level is I have no idea.

I wonder what the experience has been in other countries?

But it is not desirable people work for too little. Work should pay reasonable wages otherwise what is the point of having an economy. An economy that keeps a mass of workers on poverty wages must be described as a failing one as it fails so many people by not providing them decent work.

 

[Frances Lengel]

Fuck Bill Gates, he's a wanker. Obviously - The sooner he joins that wide hipped bastard Steve Jobs the better.

 

[butchersapron]

I think at some level there must come some undesirable effects, but what that level is I have no idea.

I wonder what the experience has been in other countries?

But it is not desirable people work for too little. Work should pay reasonable wages otherwise what is the point of having an economy. An economy that keeps a mass of workers on poverty wages must be described as a failing one as it fails so many people by not providing them decent work.

Undesirable for who? And you've just described the capitalist model of success as a failure whilst pointing out that the current system is not motivated by the desire to provide decent jobs.

 

[SpookyFrank]

But it is not desirable people work for too little. Work should pay reasonable wages otherwise what is the point of having an economy. An economy that keeps a mass of workers on poverty wages must be described as a failing one as it fails so many people by not providing them decent work.

Except the idea of the economy as some universal beneficent force is a complete fiction. The situation with precarious labour and poverty wages has been created deliberately to serve certain interests. I agree that it's illogical even by the demented reasoning of capitalism to completely impoverish your workforce, but they're not doing that. Look at the amount of overpriced shit still being sold on the high street, and look how many people are clamouring to get at it. The economy is doing very well indeed for the people it is designed to serve. It's not an accident that so many other people are getting shafted, it's all part of the plan.

 

[weltweit]

Undesirable for who? And you've just described the capitalist model of success as a failure whilst pointing out that the current system is not motivated by the desire to provide decent jobs.

Undesirable for the mass of the population, the mass of voters.. the general public.
tbh I would like to see international comparisons because I don't know what is happening around the world.

 

[butchersapron]

Undesirable for the mass of the population, the mass of voters.. the general public.
tbh I would like to see international comparisons because I don't know what is happening around the world.

Are these things all the same then? What would the undesirable effects be?

 

[weltweit]

Except the idea of the economy as some universal beneficent force is a complete fiction. The situation with precarious labour and poverty wages has been created deliberately to serve certain interests. I agree that it's illogical even by the demented reasoning of capitalism to completely impoverish your workforce, but they're not doing that. Look at the amount of overpriced shit still being sold on the high street, and look how many people are clamouring to get at it. The economy is doing very well indeed for the people it is designed to serve. It's not an accident that so many other people are getting shafted, it's all part of the plan.

If the economy does not serve the people, but just a minority, I think it is arguable it is failing.
But there is no alternative in Britain for voters to opt for.
While I agree capitalism can put pressure on wages, the market effect, government can intervene to reduce the excesses of the market. The minimum wage is an example of that.

 

[weltweit]

Are these things all the same then? What would the undesirable effects be?

Say government set the minimum wage to £30.00. That might scare some employers out of creating more jobs and might cause some to cut back. It would also change the balance between hiring workers or buying automatic machines for the same job.

 

[SpookyFrank]

While I agree capitalism can put pressure on wages, the market effect, government can intervene to reduce the excesses of the market. The minimum wage is an example of that.

I'd argue that the minimum wage as it currently exists does not reduce the excesses of the market at all. The minimum wage is lower than a living wage for starters, to the point where the government ends up subsidising employers who pay this poverty wage via the benefits system. Add to that the nice folk at the DWP who will force people to take minimum wage jobs or deny them access to benefits and it really doesn't look like the minimum wage is being used for our benefit.

It could be of course, if it was raised significantly, enforced properly with actual penalties for employers who fail to pay it, and loopholes with apprenticeships and so on were removed so that you couldn't just give someone a job stacking shelves for 2.50 an hour and call them an apprentice.

The government might intervene to prevent the excesses of the market from actually killing people, but all this serves to do is to sustain the very same market that was trying to kill them in the first place. They're not trying to protect us from market forces, they're only trying to protect the market from itself, the better to screw us all over again tomorrow.