Bill Gates: We Need Socialism To Save The Planet

Bill Gates says that socialism is needed in order to save the planet

Bill Gates has said that capitalism isn’t working, and that socialism is our only hope in order to save the planet.

During an interview with The Atlantic, the Microsoft founder said that the private sector is too selfish to produce clean and economical alternatives to fossil fuels, and announced his intentions to spend $2 billion of his own money on green energy.

The Independent reports:

The Microsoft founder called on fellow billionaires to help make the US fossil-free by 2050 with similar philanthropy.

He said:

“There’s no fortune to be made. Even if you have a new energy source that costs the same as today’s and emits no CO2, it will be uncertain compared with what’s tried-and-true and already operating at unbelievable scale and has gotten through all the regulatory problems.

Without a substantial carbon tax, there’s no incentive for innovators or plant buyers to switch.

Since World War II, US-government R&D has defined the state of the art in almost every area. The private sector is in general inept.

The climate problem has to be solved in the rich countries. China and the US and Europe have to solve CO2 emissions, and when they do, hopefully they’ll make it cheap enough for everyone else.”

In recent years, China has surged ahead of the US and Europe in green investment, despite remaining the world’s most polluting country in terms of fossil fuels.

Between 2000 and 2012, China’s solar energy output rose from 3 to 21,000 megawatts, rising 67 per cent between 2013 and 2014. In 2014 the country’s CO2 emissions decreased 1 per cent.

Meanwhile, Germany’s greenhouse emissions are at the lowest point since 1990, and the UK has seen a decrease of 13.35 per cent in emissions over the last five years, according to official quarterly statistics from the Department of Energy & Climate Change.

Greenhouse gas emissions statistics from the Department of Energy & Climate Change

  • WhiteEagle

    Thats the solution!! Another tax! Make it harder for the average person to meet their bills, much less survive without being on the government welfare lists. Not like Joe 6-pack even has discresionary money for his even his 6-pack anymore as the country keeps sinking under the burden of taxes, NAFTA style trade deals and excessive Government spending with its alphabet agencies and continual war mongering.

    Lets solve everything..with another tax. Maybe we can get rid of those useless eater…er breathers in the process.

    • whatever

      Well, technically speaking that’s already the case within Europe. We have engine taxes + carbon taxes + energy taxes on fuel.

      Price of a _liter_ of gas is around ~1.50 EUR here, around 92%+ energy taxes on them, dependent on what kind of octan level the gas has.

      On top of that, we need to pay taxes on how “big” our engine is. If the engine is, say, 2l small block, you need to pay at least 40 EUR for it, in the case it produces exactly 0g/km CO2 emissions. Calculated by 2EUR * each beginning 100cm3.

      On top of that, you have to pay for each beginning 95g/km CO2 emissions 2EUR, so you are likely around 300EUR taxes per year for a typical ultra-modern-and-EURO5++ normed car.

      Of course, insurances try to push you to get more modern cars, too. But that’s the same in US as in EU. That’s why I personally drive E85 here, cheaper fuel and cheaper taxes due to less emissions.

    • Michtou

      Well, if the rich and big companies paid their share, the little guy wouldn’t have to pay so much. But whenever you elect rich people, they cut their own tax burden more and more.

      • vps

        M: This “rich” president, Trump”, will cut your “middle class” tax….just stay tuned. He will also take $1 for his presidential salary.

        • Michtou

          He won’t cut your taxes. That’s lie number one. He’ll cut taxes for the rich. The so-called “death tax” doesn’t affect the middle class at all. And all those tax cuts to the rich will be paid via cuts to the middle class and poor. They’re already talking about cutting medicare and Social Security, which are benefits YOU PAID FOR out of your pay check. So they’ll steal money you gave for decades. And user fees (hidden taxes) will go up everywhere to keep basic services running. Privatizing means gouging the public, so expect to pay more for lots of stuff. The salary? It is meaningless to him, a drop in the bucket. John F. Kennedy didn’t take the salary either. It’s not that he’s being generous, he thinks it’s good PR.

        • alikhat

          Oh, sure he will! But will that be before or after he gives everyone in the country a magical flying unicorn and a bottomless sack of gold coins?

          You Trumperoos are such simple-minded buffoons. You’d be funny, if there hadn’t been enough of you to set the country on fire.

          • joe_schmooga

            Bernie or Hillary??!

          • alikhat

            Bernie or Hillary *what*? Who you’d rather date? Who’s got the prettiest eyes? Who’s shoe size is higher than Trump’s IQ (that’s a trick question, obviously. The answer is “both of them”).

            You need to make your wild-eyed blurtings a bit more precise, dear.

          • joe_schmooga

            ..,actually wondering in whose rectum your head resides???

          • alikhat

            Ohhhhh, that’s what Trumperoos consider “humor”, isn’t that right? My, it is just so cute and quaint the things that amuse you creatures! Most people go on to develop a more sophisticated sense of wit after kindergarten. But I suppose it’s nice for you that you can be tickled by such simple, childlike things. Bless your heart!

    • Patti

      He just said “The private sector is too selfish, bla, bla, bla” and then goes on to say he (from the private sector” will invest in the very cause ??? What he has never done is live in an actual social democracy to realize how things really pan out. American neo-liberals make me laugh cause they live in this alternate universe of ideals and are sooo sure socialism is the sure way to get there. As if switching it all up into a socialist nation will get you to utopia. Hello from that other side: your grandparents ran away from all this docial restriction fir s dang giid reason. The corruption under socialist rule (ie big government) and socisl inequslity becomes actual far greater. You have the elite ruling class and then far, far below the “working class “. Oh, and tax evasion suddenly becomes a must cause big government never gets the needs of the little people right (and begin to care less and less, as they sit on their comfy thrones). Go shead and donate, Bill. It’ll get us there without stripping us of our liberty. That’s what your grandparents busted their butts to get here for.

    • John Beavin

      You are correct in most of what you write, WhiteEagle, but the carbon tax really would be a major part of the true solution.

  • Kassman

    He never said that. More fake news for Trump suporters. http://money.cnn.com/2016/10/30/media/facebook-fake-news-plague/

    • disqus_75khJZ6RgX

      he did say it……who are you?

      • Kassman

        He never said what was quoted in the headline. This article would fail in middle school.

  • fedupwithlibtards

    What a profound short little paragraph…

    “You cannot legislate the poor into freedom by

    legislating the wealthy out of freedom. What one person

    receives without working for, another person must work for

    without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody

    anything that the government does not first take from

    somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that

    they do not have to work because the other half is going to

    take care of them, and when the other half gets the idea

    that it does no good to work because somebody else is going

    to get what they work for, that my dear friend, is about the

    end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing

    it.”

    ~~~~~ Dr. Adrian Rogers, 1931

    • Matthew J. Robison

      Profoundly ignorant. Freedom starts as a contradiction — if we’re all completely free, we’re free to abuse each others’ freedoms. We legislate to maximize the freedoms of all, because freedom just for the few is called tyranny.

      “What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving” — precisely! We’re tired of the poor working hard and rarely receiving the true fruits of their labours, while those who by luck of birth have arrived in the corridors of power without having to work an honest day in their lives.

