Also in this playlist...
This transcript is automatically generated
Historically a lot of foreign name was not very well -- -- it had goals.
For example keeping friends in the Cold War and so.
In -- sending -- money to people who -- on our side vs their side.
You know -- what it was about.
Now days it's become very metric driven.
Can you take cheap vaccines and literally save lives for well under 1%.
-- what -- we spend to save lives here and by saving those lives you avoid the kind of population growth and instability.
That lead to huge national security issues in countries like Nigeria -- Yemen.
If we let them trip -- population because we don't help out their health issues.
We're gonna have huge costs and instability -- so these humanitarian in the national security argument.
Really point to this is one -- -- more measured more -- parts of the the entire budget.
So you would draw a line -- -- today and the money that was recently -- an area that was secretary of state.
250 million or so for the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt.
There are Republicans are criticizing that sank.
We don't know if that's the case of more good money after bad and what uses it will will go to -- Yeah once you get up into countries that are a little better off.
Is there how how did they view their relationship with the US you know -- we saw one tingle with the previous regime that.
You know there's -- counter reaction to that those areas are foundation.
He's not expert in.
What what were focused on and we've you know chosen to take.
That the money I have the mourn the money Warren Buffett's given and who worked in the same type global health areas aids malaria.
Vaccines for children both the science part of that the delivery part of that that's where we say wow.
-- it so.
Impact full it's so wonderful.
Double take our own money and joining in on polio eradication animal over time malaria eradication.
And be a partner with US government in some unbelievable programs that I get to go on -- on a regular basis.
You know what your money appears to be intact -- your foundation.
Efforts seem to be impact folks.
I'm sure no small measure because -- the view and and and Melinda but.
The the US track record on this is Dicey and even.
-- globally efforts after disasters.
Calls into question whether.
Money ever gets to the right recipients suited to -- the -- earthquake some years back there's always -- does.
An example too familiar -- -- the two billion that was raised both by governments and and private enterprises in concerts and the like.
And I was recently in Haiti and on.
Unless I missed something here indeed it is its disastrous.
And -- -- with poverty and famine and abuses -- -- was so.
That's what worries -- so when you -- as a way to today I just wanna (%expletive) you wrote today it.
The number children are dying every -- -- conference -- and into fewer than eight million.
Those living in extreme poverty has been cut -- thanks to the tornadoes that I I do see examples -- that's not the case.
Well wait a minute.
You should've gotten the Haiti before the earthquake so I didn't hear -- did he did donated to Haiti was a very tough place before the earthquake.
And lot of that money didn't get -- A lot of it did get spent to restore things back to that situation.
And you know so there you're just making up for huge set back and and in terms of health where as you get families to be more healthy they choose to have -- children and so the population growth goes down.
There the numbers couldn't be clearer and you know my money that goes in the aids is in the same pot is -- -- money in fact it's a fairly small percentage.
My dead body from the foundation that goes after -- same thing it's -- partnership the -- government.
And it's really under the Bush Administration that this global health piece went from -- very tiny part of the aide -- -- to over half now.
You know aids malaria neglected diseases and that -- which is the part.
We work in and have expertise summed up part about four completely because -- in there looking at the numbers all the time.
Well -- -- I think very Smart folks if they wanted to give money to any charitable effort would right away.
Give -- -- and an -- and right away through your foundation because.
It's it's put this -- you do get a lot of bang for the buck Warren Buffett.
-- a fan of course of higher taxes on on the upper income.
And and -- the government doing more spending more.
When he had his -- -- he chose to commit whatever money's gonna have before he goes to you and after goes to you when your foundation and not to the US government.
What does that tell you.
-- tells you that we've got three sectors we've got the private sector.
That is the biggest and is phenomenal and anything it can do in terms of the diseases of the rich the needs of -- people -- -- it's fantastic.
Then you have some things like education and just us or government comes in and helping poor countries is there philanthropy.
Only a -- percent as big as either of those other sectors but it tends to be more innovative more willing to take.
Far out science new delivery programs and so there's a complementary role.
And so often you know we're taking our scientists and expertise talking about the government firms about.
You know what we know and and where we have a common view so I'm the biggest -- philanthropy.
Because it's it's almost like that venture capital of societal spending.
Sometimes you take on things like you know we're trying to get teachers to have more feedback -- raise the average quality.
Those programs might or might not succeeded and it's not the typical thing.
A government would do so I really love all all three sectors for and in an appropriate role in.
You know I'm trying to make sure that warrants mining.
Is well spent -- -- -- -- my that's my full time job now now.
Filter by section