Gates, business leaders call for US to triple spending on clean energy research

Jun 10, 2010 | Posted by: roboblogger | Full story: Myphl17.com

Billionaire Bill Gates is urging the government to triple spending on what he says everyone, rich and poor, will need in the future: clean, cheap energy.

Comments
1 - 20 of 27 Comments Last updated Jun 15, 2010
First Prev
of 2
Next Last
Northie

Spokane, WA

#1 Jun 10, 2010
Wow. What he said.
YouHelpFixIt

Scottsdale, AZ

#2 Jun 11, 2010
If Bill Gates thinks it realy makes sense for the government to invest in this research why does it not make sense for private investors to do it? If he thinks it is a worthwhile cause but will not result in a return on investment then it sounds like a perfect candidate for the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation to spend money on.

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

#3 Jun 11, 2010
Bill Gates is urging the government to triple spending on ... cheap energy.
Fewer people believe in climate change mitigation or manmade global warming, now, when will Gate's catch on? He's deeply committed, to his portfolio.
Northie

Spokane, WA

#4 Jun 11, 2010
YouHelpFixIt wrote:
If Bill Gates thinks it realy makes sense for the government to invest in this research why does it not make sense for private investors to do it? If he thinks it is a worthwhile cause but will not result in a return on investment then it sounds like a perfect candidate for the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation to spend money on.
Because private investors demand short-term return on investment. Businesses rarely invest in basic research. Generally, they monetize research from other sources, especially government-funded ones. The real issue is bankers and VCs; it's very hard to fund any business venture, no matter how promising, without proving that it has already worked somewhere else.

Computing, pharmaceuticals, biotech, wireless telephony, data networks, aircraft, nuclear power, solar PVs, composite materials...we can thank government-funded initial R&D for them all. Margarine was developed by a huge prize grant from the French Empire two centuries ago.

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

#5 Jun 11, 2010
Bigger spending on cheap energy, is that a joke?
YouHelpFixIt

Scottsdale, AZ

#6 Jun 11, 2010
Northie wrote:
<quoted text>
Because private investors demand short-term return on investment. Businesses rarely invest in basic research. Generally, they monetize research from other sources, especially government-funded ones. The real issue is bankers and VCs; it's very hard to fund any business venture, no matter how promising, without proving that it has already worked somewhere else.
Computing, pharmaceuticals, biotech, wireless telephony, data networks, aircraft, nuclear power, solar PVs, composite materials...we can thank government-funded initial R&D for them all. Margarine was developed by a huge prize grant from the French Empire two centuries ago.
So if there is not going to be a return that can be capitalized on, again why would it not be a good canidate for thier foundation?

Again, why does someone who invests billions in profitable ventures and gives away billions need to get the government to take away our money for this research?
Earthling

Hellín, Spain

#7 Jun 11, 2010
Northie wrote:
Because private investors demand short-term return on investment.
Where have you been investing for the last 10 years?
There have been no worthwhile 'short term' investments for the average punter since 2002 at the very latest.

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

#8 Jun 11, 2010
Our governments have been spending too much money, it's time to face facts. We can't afford to mitigate climate change.

For people like Gate's we don't think of it as crazy, it's eccentric. Global warming eccentric science. Perfect.
Northie

Spokane, WA

#9 Jun 11, 2010
Earthling wrote:
<quoted text>Where have you been investing for the last 10 years?
There have been no worthwhile 'short term' investments for the average punter since 2002 at the very latest.
Au contraire. Long equities have been very lucrative in emerging markets, clean tech, consumer electronics, integrated retail, healthcare. Commodities have done well; particularly metals. I've profited from them all. I also know plenty who lucked out in real estate and the currency carry trade.

The "average punter" simply doesn't study trends or investment fundamentals much. Above-average punters do.
Northie

Spokane, WA

#10 Jun 11, 2010
YouHelpFixIt wrote:
<quoted text>
So if there is not going to be a return that can be capitalized on, again why would it not be a good canidate for thier foundation?
Again, why does someone who invests billions in profitable ventures and gives away billions need to get the government to take away our money for this research?
Ask Bill. My guess is that Gates Foundation capital is heavily deployed in education and emerging-world health care, which Gates chose as his legacy priorities years ago. In addition, poor investment returns in recent years may have strained his ability to keep those programs moving ahead.

In any case, energy R&D should be addressed at the Federal level because we don't merely need research, but also a committed policy establishment that will USE that research. Nothing would be more frustrating than to invest billions privately and then see the fruits of those labors ignored. Gates wants to see America truly invested in this, in every sense.
Earthling

Hellín, Spain

#11 Jun 11, 2010
Northie wrote:
I've profited from them all.
Aha, now I know why you're so fearful of climate cooking and roaming bands of heavily armed terrorists.
YouHelpFixIt

Scottsdale, AZ

#12 Jun 11, 2010
Northie wrote:
<quoted text>
Ask Bill. My guess is that Gates Foundation capital is heavily deployed in education and emerging-world health care, which Gates chose as his legacy priorities years ago. In addition, poor investment returns in recent years may have strained his ability to keep those programs moving ahead.
In any case, energy R&D should be addressed at the Federal level because we don't merely need research, but also a committed policy establishment that will USE that research. Nothing would be more frustrating than to invest billions privately and then see the fruits of those labors ignored. Gates wants to see America truly invested in this, in every sense.
The point is that if it important enought for him to encourage our government to take our money at the point of a gun to pay for, then it should be good enough to qualify as one of his charities.

