Powered By Blogger

Friday, November 13, 2015

POPE FRANCISCO AND BILL GATES



Image result for el papa francisco y bill gates
Image result for el papa francisco y bill gates
Published by El Nuevo Herald on Sept. 27, 2015

In his recent speech on Capitol Hill, the Pope argued, among other things, to combat poverty and disease using all available resources, including technological advances. Bill Gates certainly exercises this humanitarian work for years.
Never another Pontiff had expressed in the same way that the pope Francisco.
He declared himself as an immigrant. This is neither more nor less than an antidote to the poison spread by Donald Trump.
He called for better control of weapons, which end up in the wrong hands with innocent lives.
He said that a golden rule is to monitor and support human life at all stages of their development. This determined its position regarding the death penalty and abortion.
He expressed the urgent need to combat poverty, unsanitary and dangerous climate change.
He emphasized that the entrepreneurial individual must be eligible for aid, because people like them are those that generate employment, improve and change the world.
Entrepreneurs are really the quintessential job creators and effectively validate capitalism as the best known system; Indeed, in those places where capitalism is absent, poverty, repression and widespread crime they are present.
The founder of Microsoft, Bill Gates, exemplifies the successful businessman, concerned about combating poverty, while fighting the endemic scourges using their vast resources, including technology, of course.
Since the United Nations launched its Millennium Development Goals in 2000, Bill Gates has been a determining factor in the successful achievement of the same, namely: in the last 15 years extreme poverty has been halved; two billion people have clean water; 43 million go to school; AIDS infection has decreased by 40%
Smallpox and malaria were practically eradicated by Gates.Similarly, polio has decimated by 75%.
The vision changed when Gates with his wife Melinda began to travel by poor countries. Realizing that one billion people still live without electricity and estimating that by 2050 the demand for food will increase by 60%, he decided to get involved fully in the Millennium Development Goals of the United Nations.
Today, Gates is investing billions of dollars in clean energy innovations, free carbon dioxide, which would help improve climate change while combating poverty by reducing the cost of transportation, electricity and use of fertilizers.
Undoubtedly, incentives for innovation funded by Gates have decreased the costs of photovoltaic solar cells and manufacturing have become cheaper for batteries that retain that energy.
At the same time, Gates also recently created two corporations: Global Disease Burden, a company that uses information from all the world researchers to fight particular diseases; and Global Citizens, a portal that aims to reduce poverty in all its forms.
As we see, the statements of the Holy Father on Capitol Hill have their followers.
It's not just about making money. For our system endures is necessary to contribute to the environment in all its aspects, that is; better living conditions for people, in other words, wages in line with actual costs, reasonable access to health services and an appropriate retreat for your retirement years.
And as the most important scientist of recent times, Stephen Hawking, "to save the world, each must tell others that our goal is to eradicate poverty and protect the environment," he said.
BENJAMIN F. DeYURRE
Economist and journalist.

WHO WON THE DEBATES ?

                              Published by El Nuevo Herald on Oct 16, 2015

Many argue that the debate between Republican presidential candidates far exceeded in television tuned to the recent Democratic debate.

It is indeed difficult to have such a colorful candidate as Donald Trump. Voters in both parties, independent immigrants, newcomers, women, gays and tourists lined up in front of public and private televisions to watch and listen as each new slapstick wielded by this individual.

You could say that Trump won the Republican debate, a fact that certainly corroborates his stay as the absolute leader in all polls.

His fiery words against illegal immigrants, its clear rejection to the use of the Spanish language in the US and its position in relation to women, generate precisely that effect on the harmony of the debate, as all expect to hear every time a new barbarism uttered by this billionaire.

For most viewers, Trump is a show in which many scoff or laugh. So it remains at the top of the polls, which of course is not the same as exercising the voting on election day.

The other Republican candidates, particularly Jeb Bush, ably appear to have dropped their guard; They wait for the epithets used by Trump or the speed reached crashing do wear out.

The Democratic debate also had a high estimated at more than 25 million people tuned. (Estimated just before real numbers)

Although to many young the winner was Bernie Sanders, the more focused balanced candidate, was certainly Hillary Clinton what makes her the real winner of the debate.

Hillary was cunningly defended by Sanders since her harassment has been for something as simple as her emails, when in the nation there are such serious problems as the paltry minimum wage and the continuous creation of American jobs overseas.

The former mayor of Baltimore and former Maryland Governor Martin O'Malley issued a speech anthology in his closing remarks. Clearly referring to Trump Republican debate and stressed that "there has not been spoken against immigrants, Hispanics or women"

US policy is an integral part of daily living. Hence the impact of the televised debates. Of course, the voters win when they have a chance to see the public positions of their candidates and their reactions when confronted.

Politicians win when they see the mistakes they made, which tries not to repeat in future discussions.

The parties win when polishing their candidates in every debate and make out the right message.

But those who actually earn more are TV channels who have the privilege to transmit the debates; indeed this prime time is highly prized by advertisers who pay exorbitant amounts to reach that segment of the population that is so important to their interests.

It turns out that most things are framed by an economic benefit. Whenever you come to power to dominate the economic base, which is the support of everything.
If you take the power under the cultural-ideological level (read feudal monarchs or religious lords), control of the economy is achieved.
If power is achieved through legal and political field (ie elections, coups and dictatorship), the ultimate aim is to manipulate financial resources.
In other words, the management of funds is usually what people sought, and certainly that's the nature of our system, so far the best known.Therefore, the discussions were, are and will always be a business.

And the ends have historically been negative in every respect. And both parties have their extremists, obviously. Do they have a chance to win the election? Probably not, according to the rule; However, every rule has its exception.

Benjamin F. DeYurre
Economist and Journalist. 


Follow on Twitter: @DEYURRE