      “The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else”
      The government is a tool of the nation. It helps to organise and oversee the mechanisms which propel the nation, to ensure we’re working together for the good of the wider economy. It takes from some parts of society to provide to other parts, so that we might all be provided the opportunity and efficiency to achieve success, regardless of the luck of our birth.

      “When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them,”
      Again, this description suits the rich, with their corporate welfare and favourable tax rates and accepted tax evasion and unfettered lobbyists, served by the working classes — the majority of benefits, by the way, going to working people.

      “and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for,”
      See above. See the vast increase in the ratio of mean pay to executive pay over recent decades. See corporate profits rebounding from the financial crash while wages stay stagnant.

      “You cannot multiply wealth by dividing”
      That’s not a mathematical statement about wealth redistribution, it’s simply nonsense that sounds good. Wealth is divided from the nation as long as it remains in a few anonymous offshore accounts and not in the pockets of those who worked for it. Wealth is fuel. Fuels power engines, and the working and middle classes, the small businesses and the hardworking individuals, the servicepeople and the teachers and the doctors, those are your engine. Humans are a profitable species. That’s the only reason we’ve come this far. Give them the tools with which to profit, and you’ll see success. Perpetuate a system which disconnects them from the ability to improve their own lives and receive fair compensation for their efforts, and you’ll see…well, you’ll see the nation as it stands.

  • Helen Sarah

    did not know that human is more power and/or better than planet. Could not understand how and why, Bill Gates can be so stupid.

  • what?

    Maybe Bill Gates would run for President in 4 years.

  • kyleyoder

    Private sector is fueling most of the innovations. He’s the reason why Hillary lost. People are sick of crony socialism. Poor billionaires like Gates realized just who’s really in charge on Nov. 8–the American people! Jokes on that a-hole.

    • Erland Nettum

      Like you have something remotely like socialism in the US. 😀

      • https://www.facebook.com/TheConservativeAtheist?ref=hl The Conservative Atheist

        glad we don’t

        • Erland Nettum

          Life is far better for most people in Norway.

      • John Lowe

        Socialism for the ‘Shareholder Class’ that plays by a different set of rules. The facial features of ‘Capitalism’ for everyone else.

    • Julia

      Have you looked at who Trump wants in his cabinet for Education?

    • George Shiflett

      private sector MURDERED STAN MYERS for HHO , PRIVATE SECTOR THREATENED THE LIVES OF A FRIENDS CHILDREN AND WIFE BECAUSE HE WAS PURSUING HHO

    • James M Wardell

      You are an idiot /republican and what is destroying the planet and democracy

    • Matthew J. Robison

      Bill Gates is why Hillary lost? That’s a hot take. Care to flesh it out?

  • Doug Miller

    Just today I thought ‘Where were the billionaires who could go up against the Kochs and their billionaire friends?” Where are you BILL???

  • BrownHorn

    What is divine govt?

    Will capitalism, as is, last forever?

    What is the purpose of communism and capitalism?

    Do humans know that all ‘isms’ are man-made?

    Do humans know that due to their ego and conceit, all ‘isms’ created by mankind have inherent flaws?

    Communism collapsed without a shot being fired in anger though the Soviet Bloc was armed to the teeth.

    Will Capitalism collapse too?

    Will runaway materialistic way of life of mankind last forever?

    Will capitalism last forever like there is no tomorrow?

    Sharing what I wrote with all my worldwide FB friends and contacts, and not with Singaporeans only.

    The link:

    https://tankoktim.wordpress.com/2015/08/24/communism-and-capitalism-what-is-ism/

  • http://www.rlaban.blogspot.com rdl

    Now he says this after supporting Hil & her corps

  • Jurisprudence

    BULLSHIT! He did not say that! The term is Utilitarianism and it is very important to not confuse the two! He seemed to be a big fan of capitalism when he was building his fortune and squashing his competition with a callous indifference. Considering his plan is to persuade other capitalists to charitably invest in green energy with their capital profits; persuade communist leaders to invest the peoples money in green energy; persuade Fascists to undo protectionist policy inhibiting green energy; how in the world is that socialist? That plan has nothing to do with capitalism vs. socialism. His statement made no mention of political philosophy, only that protectionism (which is actually a national socialist policy) is hindering utilitarian progress in the energy sector. So really his statement is ANTI-Socialism.

  • Daniel

    I thought Bill Gates was smarter than this. If private individuals are too selfish, what about politicians and bureaucrats? They are the most selfish people on the planet and they have guns to come to your house to steal your property via taxation. What Bill Gates talks is NOT capitalism, but crony capitalism. Of course crony capitalism does not work. There has been no capitalism left in the world for at least a full century.

    • sigtrent

      He is. He said nothing about socialism or capitalism in the actual interview. This news site is just full of bullshit lies for the sake of clicks.

    • Matthew J. Robison

      ” If private individuals are too selfish, what about politicians and bureaucrats” — they’re also private individuals, but ones that can be controlled, because they rely on votes. Think of them as board executives that the customer can fire. Private individuals do not rely on votes, and their wealth is sufficient to protect them for other mechanisms for accountability. As more money enters politics, it’s allowing those private individuals to buy the accountability of politicians, but that accountability is always there — remove the money and engage the population, and there should be no problems. With private business, there’s no removing the money.

      • Daniel

        Quite the opposite. With a private business, you can choose to no longer be a customer, therefore removing their source of money… and power. With the government, you have to continue paying taxes, or else…. prison… and if you resist, the government will murder you. And no, you cannot vote bureaucrats out…. they are social parasites you can never get rid of. Politicians are the same: they are professional liars hungry for power. Voting one politician vs another is like voting of who will behead you. The choice may vary with each politician having a different name, skin color, sexual orientation and political party, but the result is just the same.

        • David Walton Wright

          I’m a little skeptical that American citizens have been murdered for not paying their taxes. This total cynicism about our democratic system (“Voting [for] one politician vs another is like voting of [sic] who will behead you.”) is defeatist and nihilistic.

          • John Holmes

            Yes, that is Daniel’s problem, among others. He is extremely pessimistic about politicians, when in reality they are not all bad. Unlike your beloved chess board, Danny boy, there is a gray area in life.

    • https://www.mixcloud.com/Elixer/ Steall

      Disagree, he is on point about capitalism and how we need a carbon tax or else people will just keep doing what they want to: ruin the planet for their own profit

      • Daniel

        Carbon is food for plants. If want to save the planet, we need more carbon to increase plant growth. I would suggest you learn a bit about biology.

        • https://www.mixcloud.com/Elixer/ Steall

          lmao, I hope you seriously don’t believe that!! .. Why don’t you google this little thing called “Nasa” and read what they think 😉

          • Daniel

            NASA is a political entity and has been politicized a long time ago. I do not trust NASA more than I trust politicians. Why instead you Google “Photosynthesis” and read about it.

