Bill Gates is Against the Global Poor Receiving Affordable Vaccines

Gergar12

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 24, 2020
1,069
310
88
Country
United States
https://www.salon.com/2021/04/26/bi...las-with-global-poor-to-end-pandemic_partner/



So, Bill Gates is still stuck in the 1990s and wants IP to rule over the rights of people and human beings. Even though lots of R&D is done in governments, and public research colleges, or provided by public grants; He wants IP protection to remain for drugs, and vaccines like Pfizer, and Moderna.



This is the so-called most ethical billionaire. A so-called cosmopolitan which by the way is just a code way for the rich to skirt taxes around the world. Explain to me what is cosmopolitan about wanting the poor to die. I would say a socialist who is against all the wars, is dodgy around immigration, and is an isolationist but will export the vaccines is more cosmopolitan than this phony. (Pre 2016 Bernie, post-2016 Bernie is more internationalist)



Is he fucking hearing himself; I want either the working poor allot of whom live on less than 5 dollars a day to pay hundreds for a life-saving drug, or I want them dying in the streets? This is the deluded madness of the rich and lets me remind you he is considered a ‘good’ billionaire. There are billionaires like Bezos, Koch, Mercers, etc. that are worse. Also, even if you were just a selfish fuck who loves good PR, and does good marketing if India or South Africa gets an RNA vaccine-resistant variant of Covid, we are all screwed, and your gold, bunkers, rockets, and money won’t save you when you don’t have anyone to sell shit to.

1619472782944.png

The answer is yes.
 

Majestic_Manatee

Senior Member
Mar 5, 2021
67
25
23
Country
Wales
It is known.



 
Last edited:

Gergar12

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 24, 2020
1,069
310
88
Country
United States
Source:


Edit: Ignore the Youtube comments section for your own sanity.
 

CM156

Resident Reactionary
Legacy
May 6, 2020
610
401
68
Country
United States
Gender
White Male
I'd like to agree with you here, but the microchip in my vaccine tells me to obey Bill and not question him.

The Belgian Congo was sold as a humanitarian effort.
Did you know that there are Belgian Congo Genocide deniers? Like, that's an actual thing? Ran into a few not too long ago and it made me despair.
 

Revnak

We must imagine Sisyphus horny
Legacy
May 25, 2020
2,706
2,693
118
Country
USA
I'd like to agree with you here, but the microchip in my vaccine tells me to obey Bill and not question him.


Did you know that there are Belgian Congo Genocide deniers? Like, that's an actual thing? Ran into a few not too long ago and it made me despair.
Yeah they’re called Belgians.
 

Seanchaidh

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 24, 2020
2,818
1,387
118
Country
United States of America
Before anyone else points it out, apparently his very flimsy reasoning is that patent protections are somehow necessary for quality control, and that without patent protections there will be some horrific mistake that causes people not to trust the vaccine and to not take it. This is, of course, possible with patent protections and hardly a necessary or even more likely outcome without them, so the argument is bad. But it will satisfy people who want to maximize the profits of Pfizer et al.
 

Satinavian

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 5, 2020
865
155
48
In this particular case i don't really disagree with him that much. Worldwide we already produce pretty much all of the vaccine we can. There are limited production capabilities and raw materials because RNA based vaccines have never been a big thing before. We would not have any faster rollout without patents.

Furthermore, Biontech is a pure research company founded on the premise to try developing RNA based technology with all potential income based on patents and IP. They started with that long before corona. Without patent protection, this company would not have been founded and would not have been able to develop a corona vaccine in such a hort time.

There is a lot of objectionable stuff about patents in the medicine sector. Much revolves around evergreening things and profit way longer than the law expects. There is also patent-trolling.
But in this case ? New technologies that the world actually deperately need now ? The developers totally should make money from it. At least for a reasonable time. That is the kind of situation he have the concept of patents for in the frst place.

That doesn't mean that global cooperation to distribute the vaccine everywhere as fast as possible is unwelcome or a bad idea. But there are many other ways to do that and actually surprisingly little interest. We have a couple of initiatives that unfortunately go nowhere. Politicians everywhere are intestested mostly to get the vaccine to their voters, everyone else can wait. The EU tried to distribute collectively and it was a huge failure.
 
