Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Author Topic: Bill Gates not a philanthropist?  (Read 17833 times)

Description:

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline blanning

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Join Date: May 2008
  • Posts: 367
    • Show all replies
    • http://www.brianlanning.com
Re: Bill Gates not a philanthropist?
« Reply #14 from previous page: January 20, 2014, 01:10:30 AM »
Quote from: JJ;757543
Fossil fuels.


So it's better to force people not to have children than to find technological solutions to the reduction of fossil fuels?

Quote

They metals and minerals we are force miming form places like Africa to make mobiles and computers.  


Again, there are technological solutions.  The only reason these things aren't recycled from old electronics now is because it's not economically viable to do so.  So should we force people not to have children only because it's cheaper to do it that way?

Maybe if we had a different attitude, we wouldn't need to replace electronics so often.  No one ever suggests that.  

Quote

Food will become an issue in the not too distant future


Listen to me...  there is no food shortage.   You're being lied to.  If a place has no food, it's either because someone is economically raping a country, or because food is being used as a weapon.  The answer to this is not to reduce population.  It's to stop the people who are causing these problems.

Us "educated" and "advanced" people in the western world think we have all the answers.  We figured out how to do it all.  We know for sure that there's just too many people on the planet for the amount of food and water we have.  We really have this farming and nature thing down pat, right?  lol  Such arrogance!  Not even close.  Wanna see how wrong we got it?  Watch this movie:  http://www.backtoedenfilm.com  I challenge you to watch it to the end with an open mind, then tell me how much arable land there is on the planet.

You want to fix fossil fuel usage?  How about we stop using all these chemical fertilizers.  They're all petroleum based.  What about all the plastic bags and bottles that are so bad for the environment?  What was so bad about wood or metal boxes, glass bottles, or paper bags?  I think they were all better anyway.  If we stop our world-wide plastic orgy, that might reduce fossil fuels right?  Plastic sucks anyway.

Did you know that my car gets more than 45 miles to the gallon?  It kicks the Prius' butt.  And it's not even available for sale in the US.  Why?   But let's not stop there.  How about making all cars are electric cars?  And don't tell me about how we're burning coal at the plant anyway.  For the cost of a new car, I'm about to go off grid and install a wind and solar system at my farm.  Why couldn't I charge my car with this?

My point to all this is that there are technological and sociological solutions to all these problems that don't require forced sterilizations, aborting babies, and killing people.  But why aren't we pursuing those solutions?  When it comes to blowing up people at wedding parties, we have the highest technology ever attained by humans.  How about we apply that level of research dollars and effort into something that helps people instead of killing people?  I guess there's no money in it.

Like I said way up higher, humans have an attitude problem.
 

Offline blanning

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Join Date: May 2008
  • Posts: 367
    • Show all replies
    • http://www.brianlanning.com
Re: Bill Gates not a philanthropist?
« Reply #15 on: January 20, 2014, 01:22:06 AM »
Quote from: nicholas;757550
I think most people are blissfully ignorant of the evil that western civilisation imposes on the rest of the world to supply the things that make our lifestyle what it is.

Ignorance is a choice IMNSHO.


I agree completely.  

If anyone wants to really see how deep the rabbit hole goes, go to amazon or youtube and search for "Confessions of an Economic Hitman" by John Perkins.   That's a good place to start.

brian
 

Offline blanning

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Join Date: May 2008
  • Posts: 367
    • Show all replies
    • http://www.brianlanning.com
Re: Bill Gates not a philanthropist?
« Reply #16 on: January 20, 2014, 01:27:58 AM »
Quote from: gertsy;757560
Thus the importance that we all take responsibility for our impact on the world and try to leave it in a better place by the time we leave. Philanthropy is the way to do that, in a considered and developmental way. Sponsoring agri projects and medical initiatives. Just like Bill Gates has.


Heh, and Warren Buffet is just a nice old man who likes ice cream.

Quote

Look at the amount of money Gates and Microsoft has pumped into the EU and the third world (Spain) through forced donations to corrupt bureaucracy.


Spain is a third world country.  lol

I....  wow.
 

Offline blanning

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Join Date: May 2008
  • Posts: 367
    • Show all replies
    • http://www.brianlanning.com
Re: Bill Gates not a philanthropist?
« Reply #17 on: January 20, 2014, 02:44:24 AM »
Quote from: Kesa;757574
I believe you when you say there is enough food in this world to feed everybody. But only in quantity. The quality of that food is not fit for consumption. I am going to make a guess and state that 99% of the food available is processed rubbish. How many generations can humanity flourish eating nothing but crap before our own DNA begins breaking down? I believe we should be focusing on quality nutrition and not quantity mush for the masses. To do this we need to reduce the population significantly.


