Bill Gates: ‘The Private Sector Is Inept’–Only Socialism Can Save Our Planet
Bill Gates may well be one of the richest men in the world, a man who acquired his fortune as a direct result of the private sector and the capitalist way, but in a recent interview with the Atlantic magazine, Gates says the only hope for saving the planet from climate change lies in socialism.
Gates said the technologies needed to guarantee that the planet remains capable of sustaining life can only be developed by governments because “the private sector is in general inept.” Gates also remarked:
Click here for reuse options!Yes, the government will be somewhat inept. But the private sector is in general inept. How many companies do venture capitalists invest in that go poorly? By far most of them….READ MORE at LiberalAmerica
Copyright 2015 Liberaland
By: Andrew Bradford
Andrew Bradford is an author, academic, and political activist who lives in Atlanta. He is a Senior Writer for Liberal America and also has his own blog at deepleftfield.info
66 responses to Bill Gates: ‘The Private Sector Is Inept’–Only Socialism Can Save Our Planet
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
anothertoothpick October 27th, 2015 at 16:18
He should know. He is the guy that gave us an operating system that sucks up internet virus like a sponge.
pignose4.0 October 27th, 2015 at 17:38
Use an anti virus program like AVG, I have had Windows from the start and not one virus, now if he could do something about all that Viagra spam…………..
sofarsogood October 27th, 2015 at 19:44
I agree Windows is less than wonderful. But you gave him your money, so don’t blame him.
Robert Smithson October 27th, 2015 at 17:23
No doubt about it, he knows computers, but the climate? No so much. Memo to Mr. Gates: It’s the government that is inept, not the private sector. He is nothing but another filthy rich person who got his and now suddenly he loves socialism. Is he sending his kids to the public schools and is he on Obamacare? I don’t think so. And will Mr. Gates be giving all his money away, leave his big mansion and move into a 2 bedroom walkup in downtown Seattle? I bet that won’t happen either. He is nothing but one big, fat hypocrite!
Budda October 27th, 2015 at 17:28
You sound jealous.
pignose4.0 October 27th, 2015 at 17:30
We have the Koch brothers driving the planet into oblivion with help from EXXON and Monsanto so tell us how the capitalist are doing at saving the planet.
Ross Denney October 27th, 2015 at 20:11
You need to live where there is no private enterprise….you know–so you’ll be HAPPPPYYYY…..
whatthe46 October 27th, 2015 at 20:19
you seem to be the one that’s unhappppyyyy!
Hirightnow October 27th, 2015 at 18:15
to paraphrase the character of Gates from this ERB, he gives away ten times your net worth to AIDS research. (Probably more like 100X)
Roctuna October 27th, 2015 at 18:17
So if he gave away all his money, dressed in rags and lived in a hovel you’d give more credit to his statement? Your arguement is such a crock! Capitalism has one goal, profit for the providers of the capital. It inherently ignores costs to indviduals or society yet the US continues to privatize the profits and socialize the YUGE (to paraphrase DT) losses on every bad investment whether it’s energy, (especially coal), banking, pharmaceuticals, security, you name it. The capitalist system in the US does not do full-cycle economic analysis and as a result we do not recognize the true cost of most of our commodities or services. At last count, Gates had donated over $28 BILLION (yes, with a B!) to charities and research. Isn’t that enough for you? What % of your net did you donate last year?
Ross Denney October 27th, 2015 at 20:14
You really need to live where there’s no eee-ville private enterprise….you’ll feel SO much better………..NOT.
Roctuna October 27th, 2015 at 20:45
Did I say it was “eee-ville”? No. Why is “all or nothing” with you cons. You’re such absolutists. I pointed out flaws I percieve in the current American version of capitalism and Smithson’s lame-ass arguement.
whatthe46 October 27th, 2015 at 20:51
cracking up laughing.
Roctuna October 27th, 2015 at 20:55
Glad I brightened your evening.
tracey marie October 27th, 2015 at 19:33
He pays taxes, property taxes which go towards schools. Your point is dead
sofarsogood October 27th, 2015 at 19:42
How do you know how much he knows about the climate? And name one other ‘filthy rich person who got his and suddenly loves socialism’. Please. Just. One. Your dream didn’t come true? Sorry. But don’t belittle this man, troll.