Last edited:

Chimpzy

Professor of Monkey Business
Legacy
Escapist +
Apr 3, 2020
7,799
1,678
118
These people are not our friends. If given the choice between money and ethics, when push comes to shove, they'll choose money. Always. Instantly. Won't even think twice.
 

Seanchaidh

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 24, 2020
2,818
1,387
118
Country
United States of America
But in this case ? New technologies that the world actually deperately need now ? The developers totally should make money from it. At least for a reasonable time. That is the kind of situation he have the concept of patents for in the frst place.
There is, to put it mildly, significant tension between the priorities of maintaining public health and granting monopolies, even for a short duration, to those who bought or for whatever other reason might own a patent for a drug (which is typically not the researchers, to be clear).
 
Last edited:

TheMysteriousGX

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 12, 2020
3,155
913
118
Country
United States
But in this case ? New technologies that the world actually deperately need now ? The developers totally should make money from it. At least for a reasonable time. That is the kind of situation he have the concept of patents for in the frst place.
Counter argument: Jonas Salk deliberately did not patent the polio vaccine nor did he try and profit on it because desperately needed medications shouldn't be put behind a paywall.

Kinda ties directly into my "billionaires are inherently bad people" argument.
 

Thaluikhain

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 4, 2020
14,759
654
118
If Gates was worried about research companies not getting money from their patents, he could always promise to throw bags of his own money at them if they waved their patent.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TheMysteriousGX

Satinavian

Elite Member
Legacy
Apr 5, 2020
865
155
48
@Seanchaidh

Well, yes. But that is the problem with capitalism as a whole. That people think, whoever invests capital into it should be the most important person who should profit the most.

In this particular case at least Biontech was actually founded by researchers who were convinced of their own ideas. And is still led by them. And yes, they are now quite wealthy, though they did manage a similar thing (found a research company, develop something nice, sell off the company to big pharma for a ridiculous sum) already once before, so that is not necessariy due to covid.

@TheMysteriousGX

Yes, That was nice of him. But during his research he was employed as professor at the University of Pitttsburg and didn't have to pay hundreds of millions out of his own pockets to make that research possible in the first place. He was completely funded by the public and some non-profit organisation.


What i would like though is public funded research remaining in public hands. And yes, i am aware that Biontech also received at least some public money from which no private profit should be generated.
 
Last edited:

Agema

You have no authority here, Jackie Weaver
Legacy
Apr 3, 2020
6,004
3,088
118
Before anyone else points it out, apparently his very flimsy reasoning is that patent protections are somehow necessary for quality control, and that without patent protections there will be some horrific mistake that causes people not to trust the vaccine and to not take it. This is, of course, possible with patent protections and hardly a necessary or even more likely outcome without them, so the argument is bad. But it will satisfy people who want to maximize the profits of Pfizer et al.
I'm not against Bill Gates' argument at all. Without any IP protection, it's the wild west for any two-bit chemicals company to make drugs and vaccines. You can absolutely guarantee there's no shortage of ethically challenged businessmen who'd sell junk: there will be substantial human cost, and in terms of medical ethics that is problematic.

We also know that if chemicals companies can make stuff cheap, they'll simply undercut Pfizer et al. We all know perfectly well that healthcare providers in many places, including our own countries, that could easily afford the expensive Western prices will all buy cheap knock-offs instead, because they still have the same motivations of profit or efficiency. And unless we want a completely different system for the discovery and production of drugs and vaccines (I'm not against this, it's just it's a whole other conversation), I'm not sure it's the right thing to let lazy companies with no R&D profit at the expense of companies who shoulder the R&D burden.

Thus I think some form of regulated licensing system where approved manufacturers can make the product for other countries is a good way forward in the interim. Pfizer et al gets a cut via the licence, they gets some say on quality control, and many more people have access to the drug/vaccine at reasonable cost.
 

Trunkage

Nascent Orca
Legacy
Apr 3, 2020
5,600
1,100
118
Brisbane
Gender
Cyborg
If Gates was worried about research companies not getting money from their patents, he could always promise to throw bags of his own money at them if they waved their patent.
Or... just pay the patent cost for other companies. He can then withdraw it if they do dangerous things. It's not like the other vaccines that ARE legal havent had massive problems