Our society has firmly established that giving someone five dollars in charity is better than selling them something that gives them twenty dollars of benefit for only ten dollars.
I have the sneaking suspicion that Gates is engaged in a long term moral experiment: how much money does a rich non-celebrity have to give away before people forgive him for being rich. I think he'll find that 100% isn't enough -- he'll have to start giving away other people's money before we like him. After all, look how we applaud those who do?
eee_eff
· 1 year ago
After all, Gates didn’t just create wealth for himself or Microsoft, he’s also made the world a whole lot richer. Like it or not, it was Windows that provided the platform for much of the information revolution, which subsequently created a worldwide economic boom.
This is a silly argument, for a variety of reasons that should be apparent to anyone with a slight faith in market based outcomes. I'll just give the single largest example here, and follow up in few days with a post on this misinformation.
Had Microsoft or Windows never existed, another company would have stepped in to fill the market demand for a PC Operating System. So to make the argument that Bill Gates is personally responsible for the wealth creation of the PC revolution doesn't hold water unless you demonstrate that there was something unique that Bill Gates brought to the table. So, when I bought a PC in 1991 for a construction site office (it was rare at that time, believe it or not) it came preloaded not with windows but PC GEOS, a non-MS product that MS used it's anti-competitive practices to crush. If a true competitive market for PC Operating System had been part of the regulatory policy at the time (i.e., had MS been quickly enjoined from using it's anti-competitive practices to first crush PC GEOS and then BEOS) it's quite probable that we would have had better OS's faster, due to competitive market forces. Instead, we had MS enrichment, not wealth creation.
Peter Rock
· 1 year ago
"If we’re talking human flourishing, how can you beat creating an operating system that runs on 90+ percent of PCs has likely contributed trillions to global GDP over the last quarter century?"
By creating one that is free for any users including businesses. How does restricting the freedom of users make for a "flourishing" society?
Mad-Hamlet
· 1 year ago
Greetings,
Free? purely free at all times for everyone, everywhere?
Congratulations, you've just destroyed civilization. Without some dynamic, social or economic tension, limitations in other words, things have a tendency to explode.
Economic growth is a better long term solution, or continuation of society which is the ever moving solution, is far superior to the Instant-Gratification-Junkie's knee-jerk reaction of FREE IS GOOD! RARRGH!
I remain, as always, Mad-Hamlet
ravi kumar.b
· 1 year ago
respected sir, how you reached your milestone is amazed and i will take an inspiration from your feet and i will struggle to become like you. thankingyou sir ravi kumar
Erik | Gravytrain
· 10 months ago
It's pretty clear that the man is incredible. Haters are either jealous or just plain stupid. You want communism and free crap for all, go start your own country and stop enjoying the benefits of living in the society that we do.
Have fun with your torches, caves and lazy masses.
All Comments
I have the sneaking suspicion that Gates is engaged in a long term moral experiment: how much money does a rich non-celebrity have to give away before people forgive him for being rich. I think he'll find that 100% isn't enough -- he'll have to start giving away other people's money before we like him. After all, look how we applaud those who do?
This is a silly argument, for a variety of reasons that should be apparent to anyone with a slight faith in market based outcomes. I'll just give the single largest example here, and follow up in few days with a post on this misinformation.
Had Microsoft or Windows never existed, another company would have stepped in to fill the market demand for a PC Operating System. So to make the argument that Bill Gates is personally responsible for the wealth creation of the PC revolution doesn't hold water unless you demonstrate that there was something unique that Bill Gates brought to the table. So, when I bought a PC in 1991 for a construction site office (it was rare at that time, believe it or not) it came preloaded not with windows but PC GEOS, a non-MS product that MS used it's anti-competitive practices to crush. If a true competitive market for PC Operating System had been part of the regulatory policy at the time (i.e., had MS been quickly enjoined from using it's anti-competitive practices to first crush PC GEOS and then BEOS) it's quite probable that we would have had better OS's faster, due to competitive market forces. Instead, we had MS enrichment, not wealth creation.
By creating one that is free for any users including businesses. How does restricting the freedom of users make for a "flourishing" society?
Free? purely free at all times for everyone, everywhere?
Congratulations, you've just destroyed civilization. Without some dynamic, social or economic tension, limitations in other words, things have a tendency to explode.
Economic growth is a better long term solution, or continuation of society which is the ever moving solution, is far superior to the Instant-Gratification-Junkie's knee-jerk reaction of FREE IS GOOD! RARRGH!
I remain, as always,
Mad-Hamlet
how you reached your milestone is amazed and i will take an inspiration from your feet and i will struggle to become like you.
thankingyou sir
ravi kumar
Have fun with your torches, caves and lazy masses.