Bill Gates Calls for ‘Global Government’

[Chef Ramsay]

Billionaire claims world government "badly needed" to save the earth

Billionaire Bill Gates called for “a kind of global government” this week, arguing that the creation of such a system would be needed to combat major issues such as “climate change.”

Speaking with Germany’s “Süddeutsche Zeitung” newspaper Tuesday, Gates decried the fact that a proper United Nations system has failed to materialize as planned.

“You can make fun of it, but in truth it was sad how the conference in Copenhagen is run, how individual who behave like the UN system failed,” Gates said according to an English translation in the Huffington Post.

Gates went on to stress his position further, stating that a global government was “badly needed” in order to combat an array of issues ailing the planet.

“Take the UN, it has been created especially for the security in the world. We are ready for war, because we have taken every precaution. We have NATO, we have divisions, jeeps, trained people,” Gates said. “But what is with epidemics? How many doctors do we have as much planes, tents, what scientists? If there were such a thing as a world government, we would be better prepared.”

More...http://www.infowars.com/bill-gates-calls-for-global-government/

Can't wait to see how this topic turns out.

[BitMos]

I try a necro, gates want a global bluescreen event, I prefer local bluescreens, furthermore individuals can better act.

what's more crazy behind the idea, is that it needs to overthrow major govs, including China, Russia, America... good luck:).

Anyway by 2100 the pentagon is already long relocated on the darkside of the moon  .

EX101: gates ain't a paperpusher, didn't learnt humility, yet...

[bmarch]

Interesting that the ex-head of an industry giant, herald of the movement to put computers in classrooms, who helped see MS Windows come to be, MS Office, the rest...now buys in completely to man-made climate change, the globalist agenda, etc. He probably should not have retired.

"You can get everything you like about a tablet, everything you like a PC, all in one device. That should change the way people look at things."
-Bill Gates in 2012 talking about Microsoft Surface

http://www.businessinsider.com/bill-gates-microsoft-surface-2012-7

[Agestorzrxx]

We haven't the ability or desire to act independently to save the earth for human habitation. So, a world government will be necessary to extract compliance of global environmental survival.

[BitCoinNutJob]

One world government is fine as long as its a good one permanently right, 1 error somewhere in the future and we could wipe out billions.

[Chef Ramsay]

One world government is fine as long as its a good one permanently right, 1 error somewhere in the future and we could wipe out billions.

Not for me. A world government of unelected bureaucrats or elites deciding what is best for the rest of us will never have the best interests of mankind at heart. Currently, we have limited amounts of say in our own respective government's policies so making this pie even smaller for us will be absolutely worse by an exponential factor. It'll be the elites by and for the elites. Why'll it may sound good for looking out for what's best for the environment and all, the same mega corporate interests will have even more say and they'll still have their way with how they treat the environment. If we're all for decentralization here in bitcoinland and for good reason, we should all strive for as much of it in terms of our relationships with governments all across the world. More government power centralized in a world government means minimal freedom for individuals of mankind.

[Bit_Happy]

Bad news to see him so clearly on the wrong side:
Get ready for the Brave New World in 7,6,5,4,3...

[jbrnt]

A local government cannot fully satisfy a local community, national leaders cannot solve domestic problems. How can we expect a global government to solve problems for mankind? A global governmental body is powerless and resourceless without the support of great powerful nations. So a global government would be an extention of dominant nations' power and have no interests in solving global problems.

[pereira4]

This pig wants to start shilling cryptocurrencies to then release his own closed source currency and control the world.

[BitCoinNutJob]

One world government is fine as long as its a good one permanently right, 1 error somewhere in the future and we could wipe out billions.

Not for me. A world government of unelected bureaucrats or elites deciding what is best for the rest of us will never have the best interests of mankind at heart. Currently, we have limited amounts of say in our own respective government's policies so making this pie even smaller for us will be absolutely worse by an exponential factor. It'll be the elites by and for the elites. Why'll it may sound good for looking out for what's best for the environment and all, the same mega corporate interests will have even more say and they'll still have their way with how they treat the environment. If we're all for decentralization here in bitcoinland and for good reason, we should all strive for as much of it in terms of our relationships with governments all across the world. More government power centralized in a world government means minimal freedom for individuals of mankind.

Yeah it sounds like an impossible task, no government right now is perfect so who do you model the global one on... 

[caga]

He is wrong about bitcoin, but might be right on this one.

[bmarch]

Interesting that the ex-head of an industry giant, herald of the movement to put computers in classrooms, who helped see MS Windows come to be, MS Office, the rest...now buys in completely to man-made climate change,

It's not about "buying in", it's about taking precautions against black swan events. In the case of climate change, the so-called climate "sceptics" are the idiots here. They don't understand risk.

The risk of extreme events, such as a humanitarian calamity caused by massive crop failure/food destruction, caused by (take your pick...)
cloud seeding and temperature changes at ground level from particulate emissions,
sustained high CO2 (as opposed to short volcanic bursts),
acid rain,
extinction of a top predator, resulting in plagues,
droughts...

cannot be calculated, so the deciding factor should be the extremeness, not the unlikelihood.

The problem with the sceptics is that they're like the banks in 2007. Or, for that matter, the communists in 1986 reluctantly talking about a "minor hiccup" in one of their Soviet nuclear plants. Because talk is so cheap, it means that climate-change sceptics can publish (notice I said publish, not write) influential papers and give zero shits when other people's lives could be at stake.

The climate sceptic's basic argument is financially motivated. There would not be such a fuss if taking precautions was free. Voodoo or not, nobody would care. But it's not free, it would mean pumping oil out of the ground at a physically slower rate, or devoting much less land to cattle farming.

