🔗 Share this article

LWe must start with the core issue: The Microsoft founder denies political realities. Though he came to it late, he now acknowledges climate change facts. But he operates in blatant, cringeworthy denial about how politics works. His new piece on climate, shared days ago, treats the issue as if it existed in a political vacuum. He writes as if there were no such thing as political power, and pretending massive fortunes aren't relevant.

Primary Argument

His main contention is that financial resources are scarce, so the participants in the upcoming climate meeting in Brazil should shift funding from "short-term pollution targets" towards climate "adaptation" and investing in poverty reduction and healthcare.

Certainly, money for worthy projects is limited, but it's not caused by inevitable rules, an unavoidable reality of communities. This results from wealthy interests attacking on benign state spending, causing the dismantling of aid agencies and severe reductions in assistance funding of other countries. Budget cuts represent political decisions. The selection to enforce it originates with authorities yielding to the demands of the ultra-rich.

Available Resources

Massive amounts of wealth exist. Soon after the billionaire released his essay, data indicated that the combined assets of America's wealthiest ten individuals grew by $698bn in the past year. That money alone, the increment in the wealth of 10 people, is nearly tenfold the annual amount required to end extreme poverty worldwide. Through what means did they accumulate of economic resources into private hands? And why can't we get it back through appropriate revenue collection? The solution lies in their conversion of wealth into policy-making authority. The richer they become, the more they can bend government and financial structures to their desires, guaranteeing continued wealth accumulation. But Bill Gates says nothing in his essay about methods and sources for additional funds for both climate solutions and hardship alleviation could be identified.

'The article seems designed as appeasement toward Donald Trump.' Gates photographed with the former president for corporate executives in the capital.

Wealth Inequality Relationship

There's a direct link between the poverty Gates claims to care so much about and the fortunes he ignores. In the US, homelessness is breaking records, and so is the percentage of resources held by the ultra-rich. Although this may not describe Gates' personal approach, by suppressing salaries, increasing housing costs, undermining worker collectives and securing tax reductions and budget decreases, billionaires prosper while others experience hardship.

Research Findings

A notable research in Perspectives on Politics, one of the rare examinations of this private sphere, found that extremely wealthy individuals hold vastly distinct political perspectives from most people. The wealthy respondents in the study, completely unlike ordinary citizens, saw budget deficits as the most important of the issues it listed, and climate breakdown as the least. They were much more inclined to demand that public retirement benefits and government medical care should be reduced, and far less likely to believe that unemployed people merit reasonable生活质量, or that there should be stricter rules for petroleum corporations, banking entities and medical coverage companies. They were fiercely opposed to redistribution.

Policy Impact

Which perspectives dominate? The tiny minority or the great majority? Even though the investigation happened under Obama, it found that extremely wealthy individuals enjoyed greater political access than average citizens. What about currently? The current reality seems obvious.

Omissions and Assumptions

Here's another crucial exclusion from the billionaire's article: across extensive text, the former president receives no reference. If Gates included this, he'd have to acknowledge that the second of his major assumptions is shaky: lower prices for sustainable technology inevitably produces environmental improvement. Of course it helps that wind, solar and other green technologies are becoming radically cheaper than fossil fuels. But Trump and similar demagogues are taking all possible actions to block the shift.

In part due to these factors, oil and gas continue generating substantial profits. This could be why, despite Gates's claim that his foundation had divested all its "direct holdings in oil and gas companies" in 2019, its investments in traditional energy securities have, actually grown.

Psychological Factors

For Gates, challenging billionaire influence might seem impossible. I don't mean only that it clashes with his worldview. I mean that, judging by his remarkable silences on the issue, he might be literally incapable of thinking about it. Perhaps this is a symptom of "billionaire brain": a deep inability to understand others' perspectives. While the ultra-rich are notoriously hard to study, inferring from investigations about money's effect on mental processes could suggest that gaining massive wealth resembles experiencing brain trauma. Fortunes seem to disturb particular brain operations, especially those involving compassion and viewpoint.

Tactical Elements

Yet, political maneuvering could be present: his article seems designed as appeasement toward Trump. Trump definitely understood it as such: "I (WE!) just won the War on the Climate Change Hoax. Bill Gates has finally admitted that he was completely WRONG on the issue. It took courage to do so, and for that we are all grateful. MAGA!!!"

Background Information

Gates has always been completely WRONG on the issue, even if not for the explanations Trump provides. He has repeatedly been behind current understanding, echoing petroleum industry talking points (renewable energy could lower carbon output only with massive expenses) significantly following their debunking. He has spread confusion and misinformation, including the unsupported claim in his recent writing that the purpose of Sri Lanka's disastrous ban on artificial fertilizers aimed at pollution decrease.

Further Difficult Realities

Gates names his article Three Challenging Environmental Facts. Therefore, here's another challenging fact he deliberately overlooks. Should, as appears probable, vital planetary systems reach critical thresholds and rapidly fail, the impact on humanity, ignoring the persistence of additional organisms (a subject he consistently omits), would destroy the smooth and steady progress he foresees. Since ecological transformation probably won't occur slowly and predictably, but through sudden changes of state, the potential effects on human welfare are very difficult to forecast. His claim that financial support should match current analytical approaches to quality of life, even if it seems logical, creates significant illogic when confronting systemic transformation, {prompting us to ignore the greatest