Nope.  When I say there's no food shortage, I mean there's enough arable land to feed everyone on the planet fresh fruits and vegetables and grains and even meat.

Did you know that Qaddafi had nearly completed a huge public works project in Libya that was a huge underground aqueduct?  Had it been allowed to continue, it would have transformed Libya from a desert into farm land.  But we brought "democracy" to Libya.  In the 1940s, Israel was a desert.  Now they export fruit to Europe.  Why can't this be done in, oh I don't know, Ethiopia?  How about Sudan?  Somalia?  There's no reason why it can't.  Yet it doesn't happen.

I agree that most food out there is garbage.  Some in third world are malnourished because of the absence of food.  Some in the first world are malnourished because the food they have is devoid of nutrients.  

Quote

And no before you say it i don't think we have the technology now to do it. Even if we wanted to. They tell us that we should eat lots of wholemeal grains to be healthy but the real reason is that grain is easy to mass produce. The human body isn't designed to eat this much grain. Technology cannot provide 9 billion people with quality food. We need to reduce the population


I disagree.  That is, I agree that the food pyramid is a joke.  And the we shouldn't be eating the quantities of grain we're "supposed to".  But I don't think we need to reduce the population to feed everyone a quality diet.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HsAracLBCxI

Where I am (Uruguay) has some of the best farm land in the world.  And vast areas are simply empty.  No people, no food growing.  So much is thrown away because of economics or mismanagement.  Yet there are still poor people here who don't get enough to eat.  Would reducing the population here solve that problem?
 

Offline blanning

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Join Date: May 2008
  • Posts: 367
    • Show all replies
    • http://www.brianlanning.com
Re: Bill Gates not a philanthropist?
« Reply #18 on: January 20, 2014, 06:37:47 PM »
Quote from: Kesa;757584
Improve living standards? I believe the reason why we are not breeding   at the same rate is because of life pressures such as work. People are   too busy to have kids these days. But yes i see your point.


Or they could just have screwed up priorities.  

The entire feminist movement in the US was manufactured in order to get the other half of the US population working so that they could be taxed.  Those women were sold a bill of goods.  No longer did they need family and children to be fulfilled.  Now they can have a career!  Just think of what you can do with all that extra money!  In other words, they sold out.  They sold out their children for "a higher standard of living", whatever that is.  Later, the two income household was required just to make it.  This is because women in the workforce drove down wages (real wages I mean, taking inflation into account).

It's no accident that this had a negative effect on the family.  I believe this was a major contributor to the increase in infidelity and divorce.  While movies, TV, music, and other pop culture influences pushed the idea that sex outside of marriage was ok and only old prudish, behind the times people thought otherwise.  After all, if you get all the vitamin-P you want without getting married, why get married and have children?  One of the goals of Agenda 21 is to destroy the family.

What I would call the "correct" business model is for people to have a family with maybe 2 to 6 children where everyone including the father works at home.  They produce most of their own food and clothes.  They have several small businesses for some income to buy the things they can't or don't want to make for themselves.  And the parents and grand parents educate the children.  With this model, families spend more time together.  Kids aren't brainwashed by the state.  And if one of the businesses fails, they have others.  And if they all fail, they still have a place to live and food to eat.  This is what I'm trying to create now.  I hope I finish it in time.
 

Offline blanning

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Join Date: May 2008
  • Posts: 367
    • Show all replies
    • http://www.brianlanning.com
Re: Bill Gates not a philanthropist?
« Reply #19 on: January 20, 2014, 06:42:47 PM »
Quote from: Kesa;757585
@Blanning. We have the same problem in Australia. We have excellent farming land that isn't being used. Instead we prefer to import our fruit and vegetables at a higher cost :confused:

... and pay farmers not to plant like in the US?  The cynic in me says this is on purpose so that we're dependent.

Here in Uruguay, food is supposed to be cheap and plentiful, since there are a lot of farmers and a relatively small population.  They export much more food than they consume.  The problem is that a farmer can choose to sell to the locals or export the food.  So that means that the locals have to compete with other, wealthier countries for the food grown across the street.  But salaries aren't any higher.  The end result is that food is really expensive.  Actually, it's about the same price as the US.  But that makes it expensive here.