          • https://www.mixcloud.com/Elixer/ Steall

            Omg, you are not the sharpest crayon in the box are you? Nasa is a political entity? .. Actually they are a collection of the brightest minds in our country putting satellites and probes into space with the most insanely difficult engineering challenges out there, so they know what the fuck they are talking about. You on the other hand? Nothing but a brainwashed shill mislead by fossil fuel company propaganda. The science behind climate change is not an “opinion” but something anyone can measure if they have their doubts. That is how SCIENCE works you fucking moron. 97% of the scientists that wrote papers on climate change believe it is human created, NINETY SEVEN FUCKING PERCENT YOU DUMB FUCK! Now stop talking and making more of an idiot out of yourself

          • Daniel

            97% of “scientists”… hahahah… your reply just show me how ignorant you are about climate change. The MSM has done a great job at brainwashing you.

          • https://www.mixcloud.com/Elixer/ Steall

            I run into so many morons like yourself that I bookmarked this link. It is a summary study of ALL the climate change studies out there. http://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/8/2/024024/meta;jsessionid=31635A80C88C7F17FBFEFF16181983B0.c5.iopscience.cld.iop.org
            Read it for yourself you dumb fuck.

          • https://www.mixcloud.com/Elixer/ Steall

            “Among self-rated papers expressing a position on AGW, 97.2% endorsed the consensus. For both abstract ratings and authors’ self-ratings, the percentage of endorsements among papers expressing a position on AGW marginally increased over time. Our analysis indicates that the number of papers rejecting the consensus on AGW is a vanishingly small proportion of the published research.” <– yet some random idiot Daniel is proposing all the scientists around the world are all working for a conspiracy!! How can you be so stupid to not see that fossil fuel companies are the ones spreading the conspiracy? These are all independent scientists, not a "group making shit up together" from all around the planet. Wake up asshole

          • https://www.mixcloud.com/Elixer/ Steall

            Also if you had done your research, you would know that fossil fuel companies have been making up lies and spreading doubt about actual SCIENCE since the 60s. These are trillion dollar companies you fool, they have more power than everyone else combined

          • EvolutionaryUturn

            Did you really just cite the Cook et al 2013 study? That piece of garbage has been thoroughly debunked years ago. Even in their abstract they say “We find that 66.4% of abstracts expressed no position on AGW”. So roughly 8000 papers did not say one way or the other, but yet you somehow can get 97% agreement? Furthermore, most scientists are NOT published, so they cannot be lumped in with a study that only looks at peer reviewed papers. Only 41 out of the 11,944 published climate papers Cook examined explicitly stated that Man caused most of the warming since 1950. Cook himself had flagged just 64 papers as explicitly supporting that consensus, but 23 of the 64 had not in fact supported it. So the 97% claimed by Cook is in fact .3% of the papers in the study.

          • https://www.mixcloud.com/Elixer/ Steall

            You are really quite retarded aren’t you? Keep reading the same abstract you fucking moron. It is without a doubt a consensus and only shills and moronic tools like yourself say anything otherwise. You want to keep ruining the planet do you? It has never been debunked, there has only been idiotic agenda based “studies” funded by Koch and other billionaire fossil fuel companies to spread doubt and misinformation. The fact that you believe these ppl shows you are incredibly stupid. If 97% of the experts on a subject that have an opinion all agree it is to one reason, that is easily the majority. Further in the abstract when authors rated their own papers that number rose significantly. Now quit embarassing yourself with your incredible stupidity and lack of awareness that climate change is very real and there is NO debate

          • https://www.mixcloud.com/Elixer/ Steall

            Your link is the only joke here. That isn’t even a study but a completely agenda based abstract. 0.3 percent? Jesus christ you have to be straight retarded to buy that when the cook study is just a summary which followed up with SELF ratings you dumb fuck

          • jonesy

            Right two things,to much carbon is not good,yes your right plants need carbon , but its what comes with burning carbon that’s the problem,secondly nasa , ha ha they are not what you think,neither is the governments of the world, you people are sheep, if you actually knew what nasa and the world governments were up to the last thing you would be worring about would be enery and pollution, ha ha sheep.

        • Zoe Kaftan

          Daniel, the carbon dioxide in the upper atmosphere isn’t food for plants. It’s nowhere near the plants. Location matters. Plus, at the rate we’re cutting down forests, why would it even matter?

        • Cellan Jones

          yip but if we heat the planet up much higher ( burning carbon emits c02 which heats the planet by trapping excess heat from the sun in the atmosphere) we won’t survive.
          the planet will be fine in the long run because it can sort it self out over a few million years but as as a species will die out because we won’t be able to survive in the habitat which is created from the planet heating up.

        • Mainer2020

          Exxon/Mobil Shell BP and all oil corporations are going to be sued for polluting the hell out of our atmosphere, they are going to pay for all the damages !

        • Jamie Sibley

          Because leading scientists are the ‘MSM’… You really don’t do this whole critical thinking thing too well, do you? Actually, I know what you probably do- read some bullshit off Breitbart or Fox with no foundation of proof, or see some highly quoted study or paper that’s already been debunked, or observed to be extremely flawed from its basis and execution, and still believe it over the hundred other papers stacked up against it. Selective cognitive bias.

          • Daniel

            The same people controlling the MSM are the one paying those so called “scientists”. There is absolutely no science behind this “Climate Change” religion. Climate Change (aka Global Warming) is is a political agenda disguised as a way to save the planet.

          • Adam Reilly

            “Climate Change (aka Global Warming) is is a political agenda disguised as a way to save the planet.”
            True or not, do you NOT want to save the planet?

          • Daniel

            Precisely. I care about the environment, and the carbon emissions are a GREAT for the environment. I am against all forms of pollution, however carbon is NOT a pollutant. Not only carbon increases makes plants grow faster, but it allows arid areas to become fertile, similar as water helps plants to grow. It is so sad that politicians took the route to label carbon as a pollutant to push their evil political agenda. Now we have to fight the myth that carbon is a good thing because the majority of the population believe that reducing carbon emissions is a good thing to save the environment. I have been called all kind of names on this forum, that I am somewhat an idiot. I started working for Microsoft as a teenager as an engineer. I met Bill Gates twice in his house. I finished my high school with the highest grade in mathematics in my state. I am also a good chess player. I read a lot and interested in a better world. I am also a philosopher. I wrote a constitution of about 100 pages of what I believe would be a better society. It is precisely why I take time to write posts like this trying to bring people to reason. If you want to know something is a lie, listen to politicians. If their lips are moving, you know they are spreading lies.

          • Jamie Sibley

            LOL, ok, so thousands of scientists from countless institutions around the world are “so-called scientists”, and they’re ALL making this shit up, at hundreds of different universities and the likes. You really don’t know what you’re talking about, do you? I bet you’ve never even picked up a Masters.

  • DTS623

    Socialism merely swaps greedy capitalists (like Gates) for greedy bureaucrats (like the Clintons)

    Low cost energy benefits everyone, the poor are helped most of all

    • John Beavin

      Aren’t those two opposing statements?

  • Don MacQuarrie

    Just build these peeple….lol https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=kye6AFjYayE

  • Brian Healey

    I read this Article and his Interview. Socialism is not what is was really talking about. I am a Republican and I am always for the Private Sector doing the job. But his point was on future Energy technologies and developement of them by the Private sector. His point was that Govt develop Nuclear Energy, They developed Hydro Power, They developed the Internet. Not because of Profit but because we needed them. So what he was saying is that the Department of Energy can do a better job coming up with new Energy technologies better than the private sector because at this time there is no Profit in it for the private sector so no incentive…Yet. I think we all agree, Oil isn’t going to be here forever. I really don’t care where I get my power from, As long as I can turn my lights on and keep warm I am pretty good. Now what I disagree with him on is funding it. I also don’t want to tax the hell out of us to do it. I mean if him and his friends want to give the department of Energy their Billions to do research then more power to them! If you want to take money from some other part of Govt to do ok fine. But we don’t need more taxes.