Ross Denney October 27th, 2015 at 20:08
You need to get out more. The list is long:
Oprah Winfrey, Warren Buffett, any number of other nu riche folks whose money somehow convinces them that they’re special and nobody else can succeed, so State Worship needs to be instituted as the answer to everybody’s problems.
…or maybe they just have simple guilt complexes, and since THEY can afford to be socialists, it makes ’em feel better.
whatthe46 October 27th, 2015 at 20:18
do you know anything about these people you speak of? Oprah for one didn’t get anything handed to her, she worked hard for what she has and she does give back.
Robert Smithson October 27th, 2015 at 21:25
Ah, let’s see, there’s Warren Buffett who supports leftist/socialist politicians. Also a guy named Tom Strayer and we can’t forget the 1%er Hillary Clinton. And how about the Hollywood elite?
Glen October 28th, 2015 at 02:23
You do realise that “not supporting the complete and utter destruction of the government and the ascendency of the private sector for everything except the military” does not make a person leftist, let alone socialist.
whatthe46 October 27th, 2015 at 19:43
and i bet you just adore your 4x bankrupting tRump:
“Donald Trump has described himself as an “ardent philanthropist,” he has only donated $3.7 million to his own foundation. In comparison, a wrestling company has given Trump’s foundation $5 million. He ranks among the least charitable billionaires in the world.”
KABoink_after_wingnut_hacker October 27th, 2015 at 19:46
And by contrast, Mr. Gates ranks amongst the most charitable and innovative billionaires in the world.
whatthe46 October 27th, 2015 at 19:56
ding ding ding.
cecilia October 27th, 2015 at 19:48
You, sir, are illogical
whatthe46 October 27th, 2015 at 20:03
very!
jasperjava October 27th, 2015 at 20:59
The government landed men on the moon, not the private sector. If we had let the private sector organize the response to Pearl Harbor and the Nazi menace, they would have been more concerned with making profits than winning a war.
The capitalist private sector is fine if you want to produce consumer goods. When faced with enormous challenges with life-and-death implications, it’s best to take the profit motive out of the picture.
Robert Smithson October 27th, 2015 at 21:19
The military is about the only thing the government does well, it’s all the other stuff that they involve themselves in that they fail miserably at.
tracey marie October 27th, 2015 at 21:22
the military, you mean the money pit from hell
Godfather October 28th, 2015 at 00:13
The government is the money pit from hell…it is very easy to spend other people’s money. The government survives only due to the taxes levied on the private sector. That is why people who have never held a job outside of government can seem to be “successful” while holding government jobs. Answer this, where would the government get their funding if the entire country worked for the government? Would they simply print it?
bpollen October 28th, 2015 at 03:43
I beg to differ. Facts are not on your side. Again.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/08/30/military-spending-waste_n_942723.html
fahvel October 28th, 2015 at 05:17
but but then VW would be an american car and krups would come from Cincinatti and……………………….. So very right again JJ
arc99 October 27th, 2015 at 22:25
I’m sorry but I cannot let idiotic statements like “”and is he on Obamacare?”” pass without comment.
Pardon me for raising my voice but THE ACA WAS NEVER INTENDED FOR PEOPLE LIKE BILL GATES WHO CAN AFFORD THEIR OWN HEALTH INSURANCE PLANS REGARDLESS OF PRICE. AND IN ANY CASE, OBAMACARE USES AETA, CIGNA AND ALL THE SAME INSURANCE COMPANIES AS ANY OTHER PLAN. GOOD LORD IN HEAVEN SIR, ARE YOU REALLY THAT STUPID?
whatthe46 October 27th, 2015 at 22:26
yep. he’s really that stupid.
William October 28th, 2015 at 01:33
You do understand that the ACA only effects about 12 percent of the population and was NOT designed for the rich…right?
Oh who the hell am I kidding?
You’re clueless.
fahvel October 28th, 2015 at 05:16
no worries – when the giant capitalist bubble of debt and war goes pop, all will be well in the world – especially in those places that have a functional social net.
pignose4.0 October 27th, 2015 at 17:43
Until humans realize that we all have to be in together to do anything about climate change other wise it’s like being the only house on the block using the recycling bins.