When the economic crash comes, there will be a lot less demand since many places won't be able to pay for the food, and transport might be expensive or impossible.  So I expect food prices to crash here.  So in that sense, an economic collapse would be a good thing for the people here.
 

Offline blanning

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Join Date: May 2008
  • Posts: 367
    • Show all replies
    • http://www.brianlanning.com
Re: Bill Gates not a philanthropist?
« Reply #20 on: January 20, 2014, 06:49:46 PM »
Quote from: psxphill;757605
Maybe they don't have huge cash reserves to subsidise the project or water trapped since the ice age to last 100 years.
 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Man-Made_River
 
Solving the problem isn't easy, because anything you do just causes new problems.


Well they had the cash at one point.  The second thing the "liberators" did upon toppling Qaddafi was to steal the countries gold reserves.  I believe it was all sent to London.  It's hard to setup a gold dinar without any gold.

The first thing they did was to setup a foreign controlled central bank.  That's telling.  Let's see.... who still doesn't have a foreign controlled central bank?   That would be Syria, Iran, and North Korea.  What a coincidence!
 

Offline blanning

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Join Date: May 2008
  • Posts: 367
    • Show all replies
    • http://www.brianlanning.com
Re: Bill Gates not a philanthropist?
« Reply #21 on: January 22, 2014, 04:46:09 PM »
Quote from: JJ;757695
OMFG did you really just say that about feminism.


Why, yes I did!   :-)

Some people would call what I did "traditional family values".  But anti-feminism is so much more incendiary.  lol

Quote

Honestly. Let me guess your wife is one of these old school people who just wants to look after their children and husband.


Yes.  But don't assume that she's uneducated.  She has a university degree and worked in the medical field for a number of years until the cost of daycare became oppressive, at which point she did what she would rather do anyway:  stay home with the kids.  Believe it or not, she was happy with her decision, the kids were better off, and it didn't make her a idiot.

How many women out there would prefer to stay home with the kids if they could afford it?  I'd argue quite a large percentage.  Oh, and this whole women working thing is so western-world.  There's women covering huge parts of the planet who would find it unthinkable to let someone else raise their children while they toiled away somewhere else for something so meaningless as money.

Quote

Who is brainwashed again.


You are.  :-)  But you're not alone.  I'd say that most people have bought the propaganda with little or no effort on the part of those pushing it.

Quote

Women are equal to men they can do as they please.


Men and women are not the same, regardless of what your TV says.  Men and women are physically and mentally different.  One isn't better or worse than the other, they're just different.  There's a reason why you don't put women on the front line in the military.  A civilization thinking rationally wouldn't dream of doing that, which is why they're getting ready to do it in the US.

I do agree that they can do as they please though.  Of course, once the women are brainwashed into giving up millennia of gender roles common to the entire human race, then they'll do what someone else pleases while believing they're free, right?

Quote

Women having choices has nothing to do with the breakdown in families.


Again, if you manipulate the women (and men) into distorting gender roles, then it does break down the family.  Brainwash them enough and they'll happily destroy their own family and argue with you when you point out what's happening.

Quote

Men not pulling their weight is a more likely cause.  


This is an entirely different problem that's also breaking down the family.  If men get all the sex they want, and aren't taught to treat women with respect, and instead are encouraged to never leave adolescence, then you end up with the problems we have today.

Quote

I really don't know what to say in flabbergasted.


Really?  Is that all it took? I'm just getting started!  How about this one...  I believe (and have encouraged my children to do so) that people should get married at around the age of 18.  This way, it becomes possible, even easy to wait for sex until marriage.  Of course, I also tell them that divorce isn't an option.  They have to make it work.

People think I'm insane when I tell them this.  After all, everyone knows that you should wait until you go to college and get an established career and a house and a mortgage and a mountain of debt and two cars... before you get married.  Maybe 30 is a good age!  After all, kids don't know anything and what if they get divorced?!  An conveniently, 30 is too late to wait for sex, so we can just sleep around with whoever we want.  Right?  I mean, we're all free and liberated, open-minded people, right?

How's that thinking working out for the western world?  The divorce rate is higher than ever.  Infidelity, illegitimacy, sexually transmitted diseases are all on the rise.  People on their second, third, or fourth spouse is commonplace.  At least if the 18 year olds get divorced later, they've only been with with (hopefully) one person the whole time, and the children all come from one father.