    • ardvarc

      Nuclear power was first funded by the government, and then the private sector followed. This is true too with the computer revolution. The first IC was developed by the space program and the military, who would pay anything for a reliable chip. Both were first funded by the taxpayer. After the moon landings Robert Noyce having just founded Intel, decided to slash the cost of his chips, the rest of the industry followed to create the civilian electronics we have today. It’s human nature to have amnesia about the origins of two key industries.

      The carbon tax is the only way to insure that the planet gets the result it so badly needs….Zero emissions on or about the 2050 to 2075 time slot, which is the consensus of climate science.

      And Gates is right also about baseload nuclear power as the heavy lifter. No rational analysis of our global energy situation would lead to any other conclusion. Greens must rid themselves of their delusion that solar and wind can come anywhere near requirement on a fast growing planet with hundreds of millions living mega cities, and electricity demand soaring, as they enter the middle class. The easiest way by far to provide clean, abundant, safe, and steady power to millions is with a wire coming into their neighborhoods.

      • 800poundgorilla

        There is plenty of Solar, Wind, and other renewable energy available to meet out needs. That is not the problem.
        The problem is how do we 1) Harness those energies efficiently to utilize as much of the energy as possible. 2) How do we store energy so that we can bank the excess, as the continued flow is erratic due to the nature of the source.
        Nuclear fission is not an option, as the waste product cannot be made safe nor stored safely.
        Nuclear fusion shows some promise and should be studied more.

        • ardvarc

          To reply as you have, all you’ve expressed is that you haven’t looked deeply in the hard numbers that drive climate solution. Solar and wind are diffuse and intermittent. They produce little or no energy 70% to 75% of the time They are unreliable, and so always require back-up baseload steady energy. Beyond peak 20% and they make the grid inefficient and expensive, as evidenced by Germany’s failed Energiewende.

          And you think that storage hasn’t been explored in detail? It’s been worked on for more than a century, and even the best batteries envisioned, Gates will tell you are 12X less than requirement. solar and wind has minor roles for HWHs and some specialized applications at the most propitious locations, as the capacity factors are so low. It’s a fool’s errand to assert these puny technologies are in any way adequate on a fast growing planet will millions moving to cities and using even more energy.

          Fusion? Forget it. It’s always 20 years away, massively expensive, and requires heat in the neighborhood of 200 million degrees.

          Once again, you are completely uneducated on fission. Generation IV plants do indeed burn almost all of their own fuel, and some types can burn even the “waste” of the Gen II and III water reactors. Thy also cannot melt down, and work at atmospheric pressure at temps of just 800-1200 degrees producing heat to run a conventional turbine. Two GenIV types have also been tested at Argonne and Oak Ridge. They worked beautifully before discontinued. We need to keep as many existing plant’s running, until GenIV nuclear is commercialized, in the next 5 to 15 years. Gates is right. We need to get on the ball with GenIV nuclear

          • 800poundgorilla

            That is all very nice and true given the technology of today.
            However, you seem to disregard our innate human capability to overcome the obstacles you mentioned.
            Scientist agree that the quantity of solar energy which the earth receives each day is much much more than we could ever need. We just haven’t figured out how to harness it.
            The same can be said for fusion technologies.
            Look, when Kennedy declared that man would go to the moon, there were plenty of competent scientists who argued that it would not be possible.
            Such was the case with many technologies which are now in common use.
            My point is that I believe that we should be focusing our efforts on sources of energy that are:
            1) environmentally neutral
            2) renewable
            3) meet our needs
            If we keep those as our goals, then reaching them will be the solution and not simply the “flavor of the day”.

          • ardvarc

            I applaud your optimism and faith in innovation. But not every innovation works, some do, and some don’t. Many innovators have looked at solar and wind for many years. They have had persistent inherent unsolved problems, and severe limitations in scalability, intermittentcy, and diffusion. The thing about nuclear power is its energy density. A fingernail of fuel is the BTU equivalent of 6,000 barrels of oil. You are just ignoring the hard facts, and the immense zero emissions challenge we have in front of us. Wishful thinking will not help us.

          • 800poundgorilla

            You are quite correct. Some innovations work and some don’t.
            My point is simply that I believe that we must set the proper goal first.
            Your point about the energy density sounds great but it has not proven to be the reality in our situation. The nuclear industry generates a total of about 2,000 – 2,300 metric tons of used fuel per year. That is a lot of fingernails, don’t you think?

          • ardvarc

            GenIV nuclear power consumes existing “waste” dumps for fuel to produce electricity. Look up IFR, the Integral Fast Reactor, long tested at Argonne. Or Transatomic and listen to the YouTube video. The “waste” problem has already been solved.

            Great you produce excess energy, but you are still connected to the grid, for you get too little juice when you need it, and too much when you don’t. Residential in the US is only 15% of grid power, so you are not helping that much anyway. And most people are living in high rise cities now, and solar makes no sense for high density maga-cities.

          • 800poundgorilla

            However you slice it, nuclear, eoil, coal, gas, and many others rely on a “Non-renewable” energy source. That alone means that these are not sustainable sources, period.
            The only value in utilizing any of these is to delay the inevitable. That may work for the interim, but at the same time it takes time and resources away from finding the true solution.

          • ardvarc

            Nice try but sorry. There are hundreds of millions of tons of uranium oxide in seawater, and they are continuously leaching from underwater mountain ranges. Several nations are already close to having cheap extraction methods ready for commercialization. Nuclear will soon become 100% renewable.

            https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.forbes.com/sites/jamesconca/2016/07/01/uranium-seawater-extraction-makes-nuclear-power-completely-renewable/amp/

          • 800poundgorilla

            Wow! Thank you for the interesting article. That is a development which I was unaware of.
            The downside to that model though, is that it still maintains the “centralization” of power generation, and also maintains a meter on the source.
            Unfortunately, when R&D is funded by industry the results will always have a bias toward the “marketing” of energy.
            This is the take away I got from Bill’s comments.

          • ardvarc

            Except for the fact, that many of the coming Gen IV companies are offering SMRs, or Small Modular Reactors, at 50 MW and smaller, which can provide for a town of 20,000, or a small neighborhood. One company is offering 25, 50, 150, and 300, and 450 MW modules which will be mass produced, so if you need more power, you just add the modules you need. They are all designed to be put on a flatbed for easy transportation to a site, including coal plants where everything is left in place except the replaced coal burner. In fact, I do believe with the current problem of high initial costs for nuclear, that the smaller versions will come out first, in the next 5 to 15 years.