Roctuna October 27th, 2015 at 18:03
I can’t wait to see/hear Hannity or Neil Cavuto at faux business news tell us that Bill Gates doesn’t know anything about capitalism or entrepeneurship.
Robert Smithson October 27th, 2015 at 21:34
So you have to wonder why is he saying such nonsense as this isn’t even arguable. For example, the private sector is the place where all the anti-pollution devices that are now in use have been developed. The government might have mandated that something be done, but the private sector completed the job.
Just look at aviation. The Wright Brothers got the job done while the government funded Samuel Langley was a complete failure. And this type of thing has been repeated over and over again.
Roctuna October 27th, 2015 at 22:23
Geez-Louise, you didn’t even read the article did you?
“If you’re not bringing math skills to the problem, then representative democracy is a problem. “When people viewed cancer as a problem, the U.S. government—and it’s a huge favor to the world—declared a war on cancer, and now we fund all health research at about $30 billion a year, of which about $5 billion goes to cancer. We got serious and did a lot of R&D, and then we got the private sector involved in taking that R&D and building breakthrough drugs.”
Gates, in his nonsense, describes a process that can work, but you, with your idealogical aversion to anything labeled “socialism” can’t see it. More lame-ass bs from a shallow thinker.
Robert Smithson October 27th, 2015 at 22:57
A process that can work to do what? Change some non existent man made “climate change” problem? All this “climate change” has occurred since the beginning of time BEFORE MAN BECAME A FACTOR. Now, please explain that?
jasperjava October 27th, 2015 at 23:50
If you’re not prepared to research the basic facts behind climate change, why should we waste our time?
You’re wilfully ignorant, and proud of it. Not all the scientists in the world will ever convince you of something that you simply refuse to believe, for purely pigheaded ideological reasons.
You’re a mindless fanatic.
Glen October 28th, 2015 at 00:26
Clearly murder doesn’t exist, or at least isn’t due to human activity, because death has occurred since the beginning of time.
THAT is how stupid your argument sounds.
Roctuna October 28th, 2015 at 08:05
As usual when cons like you get some pushback on your posts you become ridiculously obtuse. Gates in his quote, and myself in my post, were talking about how govm’t-private partnership can work on solving big, challenging, societal problems. I’ll never change your closed mind about global climate change so I won’t even try but believe me, most of the world does understand what’s going on and there will be efforts to ameliorate the problems and it will take govmt-private cooperation. Strictly market-based, unregulated capitalism inherently does not have the long-term vision necessary to solve any problem that impacts more than a handful of investors.
Glen October 28th, 2015 at 00:26
Actually, if you look worldwide, most of the great discoveries, inventions, etc, are actually done at government universities in various countries.
But well done pointing at a single example from more than a hundred years ago, of a pair of individuals (not “the private sector”) improving slightly but importantly on already-existing ideas that had been in development over a long period of time, including the word of Langley (and many others, all the way back to da Vinci). They got their start in the efforts by getting a wealth of information from the Smithsonian Institute… a Government institution.
Meanwhile, to use just one of a myriad of examples, it was a government institution (here in Australia) that invented Wifi. But hey, clearly the private sector *must* be better, because 100 years ago it was two individuals who took the final step in establishing the viability of human-controlled flight. Great logic!
Hogandda October 27th, 2015 at 20:21
No, bill gates did not acquire his wealth through the private sector. He had, due to his dad’s position, access to private schools, Harvard, unlimited access to the schools computers, etc. etc. Granted he did well but he had the family, the resources to succeed. He was not a ‘pull yourself up by your bootstrps’ kind of guy.
tracey marie October 27th, 2015 at 21:57
do you have a point?
Hogandda October 27th, 2015 at 22:51
Yes, coming from wealth is easier than not.
Warman1138 October 27th, 2015 at 21:08
Governments command the resources of a nation and the entirety of its people and thus are more capable than any private sector entity or group.
Robert Smithson October 27th, 2015 at 21:17
The only thing the government is capable of is getting trillions of dollars from the people and they do it with the force of law. Except for the military, the government messes up just about everything it touches. I mean really, we are talking about an entity that funds stuff like studying the love making habits of ants; giving money to prosperous countries like China; spending billons on educational systems that consistently fail and hundreds of other wasteful endeavors.
