The Gates Foundation has donated 26billion$ since it began in 2000. A very large part of this has gone towards the eradication of AIDS, which Melinda has made her main mission.

Melinda Gates is no half-hearted contributor. She is right into it, spending a lot of time in the slums of India and similar places. She is frank and unembarrassable, having no qualms about dealing forthrightly with the nitty-gritty of AIDS prevention on the personal level.

The Gates Foundation has an impressive list of issues that it is trying to deal with -
http://www.gatesfoundation.org/topics/Pages/topics-overview.aspx. It is now one of the great world forces for the betterment of quality of life for millions of people living in abject poverty across the globe.

However…..

It seems to me that something absolutely enormous is missing. There is no effort whatsoever being put towards directly addressing overpopulation, which is surely the world’s biggest issue, or at least right up there with AIDS.

Bill and Melinda Gates are free spirits. They are beholden to no government. They are not tied to the absurdity of the continuous economic growth and human expansion paradigm, that every government and company in world seems to be a slave of. They CAN address this all-important issue freely.

Sure, it is enormously difficult. It requires messing with the intimate details of peoples’ sex lives, social stigmas, religious aspects, education regimes, etc. But then, all of these things have to be addressed in the fight against AIDS...and the Gateses has shown a full willingness to do so.

So why do they have an enormous blind spot with population growth or feel that it is not worth addressing?

Ludwig

"They are not tied to the absurdity of the continuous economic growth and human expansion paradigm.."

Not so much now I guess, at least in terms of their personal well-being, but it's that paradigm that created their wealth in the first place and continues to fund their philanthropy. Not that I'm condemning what they do, but it's not without the odd interesting paradox.

I agree with all you say on population. It's a fundamentally critical problem.

And I like your creative lead-in to your favourite and well worn theme! :)

It's one of course that we absolutely need to keep hearing, so good on you, Ludwig.

I echo Bronwyn's thoughts on this too Ludwig and support your crusade for the overpopulation issue. When will man realise that our resources are finite and we not only need to learn to manage them better but to keep population sustainable.

The Gates' efforts are to be applauded but as Bronwyn mentioned the emphasis on economic growth which helped to establish and grow Microsoft was very much dependent on population growth (as well as a dodgy product with built-in obsolescence) :).

Perhaps overpopulation is in the "Too Hard Basket".
I've not gone and looked at the link of the goals but the stuff I've seen them involved in previously seem to be goals where appropriately directed resources can make a difference. Changing peoples breeding habit's directly may occupy a whole different space.

The most effective means of reduce reproduction rates in humans seems to be to create wealth and improve education, affluent educated societies have lower reproduction rates than ones where real poverty and low education levels are widespread issue's.

People who have some confidence that they can provide for their own future may not feel the need to breed so many kids in the hope that some will provide for them in their old age. People with access to appropriate technology may not need to breed so many children to help them earn their living.

R0bert

Ludwig, the Weekend Australian magazine just before Christmas
carried a story about what the Gates Foundation is doing etc.

The way I remember it, Belinda was quite aware of the problems
in Africa, where women have one kid in the belly and one on
the back.

One of the things they are developing, are microbicides in the
form of an odourless clear jelly, that a woman can use without
her partner knowing. She said they hoped they would be
available in the next seven years.

She mentioned these in terms of hiv prevention, but I would
be amazed if they also did not control sperm.

In Africa more women then men are infected with HIV and it seems
she is aware that women don't have alot of say, when it comes
to sex.

This would be a clever way to empower women to have some say
about how many kids that they want. Perhaps the website would
tell you more about these microbicides, which she seems to have
so much hope for.

No arguments from Ludwig.I totally agree.