          • 800poundgorilla

            Regarding Solar. I have 3.8KW of panels on my roof.
            I have a grid intertie system. My panels cover less than 30% of my roof surface area.
            I run a hot tub, electric water heater, and appliances, for two people.
            Last year, I had a $684 credit for my years use of energy.
            It is clear to me that the problem is storage, not generation.
            Unfortunately, the capitalist economy has no interest in the decentralization of power, since they can’t put a meter on the sun. Hence their incentive to invest in R&D in this area is non-existent.

          • https://soundcloud.com/steven-ingham-2/enough-is-enough Steven Ingham

            And older Nissan Leaf makes a great battery back up for the home. Tesla makes a battery for the home as well, but older EVs are dirt cheap and you get the rest of the car with the battery.

    • John Beavin

      “I really don’t care where I get my power from as long as I can turn my lights on and keep warm I am pretty good.” That’s all you need have written, Brian. That thinking by too many people is the entire problem in a nutshell.

      • http://spearman3004.wordpress.com spearman

        So you don’t care about climate change?

        • 800poundgorilla

          You seem to have missed John’s point.
          It is the selfish thinking of too many folks that is the problem.

          • http://spearman3004.wordpress.com spearman

            Obviously I was replying to Brian & not John.

          • Steven Costa

            It’s not selfish to have the rudiments of civilization. Even horses emit Co2.

        • Tom

          If you have an AC unit in your house, do you turn up the thermostat in the summer, or do you not use it at all? Just wondering if you’re going to lecture on climate change.

          • http://spearman3004.wordpress.com spearman

            Typical response of a denier to suggest one can’t talk climate change remedies & use air conditioning. I get my energy from a community solar garden & in 70 years of winters I’ve never flown south from Dec through Feb to escape the cold. Also I don’t have a lake cabin to escape to & avoid the summer heat. As a denier I assume you do all those things and are looking for company to assuage your guilt

          • Frank Mercieca

            So you’re rich. Hillary right.

          • http://spearman3004.wordpress.com spearman

            I’m rich? How’s that?

          • Frank Mercieca

            Rich in stupidity

          • Michael Haskins

            I’m not a denier. I know climate change does exist! Consider Greenland in the 10th century was much warmer as was much of the northern hemisphere. Early explorers (Vikings) named the place “Greenland” because it was lush, green and excellent farmland. Then…… the climate changed – went very cold over the next 2 centuries. Guess what? No factual correlation between man-made pollution and climate change.

          • http://spearman3004.wordpress.com spearman

            Of course you deny humans cause climate change. That’s what a denier is. If it only meant your definition there would be no deniers. Greenland in the 10th century was still only green on the edges and only some small more than now considering it still had an icecap covering 95+%.

          • Digital

            Michael. The problem isn’t just that temps are going to change, as you are correct, this has been a ‘thing that happens’ on the planet over the millennia.

            The problem(s) that come with the current runaway greenhouse gas emission issue are multi-fold. Here is but a small sample of numerous issues related to this phenomenon:

            1) Ocean Acidification is huge, if you like having life in the oceans. 2) Humans breathing particulates and disease. 3) Rising oceans. 4) Perhaps nastiest of all, seeing as there are about 7-odd-billion of us now – is the rate at which so many effects are simultaneously occurring.

            We simply cannot all scrunch into a “comfortable part of the planet” while massive parts of the land are uninhabitable for a few thousand years. Hell, our species cannot even get along with each other with an entire planet to wander!

            Now, if you don’t believe that humans, through igniting more than 93 million barrels of oil and liquid fuels per day worldwide (more than 34 billion barrels a year) – are not having a serious effect on the incredibly thin atmosphere which surrounds the planet – then man, I think that you are not looking at the truth in a rational manner.

          • Digital

            Michael. The problem isn’t just that temps are going to change, as you are correct, this has been a ‘thing that happens’ on the planet over the millennia.

            The problem(s) that come with the current runaway greenhouse gas emission issue are multi-fold. Here is but a small sample of numerous issues related to this phenomenon:

            1) Ocean Acidification is huge, if you like having life in the oceans. 2) Humans breathing particulates and disease. 3) Rising oceans. 4) Perhaps nastiest of all, seeing as there are about 7-odd-billion of us now – is the rate at which so many effects are simultaneously occurring.

            We simply cannot all scrunch into a “comfortable part of the planet” while massive parts of the land are uninhabitable for a few thousand years. Hell, our species cannot even get along with each other with an entire planet to wander!

            Now, if you believe that humans, through igniting more than 93 million barrels of oil and liquid fuels per day worldwide (more than 34 billion barrels a year) – are not having a serious effect on the incredibly thin atmosphere which surrounds the planet – then man, I think that you are not looking at the truth in a rational manner.

          • sanduchi

            Yes, we climate change activists turn on our AC but we don’t want to turn on our AC because the Earth is so hot we need it to breathe. And yes we go out of our way to conserve energy and find and use alternative energy that does not hurt our Earth, what do you do?

          • https://soundcloud.com/steven-ingham-2/enough-is-enough Steven Ingham

            And some of us drive electric cars powered by renewables and ride bicycles now and then too. Our heat and AC comes from renewables also. Sun power !

        • Michael Haskins

          Sure everybody cares about climate change but it been changing for thousands of years. Climate on earth is never static as nature and God determines our climate – not man.

          The government’s answer to climate change is simply a massive financial redistribution program – world wide.

          • http://spearman3004.wordpress.com spearman

            So God is changing it now? Glad you agree like the Hindus who believe man is God & vice versa.

        • Christian Carle

          well considering that man made climate change IS a myth and has been debunked over and over again….No wait didn’t they actually catch the majority of man made climate change proponents with their pants down and their data falsified? sorry to bring back you bad memories 😀

          • http://spearman3004.wordpress.com spearman

            Climate change data wasn’t falsified as you say. That was fake news if you read more closely. News was taken out of context. Just google it. 97% of all the 1000s of peer reviewed scientific papers agree humans cause climate change. I suppose you think human evolution is a myth too?

          • Christian Carle

            no my dear friend, just man made global warming is a myth. And my friend the investigation was the FAKE news and that has been demonstrated, but guess you prefer to keep pineapple slices on you eyes. I will just invite you to read the actual investigation and how it was conducted. I mean interrogating only the suspects and basing the conclusions only on their anwers sound a bit fishy, but just follow the money…….

          • Whining_Artist

            So true, just like there’s no such thing as evolution and the world is only 6000 years old. Who needs peer review? Thank heavens we have all those old books written by sheep herders to use for scientific knowledge.

          • Christian Carle

            Dude who is talking about evolution and religion? Although its quite obvious you lack the skills for an open discussion you might as well go on the street with Bill Nye and make a complete fool of yourself, not just partially.

      • Steven Costa

        Your point being we have to live in caves and wear bearskins?

    • Judith Allen

      A very selfish attitude Brian.

      • Adam Reilly

        Well, he did say pretty much right at the beginning: “I am a Republican”

    • Paul

      We don’t need more taxes…ON US…we need more taxes on the 1%. Our treasury is currently deprived of about 400 billion dollars a year from tax dodging corporate America. It’s got to stop. Besides that, government has a role to play in the life of the citizenry. No where does our Constitution say that we should be abdicating the governments power to the corporate world. When I go to the polls, I go to vote for a fellow citizen to run this thing called the United States. I don’t go and vote for corporate CEO’s, corporate boards and other executives to do that job. Ultimately, we all would be well served to remember that capitalism is not a form or government but an economic system within the private sector. This is supposed to be a democratic republic not a plutocracy.

