reply to post by CIAGypsy
Ok checking now...gimme a few minutes
Ok regarding Philanthropy and Altruism, regarding science and media... He himself is estimated to have a net worth of 2.9 Billion, yet has donated
about 900 Million into self serving organisations.
Now 900 million is LITTLE in comparison compared to his net worth. If he donated this money to other organisations, (working on the math now) there's
1 million million to make 1 billion. So lets say 3 million million is 3 billion. 3 million million divided by 900 million is........ 3333. So in
essence, he donated 0.03% of his total net worth.
What the hell is up with that, not only am I ignoring the fact he's donating it back to his own foundations and companies that are self serving, he
gives out LESS % wise than the couple of hard working individuals who throw coins and notes into a performers guitar case!!! And that person playing
the guitar is not even working for the total strangers that donated to him other than to provide light entertainment.
My line of thinking is that this isn't philanthropy, its way worse, its sinister because people see $billion dollar numbers they think ooo ahhh he's
super duper nice. Bugger that, and this is conjecture, but he's probably got a team of specialist economists who would most likely "donate this
amount into XYZ, not only are you investing in your own endevours, the amount given in the millions will make the general population think you're
doing a great job and see you as a really nice guy" and it seems that many people have fallen for that.
I give my money to people/groups/friends/family which equates to more than the % wise than Rockefeller does, and I am not a philanthropist. G'damn
he's pulled the wool over the eyes of the nations. Well played David, well played.
Now do I really need to go into the science and media. Media that is owned = controlled. Science companies like Monsanto that do genetic
modification of the food we eat = dangerous. They aren't making healthier food, they're making redder tomatoes, but nutrition wise is crap.
In Australia its ILLEGAL to grow organic tobacco. (Notice I said ILLEGAL, I didn't say its against the law, these are two separate ideologies) Its a
statute which is technically a guideline for consensual contracts to be made that organic tobacco cannot be grown - that is what ILLEGAL actually
Now why the hell would it be illegal to grow organic tobacco. We HAVE to buy tobacco that is treated with pesticides et al.... Because perhaps they
don't think regular lung cancer is working fast enough *sarcasm btw* heheh.
So companies like Monsanto are doing crap.
I need to research this part though, I think I read somewhere that a board member that was on Monsanto now is part of the FDA? Need to verify
Ok settled down now
edit on 13/12/26 by Im a Marty because: added long winding response