Hacker News Reader

Comment by chris_mahan | Hacker News Reader

Uh, there's plenty of poor people in America. There are kids at my son's elementary school who don't have enough food. In Los Angeles. In California.

View on HN

You haven't seen real poverty then. Go visit India someday. (Hint: You will find kids that have to work, beg, get abused just so they can eat once, often rotten or throw away food. Forget clothes, forget school, forget sanitation, forget having even some kind of roof on the head and blanket to sleep.)

Besides I am not sure bringing nationalism into charity is classy or even logical - given Bill Gates is spending his own money as opposed to tax payer one or national funds.

That is true. However, Gates' point is that there are health problems faced by poor folk, even in America, that no one there seems to be solving (not a pressing problem, not enough $, etc).

India is in a unique position to solve these issues, and hopefully some of those solutions can be applied to other places in the world, including America.

He's given $60 million to the the College-Ready Promise coalition in Los Angeles that serves thousands of inner-city kids and has given $1.37B to the United Negro College Fund.

Maybe one day a Chinese billionaire will show up and help solve the issues surrounding the food desert/insecurity present in LA?

If there's a chance to help more lives elsewhere I think he should do it. Why should he limit himself to America? I don't really understand what you're trying to get at with this comment.

I just want to point out that there are very poor, desperately poor people in America, and that perhaps his statement "But we don’t have everyday experience with the problems of the poorest. We don’t see people living in extreme poverty next door or pass by them in a slum down the street. " might lead some to think otherwise.

Yes, there are worse places, and while I've never traveled to Mumbai, I do know people who live there, and there are plenty of people with money there, and it's not all slums.

There are rich everywhere, and there are poor everywhere. The reasons for poverty are diverse. It's not: America is rich and India is poor as he seems to show.

But what do I know...

Chris, I've lived all around the world - I literally have not seen worse poverty than Indian slums (and yes, this includes multiple countries in Africa). From a marginal benefit perspective, the gains in India are enormous.

Ok, so what can he do? I mean, let's say he spends 10 billion dollars, on 100 million people. That would be $100 each. I don't suppose there is any way to insure that all these people get their $100, because of the problem of distribution, identity verification, etc. You can't mail them a check. You can't mail them cash. You can't trust local delivery men to do the job (they'll pocket it and say they delivered, or they'll get robbed). If you try to provide a service, you'll get knocked down by the bureaucracy. Look at the fiasco around providing identification cards for the poor (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unique_Identification_Authorit...). In my opinion, the best way to help the poor in India is to help India become a more prosperous nation, and as such, help the development of education, industry, public safety, environmental safety, research and development, and cultural identity within diversity. This is something the governments of India (national, state, and local) have generally pursued vigorously since independence more than 60 years ago. That the problem with poverty and illiteracy is still so pronounced only demonstrates the magnitude of the task.

Look what a long letter I write... I would suggest that the only way to help the people of the slums is for the rest of the people of India to want to help the people of the slums. There has to be a mindset that the majority of people in India adhere to, namely, that poverty is not acceptable, and that the factors that enhance poverty are to be remedied, even if this means pushing aside long-held traditions and ways of doing things.

Which is a tall order, even for Bill Gates.

So instead he goes after specific problems, such as polio, and it's all good, don't take me wrong, but, huh, it's not nearly as impressive in the grand scheme of things as it's made out to be.

I think this is an absurd standard. For want of perfection, he should do nothing? What he's doing has shown clear impact. I'm a skeptic on much of NGO land, but the Gates foundation is better than most and has hard gains to show for it.

Gates is working in India on education, on environmental safety, on sanitation (seriously - I've heard talk repeatedly that his number one goal right now is a better toilet / sanitary mechanism) - these are things that will directly advantage India in the long run. As for the Indian government... well, the road to hell has been paved with good and not so good intentions - suffice to say that has not always been the goal.

FYI separate topic, but the UID is a success story by any standard (its the world's largest biometric database by some distance) - and enables a reduction in the wastage in the traditional channels you identified (aka, the politician cut).

I hear you.

I think he's doing good, true, better than nothing.

Bill Gates's foundation does some great work right here in the United States researching improvement in education.

http://www.metproject.org/

Have you seen real poverty?

Just take a trip to Mumbai and visit the slums there.

"A rat done bit my sister Nell, with Whitey on the moon."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PtBy_ppG4hY

Are poor Americans inherently superior humans to poor Indians? Why does nationality matter?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com