Bill Gates' Climate Group Lays Off US, Europe Policy Teams 88
Breakthrough Energy, the climate group founded by Bill Gates, has laid off dozens of employees in the U.S. and Europe, eliminating its public policy and partnerships teams as it shifts away from advocacy work. Its investment and grantmaking divisions will remain unaffected. The Detroit News reports: Breakthrough Energy is an umbrella organization founded by Gates that houses various initiatives aimed at accelerating the clean energy transition. It also encompasses Breakthrough Energy Ventures, one of the biggest investors in early-stage climate technologies with stakes in more than 120 companies, as well as a grantmaking program for early-seed stage company founders and Breakthrough Catalyst, a funding platform focused on emergent climate technologies. None of those divisions of the group were impacted by cuts, which were reported earlier by the New York Times.
[...] "In the United States especially, the conversation about climate has been sidetracked by politics," Gates wrote in the introduction to his 2021 book. "Some days, it can seem as if we have little hope of getting anything done." The climate pullback is happening at the same time as the US cuts foreign aid, a field where Gates is also a major donor. His nonprofit, the Gates Foundation, operates with a budget of billions and has a strong focus on overseas development. "Bill Gates remains as committed as ever to advancing the clean energy innovations needed to address climate change," a Breakthrough Energy spokesperson said in an emailed statement. "His work in this area will continue and is focused on helping drive reliable affordable, clean energy solutions that will enable people everywhere to thrive."
On Wednesday, the EPA announced the agency will "undertake 31 historic actions in the greatest and most consequential day of deregulation in U.S. history..."
[...] "In the United States especially, the conversation about climate has been sidetracked by politics," Gates wrote in the introduction to his 2021 book. "Some days, it can seem as if we have little hope of getting anything done." The climate pullback is happening at the same time as the US cuts foreign aid, a field where Gates is also a major donor. His nonprofit, the Gates Foundation, operates with a budget of billions and has a strong focus on overseas development. "Bill Gates remains as committed as ever to advancing the clean energy innovations needed to address climate change," a Breakthrough Energy spokesperson said in an emailed statement. "His work in this area will continue and is focused on helping drive reliable affordable, clean energy solutions that will enable people everywhere to thrive."
On Wednesday, the EPA announced the agency will "undertake 31 historic actions in the greatest and most consequential day of deregulation in U.S. history..."
No more USAID paying for Bill Gates Philanthrophy? (Score:4, Insightful)
“I’m a little worried, particularly with this USAID stuff. My foundation partners with USAID on nutrition and getting vaccines out Hopefully we’ll get some of that work back If we don’t, you could have literally millions of deaths,” Gates said.
Re: (Score:3)
Why doesn't Gates just buy Greenland?
A Trump spokesperson suggested paying $57 Billion for Greenland, or $1M for each of 57,000 residents.
An informal poll found that most Greenlanders would accept the deal if it were put to a referendum.
Bill Gates has a net worth of about $110B, so he could afford it.
Re: (Score:2)
Except of course that, if there are any laws in Greenland about buying votes, it seems like that would be illegal. Plus, $1 million per person is not that much. As it is, the average person in Greenland gets the equivalent of about $20,000 (that's not how much they earn, that's the average salary of every working person added then divided by the total number of people including the non-working). If you assume about a 4% inflation adjusted return on investment for the $1 million everyone would get, that woul
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
LOL! Even gates is now giving up on the silly Klaus Schwab WEF's plan to control the whole planet. It feels really good to see them fail and the decision power return to the people instead of some evil non elected private crazy man with a bunch of disciples! I bet they'll be back at it with a new iteration although so please keep your eyes open and don't fall for their brainwashing new rhetoric whatever it will be please. Overall, you can easily spot all of them from miles away, it isn't that hard but, oh
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
Stop blaming everything on Elmo. Just because he's unelected does not mean misogynistic, cruel psychopath. He's always been that way.
Re: No more USAID paying for Bill Gates Philanthro (Score:1)
Felon is costing far more than he's cutting, and he's cutting programs that protect or oven produce profit.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
All of the solar grants that were cut provide jobs and cheaper electricity.
Re: No more USAID paying for Bill Gates Philanthro (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Besides firing the enforcement people at the IRS - a.k.a. the government's Accounts Receivables department?