StoneyCurtisll October 27th, 2015 at 21:44
What a wonderful foolish comment..
congratulations…
Few if anyone could have made one more ignorant of reality or based on factual intricacies..
Warman1138 October 27th, 2015 at 21:46
Your statement is irrelevant, government no matter its makeup commands the total resources of a nation/state. Not the private business sector and or the military. They are parts of its totality.
arc99 October 27th, 2015 at 22:17
I would call your post an outrageous lie. But calling a statement a lie implies that the speaker actually knows better. I think you really do believe the preposterous nonsense that government messes up everything it touches, except the military. Of course you would say that. You right wingers want to drown government in a bathtub. You see the problem is that there are far more people in this country who are smart enough not to believe such right wing idiocy.
When you get on an airplane, you can be confident that it has been built and maintained according to the dictates of GOVERNMENT to maximize your safety.
When you turn on your tap, you can be confident that the water is fit for human consumption, based on the standards established by GOVERNMENT.
When you drive from New York to San Diego, you can be sure that there will be suitable highways which allow you to travel at productive speeds, thanks to the efforts of GOVERNMENT
When you purchase a product and you find that it does not provide the functions the commercials said it would provide, you have recourse through the court system maintained by GOVERNMENT
When your doctor provides you with a prescription medication, you can be confident that it will provide the relief it is supposed to provide, thanks to standards and testing peformed by GOVERNMENT.
This list could go on for hundreds of pages. But I will close with the reminder that when you come to this forum and post your misinformed nonsense, you can be sure that we will all see it, thanks to the TCP/IP protocol established with the original ARPANET program which was sponsored and funded by GOVERNMENT.
I do not expect these comments of mine to change your mind. Right wingers are notoriously resistant to facts….
Robert Smithson October 27th, 2015 at 22:53
Are you talking Federal government or local? You see, the powers of the Federal government are really constitutionally limited, but liberals like yourself want to give it every power under the sun and that is where our main problems have arisen. You think we need them, but in many instances things would work just fine without their interference.
Obewon October 27th, 2015 at 23:13
Warren Buffett isn’t the only rich guy who wants to higher taxes on the rich.
A new survey from Spectrem Group found that 68% of millionaires (those with investments of $1 million or more) support raising taxes to 30% minimum on those with $1 million or more in net income. Fully 61% of those with net worths of $5 million or more support the Buffet-Rule tax on million-plus earners. http://blogs.wsj.com/wealth/2011/10/27/most-millionaires-support-warren-buffetts-tax-on-the-rich/ Didn’t FNC Report these? Levin? Rusty the (R)acist Limbaugh? Nope!
More than 1/3 of millionaires and ultra-high-net-worths said they have a more positive opinion of Buffett after his tax proposal. Only 19% of millionaires and 22% of the $5 million -plus group said they had a more negative opinion of him after the proposal. Boo!
Obewon October 27th, 2015 at 23:21
Liar! Public Debt is $13.099 T (Net Debt)
Intergovernmental Holdings Medicare, Socialist Security, etc pension SURPLUSES = $5.053 T+ http://www.treasurydirect.gov/NP/debt/search?startMonth=03&startDay=30&startYear=2015&endMonth=&endDay=&endYear=
jasperjava October 27th, 2015 at 23:45
You’re ignorant. China gets trillions of dollars from the private sector. Next time you’re in Wal-Mart, check out where their crap comes from.
Glen October 28th, 2015 at 02:17
America’s in humongous debt, and is the only country in the world to be full-fledged capitalist. Other countries, like my own country of Australia, have government spending more (per capita), yet have much lower deficits and debts per capita, and as a percentage of GDP, without massive taxes.
Your government spending is wasteful for two simple reasons – excessive spending on military, and inane spending to prop up a capitalist system that has failed massively. But “living within your means” isn’t always the right way to do things. It’s often necessary to spend more money now, in order to make things better later. It’s called an investment. Kind of like a family borrowing money to buy a house – would you tell a family “don’t buy a house, you’d have to go into debt to do it”, and instead make them keep renting, and over time end up spending even more money?
That’s fundamentally what people like you are telling the government to do – when you say “live within your means”, what you’re really saying is “live in poverty instead of making intelligent decisions to go into debt in certain circumstances that will help you to get out of poverty”. It’s completely against your own belief in capitalism.
