Three Billionaires Who Made A Difference In 2015

Three Billionaires Who Made A Difference In 2015

With their help, the world is not completely falling apart.
64
views

2015 was filled with both thorns and roses. In reflection of the year 2015, what you may have neglected to think about is the fact that billionaires seemed to do more charitable, innovative and just plain sweet things with their money than recognized or seen before. Take a moment to look into three billionaires who pledged to do something meaningful with all of that dough.

1. Bill Gates turns yucky to yummy

In January of 2015, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation used its funds to execute a machine that can turn human waste into drinkable water. It can produce a little over 10,000 liters of water a day! The machine was named "The OmniProcessor", built by Janicki Industries. A large percent of our global population both neglect to properly treat sewage and lack adequate drinking water. This invention is surely going to act as a catalyst for further breakthrough in solving the world's clean water epidemic.



2. Manoj Bhargava funds three inventions (so far) to alleviate global suffering

Manoj Bhargava may be an unfamiliar name to you, so to catch you up: he is the founder of the very well-known company Five-Hour Energy. He also just so happens to be worth $4 billion. In October of 2015, Bhargava announced he would be giving away the majority of his wealth. Bhargava has stated most consistently that he wishes to "alleviate global suffering". Although alleviating global suffering seems like a daunting task, Manoj condenses it by putting his money toward water, energy and health. Bhargava's money has already been put toward three innovative inventions: The Rain Maker which creates safe drinking water, Free Electric which provides free electricity, and the Renew ECP which promotes good blood flow for wellness. Manoj Bhargava wants to change the world, and he is determined not to allow anything to stand in his way.

3. Maxima Zuckerberg makes a difference before even making an appearance

On Dec. 1, 2015, Mark Zuckerberg and his wife, Dr. Priscilla Chan announced they will be giving ninety-nine percent of their Facebook shares to charity throughout their lives. Mark and Priscilla's daughter, Max, inspired the decision. Max was born one week before the announcement of the Facebook founder's philanthropy. In a video released by Facebook, Mr. Zuckerberg said: "Having this child has made us think about all of the things that should be improved in the world for her whole generation."

Dr. Chan stated: "We need to make sure that there are investments and programs that ensure that the future isn't going to be like today... the future is going to be better than today." There is some controversy about the intentions of the Zuckerberg family, but only time will tell if this is truly a pledge that will make a difference. For now, let's celebrate that Mark and Priscilla have promised to do something amazing with the shares from the social media medium we all know and love. The beautiful baby, Maxima Zuckerberg, has already changed the world by inspiring her powerful parents to make a difference, and she is just under one month old!



Cover Image Credit: The Telegraph

Popular Right Now

Connect with a generation
of new voices.

We are students, thinkers, influencers, and communities sharing our ideas with the world. Join our platform to create and discover content that actually matters to you.

Learn more Start Creating

Ilhan Omar Is at Best Foolhardy and at Worst, Yes, Anti-Semitic

Her latest statements seem to lack substance, motivation, or direction.

432
views

I find the case of Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) to be a curious one.

Specifically, I am referring to the recent controversy over select comments of hers that have generated accusations of anti-Semitism. In all honesty, prior to doing research for this article, I was prepared to come to her defense.

When her comments consisted primarily of "Israeli hypnosis" and monied interest, I thought her wording poor, though not too egregiously deviated from that of most politicians in the current climate of bad behavior. After all, Israeli PACs surely do have a monied interest in the orientation of United States policy in the Middle East. Besides, if President Trump can hypothesize about killing someone in broad daylight and receive no official sanction, I don't see the need for the House of Representatives to hand down reprimand to Rep. Omar for simply saying that Israel may have dealt wrongly, regardless of the veracity of that position.

And yet, seemingly discontent that she had not drawn enough ire, Omar continued firing. She questioned the purported dual loyalty of those Americans who support the state of Israel, while also making claim that the beloved former President Obama is actually not all that different from the reviled current President Trump.

In short, the initial (mostly) innocuous statements about the United States' relation with Israel have been supplanted by increasingly bizarre (and unnecessary) postulations.