Re: (Score:2)
IRS targeted conservatives for political reasons, this purge is a crude attempt to remove politicization of IRS.
Re: (Score:2)
“I’m a little worried, particularly with this USAID stuff. My foundation partners with USAID on nutrition and getting vaccines out Hopefully we’ll get some of that work back If we don’t, you could have literally millions of deaths,” Gates said.
While "profit" is not really quite the right word in government since government is not a for-profit organization, I am fairly certain we can substitute the more correct word "revenue" here and it works so... What the hell do you mean by "Taxes are not [revenues]. While I see your point, technically this does not qualify."? If taxes are not revenues for government, nothing is. Unless you're just making a purely semantic argument on taxes/revenues. In which case you're not arguing in good faith, otherwise yo
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The post you replied to very, very specifically said "...the enforcement people at the IRS...". Maybe you can be excused if you didn't actually understand who he meant. See, despite actually owing taxes, some people just don't pay them. With no enforcement, those people never pay and the IRS never gets the money. With enforcement, the IRS gets the money and that's revenue that the IRS would otherwise never get. So, unless you're playing some sort of semantic game when you say "generate taxes" (which is some
Re: (Score:2)
Government profit would be anything that generates growth. For example, infrastructure projects like ports and pipelines. Also leasing out federal land.
Why did you reply twice to my single post? I could understand if you accidentally sent before you were done and wanted to add more, but it's standard to acknowledge that. So what's your d
In any case, if government profit is anything that generates growth (which is, frankly, a strange and ambiguous definition - I mean, there are lots of kinds of growth) then clearly the enforcement people at the IRS generate growth because they bring in revenue that can be used for "infrastructure projects like ports and pip
Re: (Score:2)
No, but other behaviors of his mean cruel psychopath, such as cutting off food and medicines already in shipment to people that need them, so they could rot in a warehouse instead.
Who would choose do that that isn't a cruel psychopath?
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: No more USAID paying for Bill Gates Philanthro (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
No more USAID paying for Bill Gates Philanthropy?
“I’m a little worried, particularly with this USAID stuff. My foundation partners with USAID on nutrition and getting vaccines out Hopefully we’ll get some of that work back If we don’t, you could have literally millions of deaths,” Gates said.
I have never been a Bill Gates fan for a variety of reasons and think that a cream pie to the face is the least of what he personally deserves. However, I have a hard time understanding how anyone marked the above as insightful. It should be fairly obvious to anyone from the context that it's not about "paying for Bill Gates Philanthropy", it is about distribution networks. USAID is more than just an issuer of grants, it is also partnered with the State Department. One of the big problems to deal with for m
Nothing changed (Score:3)
"Bill Gates remains as committed as ever to advancing the clean energy innovations needed to address climate change,"
That was the problem all along. He said he was a good boy, but still used his private jet more than a Dutch kid uses a bicycle.
"as committed" just means "not interested in the least".
How will the US emerge from this? (Score:5, Insightful)
Based on the EPA changes, it would seem that their land, water, and air are all basically screwed. Unless, of course, industry chooses not to avail themselves of the newly permitted regressive behaviours... Rather than just idly not making or meeting promises, the states will be at the forefront of making things much worse. The effects will be borne by everybody, but the benefits not so much. Lots of future superfund sites. So what is the end game? I'm genuinely curious.
The problem is larger than just the environment. The relationships being destroyed right now won't be easily rebuilt. It's not like you can throw a switch in four years and say, "Oops, our bad. Let's just pretend it never happened." The world is being trained to do without the states, and it'll be decades before they trust the US enough to re-engage in meaningful ways. The strong arm the US wields today has a shelf life. When it's gone, the withdrawal from the world will be far worse for the US than Brexit was for the UK.
What, exactly, does the US hope to gain by upsetting all these short term applecarts? What is the great wrong that is being corrected? Everything holding down the lower and middle classes comes from within, not without. And thinking that taking their ball and going home will see others collapse while the US is unscathed is just silly.
And how long before the majority admits to themselves that the gains are not ever intended to materialize in their lives? Or will they? Maybe not.
I'm actually an optimist by nature. I think the US has begun a dramatic decline. But I think the rest of the west will figure it out.
Re: (Score:3)
The moneyed class wants to extend both their power and range, ostensibly increasing their wealth. There are sufficient sheep to follow them, provoked by fear messaging, that they become elected.
