I didn't say those things. I was saying that it's not ironic and pushing back against a particular straw man in the letter.
1. Government aid has its problems.
The fact that the Gates Foundation helps government programs implies that private organizations execute better, at least in some aspects. Gates later admits that government aid has its problems, so it's odd that he dismisses objections in this way.
2. Philosophical objections should be acknowledged and addressed.
At another point in the letter, Gates hypothetically asked, "Imagine that the income tax form asked, 'Can we use $30 of the taxes you’re already paying to protect 120 children from measles?' Would you check yes or no?"
Many people would have no problem with that arrangement but do have a problem with not-optional line items in the federal budget. The point is that right now donations are enforced by the IRS, which is an odd form of charity, and I think it's reasonable (and certainly not ironic) to have philosophical problems with that and to prefer more democratic forms of aid.
Perhaps the benefits are worth overruling the drawbacks (point 1) and philosophical objections (point 2), but calling reservations about government aid ironic is either sloppy or disingenuous.
1. Government aid has its problems.
The fact that the Gates Foundation helps government programs implies that private organizations execute better, at least in some aspects. Gates later admits that government aid has its problems, so it's odd that he dismisses objections in this way.
2. Philosophical objections should be acknowledged and addressed.
At another point in the letter, Gates hypothetically asked, "Imagine that the income tax form asked, 'Can we use $30 of the taxes you’re already paying to protect 120 children from measles?' Would you check yes or no?"
Many people would have no problem with that arrangement but do have a problem with not-optional line items in the federal budget. The point is that right now donations are enforced by the IRS, which is an odd form of charity, and I think it's reasonable (and certainly not ironic) to have philosophical problems with that and to prefer more democratic forms of aid.
Perhaps the benefits are worth overruling the drawbacks (point 1) and philosophical objections (point 2), but calling reservations about government aid ironic is either sloppy or disingenuous.