Those latest two controversies I find most egregious. Questioning the loyalty of an American citizen for espousing support for a heavily persecuted world religion and in defense of a refuge for practitioners of that self-same religion that has existed as an independent state since 1948, seems, in really no uncertain terms, anti-Semitic.

After all, is it not her own party that so adamantly supports persecuted Palestinians in the very same region? Is it not she and fellow Muslim Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-MI) (who is not without her own streak of anti-Semitic controversy) that have rejected challenges to their own loyalty in being ethnically Somali and Palestinian respectively? Is her claim not akin to the "racist" demands that Obama produce proof of his birth in the United States, and the more concrete racism that asserted he truly was not? And (if you care to reach back so far) can her statement not be equated to suggestions that President John F. Kennedy would be beholden to the Vatican as the first (and to date only) Catholic to hold the presidency?

From what I can discern amongst her commentary, in Omar's mind, the rules that apply to her framework on race, ethnicity, religion, and culture as sacred idols above reproach do not extend to her Jewish contemporaries.

Oh, and may I remind you that over 70% of Jewish Americans voted for Hilary Clinton in 2016.

And yet, beyond even this hypocrisy, is the strange disdain Omar suddenly seems to hold for Barack Obama. Even as a non-Democrat, while I can find reason for this, it is still largely perplexing.

To begin with, I recognize that Ilhan Omar is not your prototypical Democrat. She would scoff at being termed a moderate, and likely would do the same to being labeled a traditional liberal. While she doesn't identify as an outright democratic socialist, one would have to be totally clueless to avoid putting her in the company of those who do, such as Tlaib or Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY).

As such, she's bound to have some critical evaluations of President Obama, despite the lionizing that the Democratic establishment has and continues to engage in. Two points still stick out to me as obvious incongruities in her statement, however.

First, Obama and Trump are nothing alike. Again, this coming from someone who does not regularly support either, I can at least attempt to claim objectivity. While Obama might not have been faithful to all the demands of the far-left during his presidency, his position on the political spectrum was far from the extreme bent that Trump has ventured into.

Secondly, there is the style of the two men to consider. While Obama had his share of goofs and gaffes (I still think it somewhat juvenile that he often refused to say "radical Islamic terrorism" when referring to Islamist extremists) he pales in comparison to Trump. Every week Trump has his foot caught in a new bear trap. Obama is enormously tame in comparison.

And in addition to all of that, one must beg the question of Omar's timing. With Republicans emboldened by her controversies and House Democratic leadership attempting to soothe the masses, why would Omar strike out at what's largely a popular figure for those that support her most? There seemed no motivation for the commentary and no salient reasoning to back it up, save that Omar wanted to speak her mind.

Such tactlessness is something that'll get you politically killed.

I do not believe Barack Obama was a great president, but that's not entirely important. I don't live in Ilhan Omar's district; her constituents believe Obama was a great president, and that should at least factor into her considerations. Or maybe she did weigh the negative value of such backlash and decided it wouldn't matter? 2019 isn't an election year, after all. Yet, even if that's the case, what's to gain by pissing off your superiors when they're already pissed off at you?

You need to pick your battles wisely in order to win the war, and I'm highly doubtful Omar will win any wars by pitching scorched-earth tactics over such minute concerns.

Her attitude reminds me not only of that of some of her colleagues engaging obtusely and unwisely over subjects that could best be shrugged off (see the AOC media controversies), but also some of my own acquaintances. They believe not only in the myth of their own infallibility, but the opposition bogeyman conjured by their status in a minority or marginalized group. As the logic goes, "I'm a member of x group, and being so gives me the right to decimate anyone who has any inclination to stand against me in any capacity, tit for tat." So much for civility.

I initially came here to defend Rep. Ilhan Omar, and I still do hold to that in certain cases. The opposition to some of her positions is unwarranted. She is allotted the freedom of speech, as are all Americans.

And yet, in certain other cases she has conducted herself brashly, and, one could argue, anti-Semitically.

All I can say is that I am content living adjacent to Minneapolis, not in it. You'd be hard-pressed to find me advocating for leadership that makes manifest in such impolitic fashion.

Related Content

Facebook Comments