      • Truth Seeker

        A carbon tax hurts the middle class, the 1% don’t give a hoot. LOL

    • Richard Forman

      Good analysis, especially about getting past the hype of the headline, to what Gates was actually saying. I’m not sure if I agree with his statement that there’s no money to be made – seems to me that investing whatever necessary billions it takes to build out a practical alternative-energy infrastructure (maybe a national network of fast electric car charging or battery exchange stations?) would address a lot of the unfair advantage that he talks about fossil feuls enjoying. Anyway, I also favor societal investment in the r&d, I don’t mind paying for it with my taxes, although as you said, Brian, there are other areas of the budget that I’d support reducing to pay for it rather than increase taxes, but that’s a separate question.

    • https://soundcloud.com/steven-ingham-2/enough-is-enough Steven Ingham

      It is after all,, all about you isn’t it Brian? Would it be OK with you if the super rich with their obsessive, compulsive personality disorders, that hoard Billions, pay their fair share of taxes and give the poor and middle class a tax break for a change? Or does that go against your ideology?

    • Topi Kallinen

      In America, everyone is scared about the word “socialism”. This mentality build the prevailing core of insanity …

    • Dlbnfla

      The reason that there will never be a private enterprise, no matter how large is that the government will regulate it out of business. If it is not polution it will be nuclear safety, water consumption, windmill noise, spotted Alaskan/Mexican field mouse, or an African moose. The aim is to stop the use of energy, not the production of it. One step at a time. Prius with bicycle pedals….that is the real goal.

  • vps

    And we thought Gates was smart !? Under socialism he would have to give up 80% of his wealth, to take care of the “poor people”, not only of the US, but the whole world. He is NUTS.

  • francoismarie

    Mr Gates the day you give up all your money to poor people, then you can make eronious statement or move to Venezuela
    Maduro would love you

  • Sun Tan

    It’s easy to say Socialism is great when you’re extremely wealthy. Nothing worse than a rich Lib

    • http://smu.gs/L1p7XU winston

      It’s easier when youre poor.

    • pamela goforth

      I filed claim # 2016-014144, 20016-014146, 2016-014147 with
      department of treasury IRS Whistlesblowers form Government form 2011 on 8.22/16
      code 7623 Microsoft bill gates is hacking into public’s electric, off his paid
      commercial ads, stealing publics kwh electric & not metering the electric
      he’s stealing to avoid paying IRS on taxable income he receiving off the public
      his hacking is same as hot wiring our cars to drive around in our automobile is
      stealing, our government allowing Bill Gates Microsoft in not charging him his
      crime involved helping to heist electrics & taxes, Mr Gate is not metering
      nor tat how much cost he receiving & Billing us for, with electric
      companies Scam defrauding citizens in the world thats robbery is now a governmental
      conspiracy if not accounting for it since I reported the crimes involved, &
      as income received by Mr Gates Microsoft; Ten commandments God’s Laws thou
      shall not steal or covet any man’s house wife ass ox or anything that is your
      neighbors, thou shall have no god above God,God called us gods! Thomas Edison
      invented our electric, it a commodity we can buy & it pay for it, taxes our
      government added to us too, costing tax payers, that a sin partaking with them
      involved in that heist too that’s against God’s laws for us too; electric was
      in the world before Mr Gates used it to make his junky computer without
      someones electric his computer wont run,(his plastic & wires is all he’s
      entitled too) I’d likened to a gun. God word said Love never faileth it
      abhorrent evil, we’ve been sent to call the sinner to repentance from dead
      works to serve God Salvation’s Plan, Mr Gate Microsoft may already stole
      billions/trillions in the world robbing us our shut eye in our kwh Electric! I
      need the income from off my work I have reported the crimes to IRS filing form
      2011 Whistleblower 7623 9(A) & (b) To become rewarded to me governments.
      The Issue is God, Microsoft crimes is in plain sight! hacking kwh electric off
      public. We have one faith,one hope of our callings, one lord Jesus Christ, we
      overcome Satan by it & the word of our testimony & by the Blood of the
      Lamb & the Gates of hell will not prevail against us. 11/18/2016 Layne
      Carver for Joseph Hebb; IRS said I provide speculative & didn’t provide
      credible evidence regarding tax underpayment revenue laws & doesn’t contain
      a determination regarding an award under section 7623 (b). I am entitled to the

      reward deliver me this Issue is God in Jesus name God I ask this all done amen.

      • Lefty Blitzer

        Citations, please, religious nutcase.

      • Dan Mayo

        Hail Satan, ruler of the earth, master of reason and bringer of truth.

    • George Shiflett

      there is something worse than a rich lib and thats a rich republicans , just look at that low life trump

    • John Beavin

      That is insane Ok. There is nothing BETTER than a rich lib who will put his own $billions into saving the planet, and your children, if you have any.

  • Sun Tan

    YouTube Bill Gates Vaccines and YouTube Ted Turner on population control.

  • Christopher Morvant

    Mr. Gates, your opinions are a lot like Microsoft’s Operating System, highly flawed. Do you not realize that if you were living in a socialist state, you wouldn’t be nearly as wealthy as you are today? Have you ever taken a trip to Russia, where Socialism is the political foundation stone and tried to get a loaf of decent bread? How about a trip to Communist Cuba? Can you now see the flaws in that which you claim to be your logic?

  • http://firearmusernetwork.com/ John M Buol Jr.

    Capitalism seemed fine when negotiating a contract with IBM, after purchasing a certain operating system from Tim Paterson of course…

  • Russell Gann

    Typical limousine liberal. He’s got his money…

  • blbc

    Money can’t buy smarts.

  • David Hersch

    The great Margaret Thatcher once said “The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people’s money.” Bill Gates will never run out of money and probably has no idea what it is like to really struggle and make ends meet. He is in an elitist position to spout this sort of nonsense which he knows has failed over and over again.

    Let the kind hearted capitalists and bleeding hearts rather wisely create the atmosphere and culture of opportunity for people to establish themselves and grow economically. We all know the principle of teaching a man how to fish rather than handing him fish.

    • Stephen Paul Reynolds

      Margaret thatcher, great? Fuck off you twat. I’m guessing you’re one of the baby boomers who took her bribes to feather your own nest while fucking over generation after generation in the process. You lived through socialism but don’t want future generations to have the same opportunities as you, you selfish prick

      • David Hersch

        Obviously Stephen Paul Reynolds, you have a limited vocabulary, lack education and don’t even have a smattering of good manners. Extraordinary that you are allowed to vote. What a fine example of a yobo you show yourself to be.

        • Stephen Paul Reynolds

          So you think those with limited vocabularies shouldn’t be allowed to vote? You think those with a lack of education shouldn’t be allowed to vote? That those without impeccable manners shouldn’t be allowed to vote? Anyone else you think shouldn’t be allowed to vote? The homeless? The poor? The disabled? Single mothers? The mentally ill?….. So you want some kind of dictatorship? That doesn’t surprise me in the least from a thatcherite. Oh, and it’s yobbo.