Obviously its not good enough for his money but good enough for ours!
Northie

Spokane, WA

#13 Jun 11, 2010
YouHelpFixIt wrote:
<quoted text>
The point is that if it important enought for him to encourage our government to take our money at the point of a gun to pay for, then it should be good enough to qualify as one of his charities.
Obviously its not good enough for his money but good enough for ours!
We pay taxes. Get used to it.

Gates and the other business leaders asking the government to fund clean energy research are as entitled as any of us are to bend the President's ear about where their tax moolah should go. They just happen to get more audiences with the Chief, for some reason.

However, we can be sure that Bill Gates is not in this for the money.

“I Luv Carbon Dioxide”

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

#14 Jun 11, 2010
Who will see the funding for clean energy research? Crony corporate pals of corrupt representatives, let's send them to jail, instead of giving them tax dollars.
YouHelpFixIt

Scottsdale, AZ

#15 Jun 14, 2010
Northie wrote:
<quoted text>
We pay taxes. Get used to it.
Gates and the other business leaders asking the government to fund clean energy research are as entitled as any of us are to bend the President's ear about where their tax moolah should go. They just happen to get more audiences with the Chief, for some reason.
However, we can be sure that Bill Gates is not in this for the money.
And the more we spend, the more we pay, get used to it. We have been riding on credit for the last 40 years and the bill is coming due.

We can't spend money on every crazy idea that some billionare thinks is good enough for someone elses money but not his own.

The same thing goes for you that goes for him. You want it, you fund it.
Northie

Spokane, WA

#16 Jun 14, 2010
YouHelpFixIt wrote:
<quoted text>
And the more we spend, the more we pay, get used to it. We have been riding on credit for the last 40 years and the bill is coming due.
We can't spend money on every crazy idea that some billionare thinks is good enough for someone elses money but not his own.
The same thing goes for you that goes for him. You want it, you fund it.
No, WE will fund it. Just as WE fund other common necessities, or doesn't Ms. Rand approve of that?
YouHelpFixIt

Scottsdale, AZ

#17 Jun 14, 2010
Northie wrote:
<quoted text>
No, WE will fund it. Just as WE fund other common necessities, or doesn't Ms. Rand approve of that?
We won't fund it if the people of the US realize that we should not waste our money any more than the billionare who advocates it will waste his money on it, the politicians can't make political gain out of it, or the Chinese and Japanese won't buy the additional debt.

It's not a necessity, its research.
Northie

Spokane, WA

#18 Jun 14, 2010
YouHelpFixIt wrote:
<quoted text>
We won't fund it if the people of the US realize that we should not waste our money any more than the billionare who advocates it will waste his money on it, the politicians can't make political gain out of it, or the Chinese and Japanese won't buy the additional debt.
It's not a necessity, its research.
But Gates is arguing that his tax money SHOULD be invested in clean energy research, and his tax dollars could fund a small country. I'm with him.
YouHelpFixIt

Scottsdale, AZ

#19 Jun 14, 2010
Northie wrote:
<quoted text>
But Gates is arguing that his tax money SHOULD be invested in clean energy research, and his tax dollars could fund a small country. I'm with him.
There is no his/your vs. our tax money. It's just tax money.

If you and he would like to fund this on your own, go right ahead, no one is stopping you. But stop telling us it's not good enough for your money (or his) and then tell me it's good enough for our tax money or extending our national debt.
Northie

Spokane, WA

#20 Jun 14, 2010
YouHelpFixIt wrote:
<quoted text>
There is no his/your vs. our tax money. It's just tax money.
If you and he would like to fund this on your own, go right ahead, no one is stopping you. But stop telling us it's not good enough for your money (or his) and then tell me it's good enough for our tax money or extending our national debt.
Did I say it's not good enough for my money? On the contrary, I've told you numerous times that I invest in clean energy. You simply have a listening problem.

As for Gates, you don't know that he isn't investing in clean energy either. I suspect he is.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Bill Gates Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Bill Gates, the American billionaire received h... Jul '14 Ana 2
Billionaires call on Congress to 'roll out the ... Jul '14 Amigo 24
Liquid metal from MIT stores solar power May '14 Alison Young 2
Breaking (Bad?) Sap Hana Boss Vishal Sikka Resigns May '14 Berblinger 1
An Apple Carplay mockup Mar '14 Talk 1
The future of women in tech [Commentary] (Feb '14) Feb '14 Jasleen Kaur 1
Back to reboot Microsoft (Feb '14) Feb '14 haha 1
•••
•••
Enter and win $5000
•••

Bill Gates People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••