If you do things God's way, you don't have any of these problems.  Of course, the Christian community has all these problem also.  But that comes from not doing things God's way.
 

Offline blanning

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Join Date: May 2008
  • Posts: 367
    • Show all replies
    • http://www.brianlanning.com
Re: Bill Gates not a philanthropist?
« Reply #22 on: January 23, 2014, 01:39:42 AM »
Quote from: JJ;757754
And you just lost the argument by bringing imaginary beings into the equation.  I think all the worlds problems are caused by not doing things the inspector gadget way.


Imaginary being to you, very real to me.  Many things, too many to count, have happened in my life to make it obvious to me that God exists.  

Also, I didn't realize this was a contest to be won or lost.  I'm simply expressing my views.
 

Offline blanning

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Join Date: May 2008
  • Posts: 367
    • Show all replies
    • http://www.brianlanning.com
Re: Bill Gates not a philanthropist?
« Reply #23 on: January 23, 2014, 08:38:57 PM »
Quote from: JJ;757808
Believe what you like mate.  I will never hold people beliefs against them until they start spouting sexist fanatical crap about how people should live "gods" way.  
 
Am i talking to someone from a certain famous baptist church in america

Believe me, the vast majority of Christians have a problem with this particular baptist church also.

You should live God's way not because I tell you to, but because it's simply a better way to live.  It's like heroine.  Not doing heroine is a better way to live.  It doesn't matter what my opinion is about it.  

A friend of ours tells a story about a church she used to attend.  One day this other woman started showing up.  She wasn't married and looked a little, um, masculine.  But still people were relatively nice and accepting.  In the course of getting to know her, she revealed that she was a lesbian, but rejected that lifestyle because of her belief in God and the bible.  In other words, she wasn't "practicing".  It didn't matter, she was immediately shunned by all the other women in the church.  

This kind of behavior makes me sick.  Here's a woman doing exactly what the bible says she should be doing.  And she's ostracized for it.  It's Christians like these that are giving us all a bad name.  We're not supposed to be judgmental about these things.  Hate the sin and not the sinner after all.

I sometimes attend church and sometimes not.  It depends on how offended I am by the behavior of the others there, among other reasons.  Christians are supposed to be living their lives to be a good example to other people.  Other people are supposed to look at us and want what we have.  But it seldom works out that way.

If you're having a hard time believing in God, don't look at the church and say "if that's what it means to believe in God, then I want no part of it."  Instead, start first with God.  Ask God to show you that he's real.  And of course, you have to be open-minded enough to hear the answer.  After you've accepted Jesus, worry about church later.  And if you can't find one that isn't offensive to you, then don't go.  But most likely, you'll want to hear more.  And a church (that follows the bible) is the best place to start.

To get back on topic, I think Bill Gates is neither a Christian nor a philanthropist.
« Last Edit: January 23, 2014, 08:42:15 PM by blanning »
 

Offline blanning

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Join Date: May 2008
  • Posts: 367
    • Show all replies
    • http://www.brianlanning.com
Re: Bill Gates not a philanthropist?
« Reply #24 on: January 23, 2014, 10:56:09 PM »
Quote from: spirantho;757824
You can't reject your sexuality as a lifestyle choice.


You can choose to perform those acts, or choose not to.  

And this idea that "orientation" isn't a choice is an opinion that's lately been forced upon us as fact.
 

Offline blanning

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Join Date: May 2008
  • Posts: 367
    • Show all replies
    • http://www.brianlanning.com
Re: Bill Gates not a philanthropist?
« Reply #25 on: January 23, 2014, 11:00:32 PM »
Quote from: JJ;757826
Easier to believe in an afterlife than believe our lives are just a breeze In eternity.


I disagree.  (At least according to my beliefs) Not existing is better than what comes later if you don't have salvation.  

Quote

Ever noticed how religions never to try to recruit people whose lives are in an even keel .......


This isn't really true either.  There are a lot of christian organizations trying to help people on drugs or whatever.  But there's just as many or more that are trying to reach regular normal people.
 

Offline blanning

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Join Date: May 2008
  • Posts: 367
    • Show all replies
    • http://www.brianlanning.com
Re: Bill Gates not a philanthropist?
« Reply #26 on: January 23, 2014, 11:01:35 PM »
Quote from: Iggy;757830

Organized
religion is "control, power and money".
But I don't have to attend a church in order to hold my beliefs.


Exactly right.