No government is "safe" from this thinking, and you'll be challenged by this trend, personally, and soon. Bad messaging works. The survival instinct is strong, and speaks more loudly when there are billions of pounds, euros, dollars, francs, and shekels (other currencies acknowledged) fueling that speech. Greed, comb
Re: (Score:3)
I saw an interview with John Cleese, one remark he made I thought was prescient: Americans do not know the meaning of "enough money".
Re: (Score:2)
The US tax code is bought and paid for. This trend is also emerging in other countries. Add complexity when there's a monarchy and ancient strictures on land ownership.
Remove the money from politics, and things change for the better.
Re: (Score:2)
Take the money out of politics; it's the only rational solution.
This.
The only possible but impossible solution is to defund politics.
Several organizations are actively working to reduce the influence of money in politics, aiming to promote transparency and equity in the democratic process. Notable among them are:
Issue One: A nonpartisan nonprofit organization dedicated to reducing the influence of big money in politics, enhancing transparency, and strengthening ethics laws. They advocate for reforms to protect U.S. elections and improve governmental accountability.
Ameri
Re: (Score:2)
Take the money out of politics; it's the only rational solution.
Unfortunately, the only way for that to happen is to expand the Supreme Court, or remove the shitbag justices that routinely do logical gymnast routines to justify their bullshit while accepting millions of dollars of "gifts" from billionaires with shitloads of money to spend on politics.
Citizens United has ruined this country, and cannot be rectified without SCOTUS overturning it, or constitutional amendment.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I disagree.
The world knows this is Trump not the US.
It will quickly readjust back to normal relationships with a normal president ( should the democrats actually come to their senses and field non woke policies and a candidate, chosen on merit, capable of defeating him and his poisonous successors ).
Re:How will the US emerge from this? (Score:5, Insightful)
The world did for Biden. They were willing to believe that Trump was a one-off. Biden was, despite what you may think of his policies, an institutionalist - a firm believer in NATO and the rules-based international order the US helped foster since WWII. (Not to mention the rule of law in the U.S., belief in the Executive being a co-equal branch rather than a king, accepting that there are limits to his power, etc.)
Then Trump got elected again, and worse shit is already happening in the sequel. I doubt the world will be willing to brush it off as another blip. Bridges shall be burned, and the rest of the world will need to 1) become more self-reliant, 2) cozy up to other powers, and/or 3) do their own thing and hope no one notices - all just to survive the next four years (at least).
You are a waste of oxygen (assuming you're human) (Score:2)
Re:How will the US emerge from this? (Score:5, Insightful)
"The world is being trained to do without the states, and it'll be decades before they trust the US enough to re-engage in meaningful ways" I disagree. The world knows this is Trump not the US.
It is the US. Actually, it is the American people. Electing that despicable individual once could be interpreted as a mistake. Electing him again, after four years of Democratic presidency in which the core parameters of the US economy were very healthy just means that the American voters want that human emetic as their president: many because they feel identified with him (just take some time to think what that means) others because they think that the alternative is much worse (which also speaks volumes about them) and others still because they couldn't be bothered to cast their vote to keep him out of office.
The reputation if the US in the world will remain tainted for decades.
Re: (Score:2)
It speaks volumes about that alternative.
The dems must never forget: Hillary and Harris brought us Trump.
Re: (Score:1)
#never_a_woman
Re: (Score:2)
Kamala was high during some of her interviews. Her campaign platform was "Vote for me or Trump will win." That was it, and yet she still got a ton of votes. Another candidate likely would have done better; and only would have needed to do a few percentage points better to win.
Re: (Score:2)
"The world is being trained to do without the states, and it'll be decades before they trust the US enough to re-engage in meaningful ways" I disagree. The world knows this is Trump not the US. It will quickly readjust back to normal relationships with a normal president ( should the democrats actually come to their senses and field non woke policies and a candidate, chosen on merit, capable of defeating him and his poisonous successors ).
Nope. While the world knows this current situation is Trump centered, they also know that one of the two parties in the states is now completely self-focused. Trump is a symptom of that, not the only driver. The Republican party will use Trump's tactics, but with a much more intelligent person in the lead once Trump finally chokes on his final cheeseburger. And the world won't be interested in re-adjusting to a country that could flip back and forth on the whims of the billionaires, as it has since 2016. If
Re: How will the US emerge from this? (Score:2)
"The world knows this is Trump not the US."
