|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, February 15 2013 @ 12:18 PM EST |
And in totally unrelated news: Devil refuses to divulge extent of real estate
holdings in Hell.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, February 15 2013 @ 12:23 PM EST |
Does Bill Gates control the money that is parked in the Gates Foundation? Can
control of that money be passed on in a will?
If yes, then these foundations are really just another tax dodge.
--
Bondfire
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Nick_UK on Friday, February 15 2013 @ 12:28 PM EST |
See my post from a few days ago here:
Bill Gates
Nick[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: artp on Friday, February 15 2013 @ 01:56 PM EST |
... but succeed at making more barrels of money.
If you follow the
thread, it refers to a Harper's article
titled "Let Them Eat Cash".
Best quote
from
this article:
"The rulers never go
hungry."
Bill Gates knows nothing about hunger or food
production or
food distribution. He knows only about robber-baron tactics
in
making money - lots of money. But where does that money
come from? It comes
from the new, naive entrants into the
market, the very farmers that he is
leading into slaughter
like the Pied Piper. Their losses become Gates'
gains.
Food production is very much a bottom-up process. Gates is
trying to
make it a top-down process. It is doomed to fail.
Until such time as farmers
regain control of their
distribution channels, they will continue to suffer
from the
inability to set their own prices, and they will be sucked
dry by
their suppliers and customers ( Grain buyers, meat
packers, syrup and gasohol
processors, etc. ), unless of
course,
those suppliers and customers decide
that they want a new
set of farmers. We, as consumers, benefit from lower food
prices, even though it is lower quality and less nutritious
food. So we do not
complain about the situation.
Farming is a rare form of economic activity
that does not
set its own prices. Farmers take what they can get.
Commodities
markets are presented as benefits to the farmer,
yet there is a cost for using
commodities markets, and that
is that the house always wins.
I mistakenly
posted this in the older, referenced article.
---
Userfriendly on WGA
server outage:
When you're chained to an oar you don't think you should go down when the galley
sinks ? [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, February 15 2013 @ 03:12 PM EST |
| . [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
- ROFL - n/t - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, February 15 2013 @ 05:48 PM EST
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, February 15 2013 @ 05:35 PM EST |
[PJ: The Bowman v. Monsanto case, currently pending before the
US Supreme Court has had numerous amicus briefs filed,
It
occurred to me, can Monsanto patent its modified seeds at all?
Now
anybody who knows about plant breeding knows that you take two plants (normally
from one species) and fertilse one with the other. The resultant seed varies
and carrying out the same with another two plants results in yet another crop of
different seed with yet more variations. Such seeds/plants are often sold with a
varietal suffix to the name. Anybody else doing the same thing is free to use a
different varietal name.
Now Monsanto have a technique (patentable -
O.K.) to modify one species by implanting genes from another species. They do
not use every plant in species one and every plant/animal in species two. So
should they be able to claim that they alone should have total rights to the
results of using that technique with that two species.
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
- you mean ? - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, February 18 2013 @ 10:38 AM EST
|
|
| Authored by: albert on Friday, February 15 2013 @ 07:44 PM EST |
There's no chance of doing a quick perusal of the Gates Foundation 2011 Form
990-PF. It's 736 pages! The Foundation follows "Section 4947(a)(1)
Nonexempt Charitable Trust, Treated as a Private Foundation". 'Nonexempt'
means not exempt from taxes. The returns are fascinating reading, even more
interesting than the SETI (tax)returns. Both are available online.
The Foundation contributes to other foundations. I believe these are considered
charitable contributions. The other foundation can then spend the money on
products from for-profit corporations. The Foundations 'contribution' becomes
money in the coffers of the 'for-profit' companies. Neat, tidy, and tax-free.
Another possible method is for the for-profit corp. to create its own
foundation, which can purchase its own products with contributions to its
foundation.
So, for example, the Foundation contributes to a charitable entity in Africa,
for the purpose of providing seeds to farmers, and that entity happens to buy
from Monsanto, what's the harm in that? If the seeds produce non-viable plants,
then Monsanto has a lock in forever, forcing the farmers to buy seeds from
Monsanto only. A small investment with continuing returns.
I'm not saying _all_ of the Foundations contributions are self-serving, but,
then again, not all of FMs statements are propaganda, just enough to get the job
done.[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Sunday, February 17 2013 @ 09:13 AM EST |
|
Is the investment. Since I don't know how much is in the foundation, I'm
not
sure whether or not he would be likely to know the details. He may have
investment professionals doing the work, it isn't as if he can't afford to hire
them...
Waynehttp://madhatter.ca [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
|
| Authored by: Anonymous on Tuesday, February 19 2013 @ 03:35 AM EST |
I'm sick of hearing about that warm, cuddly philanthropic charitable foundation
that has all our best interests at heart. Let's sprinkle a little truth on the
matter, shall we? Oh, I could have a field day with this, but let's just try
these for starters:
http://www.activistpost.com/2013/01/bill-gates-says-global-vaccination.html
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9WoMps4Pmpo
http://www.activistpost.com/2012/08/gates-foundation-funds-surveillance-of.html
http://www.wakingtimes.com/2013/02/09/if-you-believe-in-vaccines-you-dont-believ
e-in-the-perfection-of-the-human-body/
Now perhaps we can understand his nibs' statement about doing "a really
great job on new vaccines".[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
|
|