    • John Beavin

      Your second paragraph is exactly what Gates is proposing. You have confused yourself by your own completely misguided belief in your first paragraph. Thanks for the second.

  • Iatemine

    When has Bill Gates ever been in touch with the average American? He went directly from introvert computer nerd to obscenely rich. He has no idea how Socialism destroys the average person. He sees himself as the elite, above all of us filthy masses. Just like all Progressives.

    • billwalker

      He is vastly ‘more in touch’ with the average American than the majotity of the obscenely rich. NOONE should inherit 20 BILLION Dollars ( Walmart kids )These oligarchy creating amounts should be applied to the national debt.

      • Iatemine

        No one should inherit 20 billion dollars? Under which Hitler or Stalin or Mao would you rather we live? Why shouldn’t my kids receive the fruits of MY labors instead of some low-achieving government nazi taking it and distributing it among those who don’t deserve it nor have worked nearly as hard or taken as many risks? Socialism doesn’t work Pal. Never has, never will. The National Debt needs to be fixed by the same people who ran it up! We are already paying for that! Do you not realize that if you confiscated the wealth of all the 2% …and 1% in this Country it would only pay for 3 hours of running the government? Stop believing the stupid lie the Democrats have been spewing for the last 60 years.

        • robdashu

          If you made twenty billion, you were either unethical or supremely lucky. It’s probably not “earned” in the sense of creating through personal effort. Let your kids make their own way with a million or two.

          • Iatemine

            Thats a Leftist rationalization for stealing from the successful to fund the loyalty and votes of the unsuccessful. Don’t continue being a dupe. And you are.

          • Stephen Paul Reynolds

            It’s not success if you’ve been handed it on a plate

          • Iatemine

            So….You Leftists are God now huh? I work my ass off all my life to make my kids life better….and I invent a better wheel and earn billions by my genius….and the GOD of Leftism takes it away and gives it to people more deserving? Most of whom sit on their ass and have for generations, not lifting a finger to help themselves? Not in the real world Pal. Go live in a jungle or a Islamic Country for a year THEN come back and tell me how bad you have it.

          • John Beavin

            No one is saying that lamemind. You are getting no “likes” because all we are saying is that everyone deserves an opportunity. You and Trump would deny that, and you can’t even begin to fathom a billionaire offering a solution to help those who have been screwed for much too long already, an opportunity to get on their feet.

          • Iatemine

            No like here…my ratio is pretty damn high overall. I’m getting no likes because hardly anyone reads this blog. Nice try though.
            And you really need to quit “assuming” and labeling people….we are all different and have different views on subjects. You are really showing your ignorance and narrow mind Pal. Not to mention a complete lack of historical and ideological knowledge. MSNBC much?

        • Stephen Paul Reynolds

          You are very stupid

          • Iatemine

            No…I have 50,000 years of human history on my side Pal….you should invest in yourself and actually LEARN it! You would not be so ignorant!

  • Shawn

    Think about this for a minute. He wants to invest in an alternative energy source, so he can control it, and make money on it, so he can get even richer than he is. He gives two rats asses about you or me.

    • John Beavin

      Make money from free energy??? Not everyone shafts everyone they can like Trump has.

  • Paul

    So he comes to this conclusion after building a McMansion and takes all the other trappings of a billionaire? Greenhouse gas polluter…why aren’t 20 homeless in his house?

    Pushing a button from a 1,000 miles away to take someone out doesn’t make it any different than point blank. That is all these millionaires and billionaires do…whine about their good fortunes and try their damnest to keep anyone else from making a living. Bill, give it all away now and live in a temple–then you will earn my respect, otherwise, get in your limo and shut up

  • Metalicman

    This guy is a lunitic. Lock him up.

  • joe_schmooga

    Gates: “I’ve got mine so FU#K the rest of you!!”

    • John Beavin

      You must read from right to left, joe–he is saying the exact opposite, and spelling it out for those who can understand what they are reading. You have him confused with Trump.

  • George Shiflett

    if fed gov would get off its ass and stop catering to the low life oil companies , we could be free of all oil in less than 5 years , no need for it at all , We can grow hemp which would cover food fuel and clothing rope and many things , Solar on every roof and desert like California Mojave Desert , Solar farms and wind farms , ends coal and Nat gas all together , this country can be fossil fuel free, i would love to see the end of the Kochs and Exxon and this is the way to do it , and HHO is another good fuel

  • Joseph Norris

    While Socialism promises prosperity, equality, and security, it delivers poverty, misery, and tyranny.

    In a capitalist economy, incentives are of the utmost importance. Market prices, the profit-and-loss system of accounting, and private property rights provide an efficient, interrelated system of incentives to guide and direct economic behavior. Capitalism is based on the theory that incentives matter!

    Under socialism, incentives either play a minimal role or are ignored totally. A centrally planned economy without market prices or profits, where property is owned by the state, is a system without an effective incentive mechanism to direct economic activity. By failing to emphasize incentives, socialism is a theory inconsistent with human nature and is therefore doomed to fail. Socialism is based on the theory that incentives don’t matter

    https://fee.org/articles/why-socialism-failed/

    Today, progressive socialists don’t ignore incentives, but instead make them out to be harmful

  • Michael M

    Interesting that a cut throat piece of garbage who destroy lots innovative small businesses and created a monopoly of sorts would talk about socialism. I guess its the ends justifies the means like how he got his fortune through shady means and destroying lots of innovative competition in the worst ways. Gates, GFY some of us remember how you made your fortune.

  • james graham

    ALL HAIL THE SCARLET BANNER.

  • walter77777

    Socialism may (or may not) make for a happier humanity, but present trends may be making some sort of socialism inevitable sometime in the relatively near future. Our President and persons associated with our President seem to feel it is OK for the rich to get all sorts of good things while the poor get inferior services and products. They feel it is OK for the rich to become richer while the gap between the rich and everybody else expands.

    This cannot go on forever, and at some point the masses will rise up to throw off their shackles and take over from their oppressors. I have little hope for great happiness from this, bu tthe rulers may be making this inevitable.
    W.

  • Lewis M. (Bill) Dickens

    Two things…

    The chart above seems to be related to what Steve Ballmer is doing… again. you must also plot this with respect to the demographics by political/geographical unit. And there must be an attendant normalized plot as well.

    That way we can compare different States along with the overall.

    Failure to do this is what?? I think that Bill used to use the term frequently.

    Now there are a number of comments about wind energy… Well then post the % Efficiency every time you try and show off your design.

    Bill Allison hit 59% in the 80’s and used to go into hysterica about the Nasa Designs since they were of such low efficiencies.

    Efficiency is the key in engineering. If you don’t get that then please back away.

    It will be fun to see if the Republicans will turn on Bill. They are crazy enough to do that.

  • JDESQ

    This jerk is pushing carbon tax, pure and simple, and the climate change hoax. Not a word about 4th generation nuclear reactors, of which China has 21 under construction, let alone its massive R&D program in nuclear fusion the source of unlimited carbon-free energy and a technological revolution. If it were up to Gates, he’d let the billions in the developing sector starve to death for his “sustainable energy” ideology while he lets fossil fuels power his 66,000 sq ft, 24 bath, $125 million abode. Please.

