• Squirrel@thelemmy.club
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    Good acts do not make a good person. Plenty of billionaires have done good things, but they don't even come close to outweighing the bad.

    • quat@lemmy.sdfeu.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      A good act does not wash out the bad, nor a bad act the good. Each should have its own reward.

    • Mnemnosyne@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I love a quote I read once in a thing about alignment. “If you fix twenty neighbor’s roofs, you’re Jimmy the Helpful Thatcher. But if you eat the neighbor’s daughter, you’re Jimmy the Cannibal, and no amount of additional carpentry assistance will change that.”

      • ArcaneSlime@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Traditionally this joke is:

        Bad Scottish Accent Engaged

        I build 200 ships, do they call me Seamus the shipbuilder? Nae.

        I paint 100 houses, do they call me Seamus the Housepainter? Nae.

        But ye fuck one sheep…

  • Veraticus@lib.lgbt
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Sure.

    Bill Gates and the Gates Foundation will probably eradicate polio.

    Before people jump on the bandwagon about how Gates is evil and problematic, that there are no virtuous billionaires, and a government or an NGO or an equivalent should have been the one to do it… I know. But the question was "name one billionaire that's done anything good," and I think it's pretty difficult to argue that eradicating polio isn't good.

    • nonearther@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      On same tone, Warren Buffet.

      He has also donated billions in the same charity and largely lives controversy free.

    • richieadler@lemmy.myserv.one
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      However, one can posit that the Gates Foundation is creating a market for vaccines that aren't of interest in the industrialized nations.

      I'm not sure that subsequent doses are going to be provided as generously as the first ones.

      • Vlyn@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        That's not how vaccines work. The illness is already there, it's not like people get sick after you introduce a vaccine into the system. So the "market" has always been there and every dose administered is great.

        • richieadler@lemmy.myserv.one
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          You don't understand my point.

          • Sick people receive vaccines for free or very cheap
          • Sick people gets hope of survival to disease, hope which wasn't previously available.
          • Sick people ask their governments to continue receiving vaccines.
          • People providing vacciones now are charging a lot more to said governments.
          • Profit (which was the whole point, and not any "humanitarian" notions.)

          And the market wasn't there, because unless there's some way to create high demand and guaranteed payment in poor countries, there's no profit in said vaccines (or any medication, for that matter; do you see any multinational farmaceutical companies giving much thought to the creation of medicine to cure Chagas disease? And it's endemic in many areas of South America. But those are poor areas, so the is no profit there).

          • imaqtpie@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            The problem with your argument is that the Gates foundation is a non-profit. They aren't trying to make a profit, they've burned through tens of billions of dollars in the past 20 years.

            Are you arguing that countries should just let people die from polio rather than accept humanitarian aid or am I missing something?

    • tsonfeir@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Bill gates, also the guy who spent loads of time on epsteins island banging children. I guess it evens out /s

  • Synthead@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    A single good thing that a single billionaire has done? The Gates foundation fighting malaria. I think that’s good.

      • TheDarkKnight@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Is the topic of the thread called “Should we tax billionaires” or was it “I dare you to name one good thing a billionaire has done”?

    • Mangoholic@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Sure but, considering they use only 5% of the money they have for all there “good” projects and invest the ither 95% in fossil fuels. The gates Foundation is really only a little good because the law forces them to use min of 5%, to stay tax exempt. So if they didn’t have to, would they still do it? I doubt that.

  • Anamnesis@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    It’s pretty easy to come up with some things billionaires have done that are good. Bill Gates funding cures and prevention of diseases in the third world is one that comes to mind.

    Now, if we’re talking about finding an example of a billionaire whose life is on balance a good thing for humanity…that’s pretty much impossible.