Moore: Bill Gates got mugged by reality
In a surprising shift, Bill Gates, the co-founder of Microsoft and one of the wealthiest individuals in history, has publicly reassessed his stance on climate change. For decades, Gates was a vocal advocate for aggressive measures against fossil fuel consumption, warning of impending doom unless society drastically altered its energy consumption habits. However, he has recently distanced himself from the more extreme predictions and mandates of the climate movement, suggesting that the doomsday narrative prevalent among some climate activists is overly alarmist. This change has sparked debates, particularly among conservatives who argue that Gates’ significant investments in energy-intensive data centers indicate a conflict of interest. Nevertheless, Gates’ willingness to acknowledge a shift in perspective is commendable, especially in a climate of polarized opinions where few public figures, like Al Gore, have admitted to being wrong.
Gates continues to advocate for communal action regarding climate issues, but he has wisely stepped away from the more radical and economically burdensome proposals pushed by some factions within the environmental movement. This has led to a backlash from the left, who have labeled him a “traitor” for his newfound stance. In light of this evolving dialogue, several critical insights emerge that should guide a more constructive debate on climate policy. First, it is essential to prioritize human welfare in climate strategies, focusing on enhancing agricultural practices and health outcomes in impoverished regions. Second, fostering economic growth—even if it involves a temporary reliance on fossil fuels like natural gas—is vital for human progress. While climate change poses risks, it is not the sole or even the most pressing threat to the lives of the world’s poor, who face more immediate challenges such as poverty and disease.
Moreover, Gates’ insights underscore the importance of technological innovation as a solution to climate-related issues. Historical data shows that advancements in technology have significantly reduced mortality rates from severe weather events compared to previous centuries. Additionally, access to reliable and affordable energy is crucial for lifting people out of poverty; denying this access is fundamentally inhumane. If Gates were to redirect even a fraction of his philanthropic resources towards ensuring universal access to electricity and clean drinking water, the impact on global welfare could far surpass that of the billions spent on climate initiatives that have yet to yield significant changes in global temperatures. As Stephen Moore, a former senior economic adviser, articulates, the discourse on climate change must evolve to embrace these pragmatic insights for the betterment of humanity.
You’ve probably heard by now the blockbuster news that Microsoft founder Bill Gates, one of the richest people to ever walk the planet, has had a change of heart on climate change. For several decades, Gates poured billions of dollars into the climate-industrial complex and was howling that the end is nigh unless we stop using fossil fuels, cars, air conditioning and general anesthesia.
Now he says he rejects the “doomsday” predictions of the more extreme global warming prophets.
Some conservatives have snuffed that Gates has shifted his position on climate change because he and Microsoft have invested heavily in energy-intensive data centers.
What Gates has done is courageous and praiseworthy. There are not many people of his stature who will admit that they were wrong. Al Gore certainly hasn’t. My wife says I never do.
Gates still endorses the need for communal action (which won’t work), but he has sensibly disassociated himself from the increasingly radical and economically destructive dictates from the green movement. For that, the Left has tossed him out of their tent as a “traitor.”
I wish to highlight several critical insights that should be the starting point for constructive debate that every clear-minded thinker on either side of the issue should embrace.
1) It’s time to put human welfare at the center of our climate policies. This includes improving agriculture and health in poor countries.
2) Countries should be encouraged to grow their economies even if that means a reliance on fossil fuels like natural gas. Economic growth is essential to human progress.
3) Although climate change will hurt poor people, it will not be the only or even the biggest threat to the lives and welfare of the vast majority of them. The biggest problems are poverty and disease.
I would add to these wise declarations two inconvenient truths: First, the solution to changing temperatures and weather patterns is technological progress. A much smaller percentage of people die of severe weather events today than did 50 or 100 or 1,000 years ago.
Second, energy is the master resource, and to deny people reliable and affordable energy is to keep them poor and vulnerable — and this is inhumane.
If Gates were to direct even a small fraction of his foundation funds toward ensuring everyone on the planet has access to electric power and safe drinking water, it would do more for humanity than all the hundreds of billions of dollars that governments and foundations have devoted to climate programs that have failed to change the globe’s temperature.
Stephen Moore is a former Trump senior economic adviser and the cofounder of Unleash Prosperity, which advocates for education freedom for all children.