Even the weather cannot be predicted accurately for more than a few days in advance because it's chaotic. Applying this knowledge to climate models, we can say that at worst there's a complete lack of evidence for man-made effects (and hence we would also be unable to "fix" things like CO2 levels). However, that's not evidence of absence, so pointing the finger at environmentalists is not so bright.

It's funny how the "sceptics" have hijacked the word sceptic, when they're not the ones actually being sceptical. It's the maligned greenies and environmentalists who are the real sceptics, because they don't blindly subscribe to the "free market capitalism will miraculously solve everything" religion.



Moving on, I think that on a global scale, trying to create -- or find -- a world government would be a lot like trying to pinpoint the exact location of consciousness in the human brain (where, for instance, large chunks of the brain would be national governments). Hehe suckers....

I think it's good that Gates wants this conversation though. There seems to be an over-reliance on "dead" (undead?) organisational structures, where lots of people participate and believe in the machine, but very few people want to step-up and make mindful, responsible decisions. Lack of personal accountability in the system is a serious problem, and in my opinion a world government(TM) would simply provide a convenient scapegoat for people to blame.

In my opinion these issues are outside of Bill Gates' area of expertise and he has been swept up into these initiatives for whatever reason. I appreciate the desire to be altruistic, but turning into a bleeding-heart spokesperson for issues you haven't studied or worked with for years seems like a waste to me. Bill Gates did not work in climate science, so what else could he be for that effort BESIDES a mouthpiece that is respected by the wider public.

My question would be, if Bill Gates has concern for these issues, why has he so suddenly and completely turned his attention from the computer and software industries. I don't get it. The only explanation to me seems that he was invited to some seminars by elites and his thinking was changed afterward. Anyways, tt probably happens to a lot of rich people or celebrities. Tom Cruise would be another one.

[TheButterZone]

The buck stops with Bill Gates for the torture of billions of direct and indirect users of Microsoft programming. If there's a hell, he should burn in it.

[TheButterZone]

The buck stops with Bill Gates for the torture of billions of direct and indirect users of Microsoft programming. If there's a hell, he should burn in it.

Hell has a blue screen.

I bet he puts Linux and Android on all his devices so he can actually be productive and not get BSODs all the time.

[Swordsoffreedom]

One world government is fine as long as its a good one permanently right, 1 error somewhere in the future and we could wipe out billions.

I think that the predictions of armageddon and doom that comes with one world government is legit
A world language would be useful kind of what english is
Anyways kind of strange Bill wants to make the NWO wouldn't get to see much of it lol.

[jaysabi]

I know Gates is incredibly successful, but what makes him think that his success in business and computers makes him qualified to be the authority on what type of world government the planet needs? America is a pretty diverse place, with 300 million citizens, and look at the level of disagreement and political vitriol that exists here. How much more dysfunctional do you think a world government representing 7 billion people would be, where the majority of government on the planet has corruption as a central tenet of its existence? I think it's so unworkable that not only will it never be possible in our lifetime, but it will never be possible PERIOD.

[bmarch]

I know Gates is incredibly successful, but what makes him think that his success in business and computers makes him qualified to be the authority on what type of world government the planet needs? America is a pretty diverse place, with 300 million citizens, and look at the level of disagreement and political vitriol that exists here. How much more dysfunctional do you think a world government representing 7 billion people would be, where the majority of government on the planet has corruption as a central tenet of its existence? I think it's so unworkable that not only will it never be possible in our lifetime, but it will never be possible PERIOD.

If you have trouble making a stable version of Windows you're in for bigger problems with a global government!

[TheButterZone]

I know Gates is incredibly successful, but what makes him think that his success in business and computers makes him qualified to be the authority on what type of world government the planet needs? America is a pretty diverse place, with 300 million citizens, and look at the level of disagreement and political vitriol that exists here. How much more dysfunctional do you think a world government representing 7 billion people would be, where the majority of government on the planet has corruption as a central tenet of its existence? I think it's so unworkable that not only will it never be possible in our lifetime, but it will never be possible PERIOD.

It's because the majority of government on the planet has corruption as a central tenet of its existence that it is possible, nay probable. They will claim they have the consent of the governed, when really people just have a self-preservation instinct, not willing to roll the dice in a global guerrilla war or get moved to the front of the line to the ovens.

[bmarch]

I know Gates is incredibly successful, but what makes him think that his success in business and computers makes him qualified to be the authority on what type of world government the planet needs? America is a pretty diverse place, with 300 million citizens, and look at the level of disagreement and political vitriol that exists here. How much more dysfunctional do you think a world government representing 7 billion people would be, where the majority of government on the planet has corruption as a central tenet of its existence? I think it's so unworkable that not only will it never be possible in our lifetime, but it will never be possible PERIOD.

It's because the majority of government on the planet has corruption as a central tenet of its existence that it is possible, nay probable. They will claim they have the consent of the governed, when really people just have a self-preservation instinct, not willing to roll the dice in a global guerrilla war or get moved to the front of the line to the ovens.

I don't live in the United States so I can testify to this. Where I'm from, even among professionals, there is a shared understanding that to secure a certain standard of living one must align themselves with the big banks, the government, big phone companies, the media, the hospitals, the energy companies, or whatever. Outside of the United States there are fewer individuals per capita that have established themselves so that they are not tied to cartels - so to speak. If a larger state structure gets proposed, fewer people in other countries actually have the freedom built up to oppose it.

[samslap]

I've never understood the opposition to a global government. It always seems to come from conspiracy theorists that lack critical thinking skills. What are we suppose to do? Never become united? Remain separate entities constantly vying and warring for territory and power? Does that really sound like the intelligent thing to do?