Quote:
Originally Posted by Slava
Well Nader was at the Berkshire Hathaway meeting this year and I had a chance to meet him and chat a little bit. (That adds nothing, but I just thought that I would name drop!).
Buffett had planned to give away his money years ago. I am not going to dig for the quotes, but basically his feeling was that the Gates run an excellent foundation and they could do far more good with the money he's amassed than he could. He seems to feel that an organization that basically specializes in creating positive change would be far more beneficial for the worlds future as these poeple are already doing amazing things without the billions of dollars.
|
Yah I remember when Buffett did that and thought it was great.
What I fear is if Nader has been convincing and the focus of the foundation with its new partners has changed. Nader would have considered what Bill Gates was doing before as "soft charity". Nader thinks their money would be more effective invested in social justice issues. Actually what Nader is saying makes a lot of sense. Imagine if their foundation invested a billion dollars in political organizations that were pushing to up federal giving in the third world to 10% GDP and provide free HIV medication for Africa. Their return on the dollar would be a lot higher that way than any direct investment in Africa. The only loser would be the American tax payer who would see more of their wealth taken away.
George Soros is now a part of Gate's foundation. Up until now Soros' charity investments has been all political in nature and I would be suprised if he has switched MO to what Nader calls "soft charity".