  • Joan Piller

    Bill Gates..hummm You didn’t mention Canada..

  • Brendan Keane

    “socialism” is a new-fangled word to describe the old word “government” | designing better government, legally, means creating a more intelligent people participating in a more detailed civic culture | the people are ironically undermining all of this | and socialism is a code word for oligarchic monopoly as much as competition is code word for “some other oligarchy”

  • Les

    doesn’t he know he’s missed the boat! it has already been done, There are systems already out there to provide free energy at no running costs after purchase.

  • ibutcherii

    Capitalism Undermines Human Dignity!

    I support the Government supplement the basic human needs of the citizens: health care, education, water, electricity, not the Privatization to the Corporate individuals, which is considered to be socialistic, and I also stated that I believe in Free Enterprise which is a form of Capitalism.

    The Government should operate in the best interest of the Citizens, not the Corporations.

    The assembly line, automation, computer tech and robotics have eliminated the need for human labor, so now what are citizens/people to do to sustain themselves?

    Voluntary workforce would be a humane solution, much like how people serve in the arm forces.

    I feel all able body and stabled mind government assisted / welfare recipient should be obligated to provide some service back into the community.

    Working hard was the “Christian” work ethic value, “By the sweat of your brow you shall earn your keep”; instead of adhering to this concept the Welfare System has recipients and their children expecting something for doing nothing.

  • Sam Curtis

    The planet is at a tipping point, and it really is about greed. It’s come to the point, where the corporations want to make the mess, but don’t want to pay for the clean up. These people believe through capitalism they should make all profit and have no responsibility after that. So the solution is make the consumer the bad guy. Blame it on the consumer, the government, because its business that’s good for the economy, If you don’t want the product don’t buy it. They claim competition is good and responsibility is bad. It’s goes along with their mentality of playing with other peoples money. Where’s their risk? How about the responsibility. We need public funding to drive competition. We have gone from being a capitalist country to a consumerist country, We don’t care where anything is made, how it affects our lives, we just want to consume for as little as possible. We’ve come from a country that solves problems to one that is leaving the responsibility to others. These are the countries investing in education to solve the problems we are neglecting, these are the countries that will kick our ass, because don’t even understand the problem. The countries that will succeed understand how things work. Just keep Ignoring the landfills.

  • Alty53

    The Cathod Ray Tube had been invented before World War Two but there was little interest in providing the substantial financing needed to build crt factories. The US government provided the financing for crt factories because Cathod Ray Tubes were needed for radar. Once the war was over building television sets using the mass production techniques and infrastructure developed during the war made television sales profitable. This is another example of the public sector serving private interests or to put it another way….State Capitalism.

  • hawkeye96

    As my friend, George, advises often, you have to define your terms if you expect to have an intelligent discussion. The definition of “socialism” is an utterly proper case in point, because its three leading definitions (from Merriam-Webster) are so different:

    1. Any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods;

    The critical words are “theories” (not palpable realities), “collective ownership” (property or production owned privately not by the government), and “government ownership” (introducing police powers as a means of enforcement).

    2. A system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state;

    This is a classical Lincolnian idea in which production is owned “by the people and for the people.” However, there is no mention here of property, so concede that private property exists in the hands of individual citizens of the state and that it may be acquired, inherited, and expanded by the use of personal means.

    3. A stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done.

    This may require still other definitions (capitalism, communism) in order to conceive where societal evolution begins and ends and which elements of capitalism and communism can be linked to form the socialism intermediary. However, the final characteristics of unequal distribution of property and money according to the value of work done is better understood as state-enforced equalization of wealth — taxing each according to ability to pay and disseminating products and services according to need.

    Now, which elements of socialism could you accept? How would you share the benefits with how many and what kind of fellow citizens?

    • JD

      Well, no need to stop at three. As for me, I’ll take the social democracies (with all their faults) such as Sweden, Finland, the Netherlands, Canada over US style dog-eat-dog any day.

      • hawkeye96

        That’s right, JD. I only wanted to exemplify the problem with most discussions of socialism: most people don’t know what they’re talking about because they don’t have a realistic understanding of the many meanings of the word and, as a result, talk past each other. Check through the comments herein, and you’ll readily see what I mean. When Brian Healy says (just below) that Gates is not “really talking about” socialism, Healy means that Gates doesn’t address the same socialism that Healy does. In an academic environment, this discontinuity is less likely to occur, so let’s all go back to high school a study up.

  • richardgrabman

    Socialism? At least in the US, public works were always state financed, and never considered “socialist” or “capitalist”. I suppose if a label had to be put on this, it would be “developmentalism” which was quite common here in Latin America, especially after WWII. It simply meant the state invested in those industries that were needed but would otherwise be imports or impossible to finance.

  • Noreen Washington

    He’s not talking about socialism. His point is well taken, the private sector serves the private sector. This is evident now more than ever in energy corporations backing Trump. Pure fiction but the climate doesn’t follow that.

  • MoreFreedomLessFreeloaders

    Every single one of you defending this hypocrite are morons. The guy made billions off of Capitalism, and now he wants to push Socialism onto everyone else. He is also a huge supporter of world depopulation aka genocide. You lefties truly are a sick, hypocritical bunch.

  • A piano

    It seems that capitalism worked fine for him all these years so why bring socialism into the picture we’ve seen what socialism has done to other countries or is this just another ploy by him to use his power & money to advocate socialism,I’m sure he can think of better solutions than to even mention the word socialism on the subject not to mention the fact that other scientists have proof that global warming is a fraud & just natures way of doing things.

  • http://RonKuleBooks.com/ Ronald Joseph Kule

    Something is not right about this article: it begins with Gates reportedly stating the private sector is to greedy to do needed green work; yet, turns around to ask his billionaire friends — are they not private-sector people? — to make it happen. Can’t think with that, bub. Something illogical here.

  • Daniel

    I agree with the previous comment though I hate to admit agreeing with anything a Republican says. No mention of Socialism at all. Of course, what Gates is talking about can be taken as implying the need for socialism though it can also be read as implying the need for government to wrest control of vital processes from private industry.

    I do wish Americans could see that socialism does not have to come in the form of Stalinism. Democratic forms of socialism have existed and do exist. All it means is that governments are empowered to place restrictions on some types of activity and to cap profits so that there is some economic equity and the people at the bottom of the economic ladder are secure in their existence. Americans surprisingly find this idea a breach of their freedom. But it is the only thing that has worked in Europe for the past 60 years and most people will agree it has brought a measure of wellbeing and stability. Allowing the rich and powerful to do what they like with the planet is simply stupid. It is to trust that they are also wise and kind, which they obviously are not. And it is not just that the rich and powerful are not wise and kind but that they comprise such a small minority of the population that they simply can’t be relied upon to head off the types of crises facing the majority of us (environmental collapse, unemployment, crime etc.) These are problems that we need to deal with collectively and we can only do that under a fully democratic system. Which means that we simpy have to do something about the way the media functions and the way demands for more democracy are met with violence.

    That is what socialism means and that is what is implied by Gates, even though he hasn’t go the balls to do it openly.

  • SJV Warrior

    Socialism never has either, the problem is liberalism destroyers of everything that’s makes sense and is good.