You're going to have to make up your mind here. Is Trump the president or not? If he isn't, we can just run him out of town on a rail. If he is, then this is definitely "the US".
Re: (Score:3)
It's different now. He was elected but constrained before. The citizens brought him back and gave him power that in unconstrained, the checks and balances are falling like dominos, and he is dismantling things at a pace that neither the US nor the rest of the world can absorb gracefully.
He is a real reflection of the current state of America, and swapping out another leader in four years - if it happens at all - won't change that nature. America cannot be trusted to pay lip service to the values they've esp
I wish they would just help us (Score:2)
Kind of like how Trump appealed to Russia to help him win the election I say we ask the EU to give us a hand fighting ba
Re: (Score:3)
The world knows this is Trump not the US.
The world also knows that a large percentage of Americans support Trump. It's not really material that a lot of them are making a huge mistake and don't understand what they have elected, the point is that they did it and they very well could do it again with another Trump (or even the same one if he both lives through his next four years of his fast food diet and gets his way with a third term). Also, international political and economic affairs can move slowly. While that can translate to taking a while t
Re: (Score:2)
I don't think the world will ever trust the US again without a substantial shift in our government. We're going to need a new constitution with a totally different system of voting, and a more resistant way for funding to operate where it cannot be so easily attacked. And I think we're going to get one, but it's not going to be the one we need. Instead it will make us a monarchy, and we'll have a world war.
Re: (Score:1)
Based on the EPA changes, it would seem that their land, water, and air are all basically screwed
This is hysterical overreaction. There are million regulations between right now and rivers on fire. EPA needs to consider economic prosperity of US people, not just what is best for the environment. This pullback is a much needed to overreach.
Personally, I am looking forward to cheaper electricity and gasoline, faster and more reliable cars, and better flushing toilets and washing machines.
Re: (Score:3)
I'll be completely shocked if you get any of those things. Particularly if it's because of actions from the government. But okay, perhaps "screwed" is hyperbole. But it will take decades to clean up the impacts.
But you're implying you can't have the existing regulations and prosperity, and that's misleading. You can't have prosperity from coal mining, perhaps, but that's not a good reason to reopen the mines.
Industry has repeatedly shown they can be profitable while being regulated. Loosening those regulati
Re: (Score:2)
How so? Never mind, we are going to talk past each other. Answer this, do you think there could exist environmental regulation that is not a worthwhile considering its negative impacts on the economy?
You absolutely can have prosperity from cheaper energy, but in case of coal the environmental impacts might not
Re: (Score:2)
Sure. It's a balancing act. But the further you push into ecological disruption, the higher the tolerable economic impact should be.
But do I think the upcoming EPA announcements will be balanced? No. They'll be rooted in denial that the impacts matter at all.
Re: How will the US emerge from this? (Score:2)
"Personally, I am looking forward to cheaper electricity and gasoline, faster and more reliable cars, and better flushing toilets and washing machines"
You might get that last thing. You definitely won't get any of the other things. And you won't be able to afford water, either.
Re: (Score:2)
Personally, I am looking forward to cheaper electricity and gasoline, faster and more reliable cars, and better flushing toilets and washing machines.
You're definitely unlikely to get cheaper electricity and gasoline with Trump. Also not faster and more reliable cars since he's against electric cars (of course, then he's for certain ones... some of the time). As for better flushing toilets and washing machines, are you on crack? Trump's tirades on toilets are ridiculous and largely based on the fact that US plumbing standards are just plain bad. The US idea of a low-flow toilet is mostly to take a regular full-flow toilet and reduce the tank size. That's
Re: (Score:2)
the withdrawal from the world will be far worse for the US than Brexit was for the UK.
Yes. This is the plan. It is basic vulture capitalism. Take over, loot, sell, or destroy anything of value, and abscond with the profits while leaving behind a shell holding the bills.
The rulers own multi-national businesses (multiple) which they can use to shift their holdings offshore. They hold citizenship in multiple nations.
They won't be here when the butcher's bill comes due.
