"In the coming decades we will have
astonishing new abilities to diagnose
illness, heal disease, educate the world's
children, create opportunities for the poor
and harness the world's brightest minds
to solve our most difficult problems..."
Bill Gates.

These are not empty words.
Gates is putting his money where his mouth is.
I don't believe it's a strategy to win a prize.
I believe that he really wants to make a
difference.

His 'awareness' of the needy in this
world came rather late in life. When he graduated
from Harvard - he was unaware of the problems
of the poor. It took several decades for him to learn.
In the meantime he made a fortune. That in itself
takes a certain amount of talent, which not many of us
possess.

However, making a fortune, should not be the bottom
line here. It's what Gates has now chosen to do with
it that matters here.

A man who's set up a Foundation and left
over $70 billion (and growing),
to be distributed towards
funding worthwhile projects
on the deaths of himself and his wife ...
his integrityhas to be taken seriously.

As for the Nobel Prize.
I'm sure that it's something that
is not that easy to obtain. Certain criteria must be met,
and its a panel that decides on the final outcome and
'worthiness,' of the nominee. They will judge Gates.

Personally, I feel the man deserves the prize.

Nobel Peace Prise, hay?

Didn't they give one of them to Gore, & the IPCC?

Hell, with that sort of company, who'd want one?

Dear Foxy,
I too am glad he's doing good now.
I am afraid you are a little too forgiving at times.
It is almost unthinkable that in the 60/70 (in particular) he wasn't aware of the plight of the 3rd world et al. But having said that, he wasn’t my target.

It was the end justifying the means. His wealth that ALLOWS him to play (?) Hero now.
Ask your self:
• Does HE more deserve a prize than Geldoff and/or Bono? They weren’t ‘ruthless’ in making their money….and they’ve been at it longer.
• Are these 3 more deserving of a prize than someone who spent a lifetime at the dirty end of aid? Consider too the Quakers who go about the same activities without recognition let alone a prize.
• Perhaps the woman who dedicated her life to the orphans in Thailand?
• Or for that matter the person who has been the ‘somebody else’ in the community who everyone leaves the boring community tasks to?
• Is the Hero one who spends the most (publicly)?
• How about NGOs and those who work at the pointy end.

Consider the Westfield owners who have given millions to Israeli charities and yet allegedly caught squirreling $100’s millions away to evade tax are they heroes?

Then there’s the Aussie Jew who gives millions to orthodox Israelii Jews so they can build new settlements on occupied land further exacerbating the crisis there. Is he a hero?

My concern is that to most first world people crave heroes so that we can ignore the problems of others knowing that a HERO is doing what we should.

Are we like puppies in that we need praise for doing what we should?

Leaders, lead the rich give lots, we give what we can: isn't that the Humane (Religious way too)

Dear examinator,

I'm sure that there are many worthy people
out there, who deserve recognition for their
good work - and don't get it.

As you pointed out
giving meaning and purpose to one's life
by performing worthy deeds is its own reward.

However, your thread is about Bill Gates,
not about the lady in Thailand who dedicated
her life to helping orphans, or the worthiness
of Bono, Geldorf, the Quakers, and many others.

I tried to answer your
question concerning Bill Gates,
as best as I could.

Giving money for worthwhile causes is great,
giving lots of money, is even better. And,
pursuing where and how the money is being
used, is better still - and it's this
dedication that to me makes Bill Gates
rather unique. He's not a Donald Trump.
Bill Gates - does not spend money in glorifying
his own name. He doesn't own a 'Trump Tower.'

Whether this meets the criteria for the Nobel
Peace Prize, I don't know.

It's up to the judges of that prize to decide.

I'm not deliberately trying to be contentious
here.

As I said previously, I feel that Gates deserves
the prize.

That's just my personal opinion.

Foxy
Oops sorry, I was just trying to engage in a discussion.
Your opinion is valid and under no circumstances were I criticising or judging it.
I don't believe that there are right or wrong answers to questions like these just considered perspectives. If I appear as didactic I apologize.
Previously you posted that you would appreciate more questions that political or religious …I thought that an excellent idea so I posted some what I call interesting questions for the thinkers. Perhaps I went over the top in trawling too wide in some of my responses. I guess that’s just me. My communication skills (?) aren't as good as I would like.

I watched a puff program the night before about Bill and Melinda Gates on TV the night before. A couple of the interviewees said that the real driving force for the trust was Melinda. It was also stated that Bill being a goal oriented person has set the goal to win a Nobel peace prize. A number of issues occurred to me
1. Surely Melinda should be the front runner for the prize she’s the visionary. Bill is just more high profile manipulator an (end justifies the means) guy. His skills are as a businessman… not a visionary in the creative sense (leopards and spots).
2. We revere the skilful users rather than the inventors e.g. We all recognize Vegemite but who knows the inventor's name?
3. The basis on which we choose heroes. How unfairly/unrealistic it favours the high profile?
4. Why we do this?
5. What happened to our community responsibility? As Dr Alice from “Don’t die young” (ABC show) put it “We inhabit Stone Age bodies” and I would add Stone Age emotions and motivations i.e. Short sighted, survivalist and are largely still driven by instincts than logic or considered thought.
6. This latter observation is more often denied or ignored in our prognostications to our ultimate detriment.
Of course the committee decides but not in a vacuum.

Dear examinator,

Thank you for being so sensitive to the opinions
of others. It's a rare quality.

Personally I think that Gates and his wife are a good
team. They compliment each other. She may be creative,
but where would she be without him? Her 'creativity'
would possibly be rather limited in its use.
So, things balance out.

You said that decisions are not made in a vacuum?
Ideally that's how it should work. But the Committees,
Boards, and Panels, that I've been on, the general
consensus always went with, 'whatever the Boss' wanted.
I spoke out quite a few times, even wrote reports -
to no avail. Still, I had the satisfaction that I did
try, and could sleep well at night, with a clear conscience.

As for heroes... of course my personal choices are the
quiet achievers - whose vision becomes clear only
when they can look into their own hearts - and
act accordingly.

But this is about Bill Gates and the Nobel Prize.
And that's a different story. People are chosen,
who are globally famous for doing 'good' globally.
They already have established 'world-wide'
reputations.

From memory, the only Nobel Prize winner that I
remember getting excited over was Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn.
It was during my university student days, and I
was absolutely smitten. Perhaps because what he wrote
about struck a cord so close to home.