You mention the spending of money on people who study the lovemaking habits of ants… the thing is, more knowledge is always beneficial. Understanding the lovemaking habits of ants could potentially lead to a breakthrough in genetic algorithms (thus enabling greater techniques for solving major problems), or it might lead to the ability to better understand low-level neurobiology (given that ants have very small brains, but still have complex behaviour), which would then lead to better ability to deal with neural issues in humans. Or even some new, unexpected ability – undirected research often creates the greatest discoveries; a classic example is Penicillin, which was discovered due to Ernest Duchesne’s investigation of the interaction between molds and microbes (Alexander Fleming then extended that research, and discovered the use of Penicillin in humans and animals).
So yes, either what you say is an outrageous lie, or you are incredibly misled and believe the claims despite them being very wrong.
CandideThirtythree October 27th, 2015 at 23:07
Privatization is what has caused the prices of everything to skyrocket.
Take the post office for instance, the republicans tried to kill the post office, after hours and after the Christmas break started so that they could bulk up their stock portfolios with Fed-Ex and UPS stock but they failed to kill it.
They forced them to pay in advance, 75 YEARS worth of pensions in just 10 years… that was pay for employees who are not even BORN yet!
The post office is still alive and kicking and Fed-Ex and UPS are stealing their customers blind by charging them full price then dropping their packages off at the post office.
Then there were the lies about privatization would make the price of electricity go down when republicans sold off all the utilities for pennies on the dollar and then the price of electricity was jacked up sky high!
Private prisons cost 10 times as much and have much much worse outcomes.
There is not a single thing that has been privatized that costs less.
SteveD October 28th, 2015 at 00:37
Thanks 33. Awesome summary! (Privatize profits/socialize losses.)
Obewon October 27th, 2015 at 23:08
Lifelong Republican Billionaires (R) Bill Gates Jr & Sr, (R) Warren Buffet & (R) Michael Bloomberg say you baggers are full of Crap and they want nothing to do with you functional and economic illiterates! A measly $500 B socialist jobs Stimulus created 14 M+ Private Jobs Vs GWB’s 1.08 M Private Jobs eight year total! Billionaires know Obama’s Private Jobs totals are +1,400% better than “Bush on jobs: Worst Track Record on Record”-WSJ 1/09/09.
SteveD October 27th, 2015 at 23:23
‘studying the love making habits of ants…hundreds of other wasteful endeavors.’
For which researchers, peripheral staff, suppliers, transporters, accountants, bankers, janitors, power companies, water companies, realtors, insurance companies, etc., ALL GOT PAID (via those “misdirected” and “wastefully” spent federal dollars). What did they all do with those paychecks/receipts? They all spent them, saved them or invested them.
GDP = federal spending + non-federal spending + net exports.
RS is convinced that he and millions of other “disgruntled with government” types with their perfect knowledge and all, would be much better served by reducing government to the bone. What arrogant BS. I second whatever 99 says below.
jasperjava October 27th, 2015 at 23:53
“spending billons on educational systems that consistently fail”
The system certainly failed in your case.
William October 28th, 2015 at 01:23
“Except for the military, the government messes up just about everything it touches”.
I spent twenty years in the military. I was part of an organization that painted it’s garbage cans and spent 20,000 dollars on a refrigerator for a patrol aircraft.
So
please tell me more.
Shall we start with government furnished GPS navigation satellites that are so successful we simply take them for granted?…
or.
perhaps the most efficient interstate road system in the world?
bpollen October 28th, 2015 at 03:37
Oral Robert, but not a Moral Robert. When your statements include dishonest portrayal of facts, ideology trumps ethics every time.
Dwendt44 October 28th, 2015 at 11:40
Ignorant comments like that could only come from someone who watches FixedNews 24/7.
Government, by it’s nature, is inefficient. The military is the worst of it all, more waste than any other form of agency.
Social Security has 2% overhead, private industry can’t touch that.
Medicare has 3% overhead, the private insurance industry couldn’t survive with that low overhead.
Few government agencies are as inefficient as private industry/business.
fahvel October 28th, 2015 at 05:09
hey rich boy, how about 20-30 billion for indepth research with the best minds your private fortune can buy? – maybe take a second loan on 25000 sq ft of your cottage.