Re: (Score:2)
The relationships being destroyed right now won't be easily rebuilt. It's not like you can throw a switch in four years and say, "Oops, our bad. Let's just pretend it never happened." The world is being trained to do without the states, and it'll be decades before they trust the US enough to re-engage in meaningful ways.
Canadian here. I have this deja vu feeling, because oh look, we just did this exact same silly dance just 8 years ago. When Trump was first elected and decided he did not want to be friendly neighbors anymore everyone was saying we need to diversify both our import and export markets, we need to tear down internal trade barriers, we need to become less reliant on allies who are less reliable. And what did we do in the last eight years? Nothing. Not a thing. Trump got to renegotiate NAFTA and call it a
In Nelson Voice - Ha ha (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Long may he continue to edumacate us sciencely.
Re: (Score:2)
Sooooo....let's say we started to see big climate effects for roughly 60 years. In that time, you have the continents moving about 120 cm, about 47 inches.
One thing climate deniers can never understand is statistics and they have no sense of proportionality.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
But don't worry, they're destroying healthcare and social secu
Re: (Score:2)
Sure was funny when Texas froze with no power
Yeah, that was funny. Hilarious even.
and all those old people died of cold;
Ok that part was sad.
Re: (Score:1)
News Flash: The world has always sucked. That's why it's here.
Re: (Score:2)
World is going to suck for you kids.
No it won't. Will be slightly warmer, some coastal cities might flood or need dams, and winters will be milder. The climate doomsday predictions that were made starting in 70s have not come to pass, there is no reason to expect that this time it will be different. I am sure someone in 2050 will be panicking about nitrogen emissions and telling us how we all going to die in 10 years.
Re: In Nelson Voice - Ha ha (Score:2)
"and winters will be milder."
Hahhahahhahahahhahahahabhababab
Re: (Score:2)
King Canute (Score:1)
It's cute how conservatives seem to think they can alter the laws of physics by stopping people talking about the effects of the laws of physics.
I'm not really sure what this means. (Score:2)
Going by the ideals and goals of this organisation, wouldn't the expected response to the current administration's stance on climate change be "Our work is now even more necessary than it was before."
What happened?
Is it no longer profitable? That seems unlikely since Bill Gates doesn't really need the money.
Are they admitted they're fighting windmills?
Did they have an advisory function before and are they just screaming at a wall now?
Why scale back in Europe as well? If the Trump administration is the issue
I think we know what happened: (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: I think we know what happened: (Score:2)
"unlimited moderation points are only given to lefties."
I get modded down every time I espouse actually leftist (not centrist) ideas. You don't know what any of the words you are using mean.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
You mod yourself up? Yeah, not actually, that tracks.
Re: I think we know what happened: (Score:2)
Left of Mao because I think humans should have rights huh?
Re: (Score:2)
*you're
Re: (Score:2)
Musk's take on this (Score:2)
Has anyone asked Musk to state that fact since he became Trump's bitch?
Has anyone asked him to defend his support for Trump's planetary ruination?
I seriously wonder how he lives with himself, and what he says to the people around him.
Re: (Score:2)
Two things can be true at the same time. Musk can recognize that:
(1) climate change is real and awful, and Trump is a retrograde wrecking ball who will only make things worse,
AND
Re: (Score:2)
Musk is not stupid and ignorant. He knows climate change is a real planetary emergency. Has anyone asked Musk to state that fact since he became Trump's bitch? Has anyone asked him to defend his support for Trump's planetary ruination? I seriously wonder how he lives with himself, and what he says to the people around him.
First off, Trump is Musk's bitch, not the other way around.
Second off, Musk is a sci-fi fan. You think he wouldn't take the idea of ruining the Earth to drive space exploration and run with it? He wants humans to be multi-planetary. And he's precisely egomaniacal enough to actually try to accelerate climate change to achieve it.
Or, he was really just a capitalist all along, and doesn't care much about anything so long as he can line his pockets a little more.
Re: (Score:2)
Or, he was really just a capitalist all along, and doesn't care much about anything so long as he can line his pockets a little more.
I think the various examples of his extreme greed, not to mention the fact that he could have just about funded a Mars mission for what he paid for his share of Twitter clearly demonstrates that he really is actually all about greed and not about lofty, noble goals.
Re: (Score:2)
You're replying on the wrong article.
What? The won't for for free? (Score:3)
Seriously? It's such a major problem that these people should be willing to work for free.