Seattlest Pix 09Nov24
Tuesdays are Muppet Days
Seattle to Remain Famous for Coffee and Rain
Thanksgiving Pairing Suggestion: Dessert Isn't Just a Meal
Eight Things A Seattle Sports Fan Can Be Thankful For
While it's tempting to make fun of the Seattle Times (or the P-I, for that matter) for not getting the story the Los Angeles Times reported this weekend on the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation and the conflicts that exist between the foundation's charitable work and its financial holdings, and while we're somewhat inclined to point out the fact that no one in Seattle is in a position to say boo to the Gates Foundation, it's really just fantastic work by the L.A. Times which continues to be one of the country's best newspapers despite the fact that it's under assault by its owner the Chicago Tribune. The Gates Foundation is based here so it's easy to lose sight of their place in the universe and jump on them for things like buying up the land that contains Seattle's only municipal skatepark and bulldozing it, but they're really a global giant with a tremendous amount of money. Thank you to the L.A. Times for pointing out that while a fraction of that money is injected directly into various charitable causes the Foundation also has a mountain of cash the size of Rainier that can also be working either for, or, in some cases against, those same causes. Take some time out on Snow Day #1 2007 to read the entire article - We learned more about the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation from that piece than we had previously through years worth of Seattle Times and Post Intelligencer full-release massage pieces. Kudos, at least, to the Seattle Times for reprinting it.
The immediate fallout from the L.A. Times article is that the Gates Foundation has announced it will review its investments and its investment procedure.
In a significant change, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation announced Wednesday that it would review its investments to determine whether its holdings were socially responsible.In addition to what it called a continuing review of "our approach to investments," the foundation said on its website, "we will review other strategies that can fulfill a social responsibility role, both in terms of their aspirations and in understanding the impact that they may have."
That's $65.95 billion in assets that reporters Charles Piller, Edmund Sanders and Robyn Dixon (and probably a shitload of other, unnamed people at the L.A. Times) are helping to direct towards more socially responsible businesses.
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
tweet this
post to facebook
I'm glad you posted about this and would like to add a few comments. It is an important article for people to read.
Microsoft is the most widely held stock by socially responsible funds. If you read my article Citizen Microsoft in 2004, you know that MSFT doesn't represent a very high bar for the definition of responsible. So, if the Gates' are going to review the investments I expect they will set the bar at the level at which the kinds of companies they own don't get them written up in another article in the LA Times.
The sad thing that is lost here is that the Gates Foundation's portfolio is not much different than most people's mutual fund holdings. You are just as evil an investor as they are. The issue here is much more about why our laws allow corporations to harm individuals and pollute without having to pay the penalties. Unfortunately, Gates is blinded by the success his participation in the capitalist system has brought him - and is not very enlightened in the area of corporate responsibility - just look at Microsoft's practices to see this.
I do hope that we broaden the discussion here.
I'm glad you posted about this and would like to add a few comments. It is an important article for people to read.
Microsoft is the most widely held stock by socially responsible funds. If you read my article Citizen Microsoft in 2004, you know that MSFT doesn't represent a very high bar for the definition of responsible. So, if the Gates' are going to review the investments I expect they will set the bar at the level at which the kinds of companies they own don't get them written up in another article in the LA Times.
The sad thing that is lost here is that the Gates Foundation's portfolio is not much different than most people's mutual fund holdings. You are just as evil an investor as they are. The issue here is much more about why our laws allow corporations to harm individuals and pollute without having to pay the penalties. Unfortunately, Gates is blinded by the success his participation in the capitalist system has brought him - and is not very enlightened in the area of corporate responsibility - just look at Microsoft's practices to see this.
I do hope that we broaden the discussion here.
p.s. If you want an overview of socially responsible investing to see some of the avenues open to people and foundations investing small or large amounts, check out Investing for Change.