Motsoaledi: Big pharma's 'satanic' plot is genocide

Charles Babbage. He was quite comfortable. So comfortable he turned down lands and titles.

Jenner too. Successful doctor.

Louis Pasteur didn't want for much (though his wealth mostly came from his discoveries, he was born relatively poor, still he was wealthy no denying that).

Isaac Newton too. He actually ran the royal mint at one point. A position that paid an obscene amount of money.

Those are just off the top of my head. I'm surprised you aren't aware of any wealthy scientists pre 1900.

However, the vast majority were poor. Many of them died at a young age due to poverty and disease (and the occasional romantic mathematician, who died for a girl).
 
However, the vast majority were poor. Many of them died at a young age due to poverty and disease (and the occasional romantic mathematician, who died for a girl).
I'm sure some were poor but plenty were wealthy too. Some obscenely wealthy.

Considering I pulled 4 just off the top of my head in a matter of seconds I find the idea that the vast majority of pre 1900 scientists were poor to be a hard one to accept. You're going to have to support that with some sort of article I can check out or something.
 
I'm sure some were poor but plenty were wealthy too. Some obscenely wealthy.

Considering I pulled 4 just off the top of my head in a matter of seconds I find the idea that the vast majority of pre 1900 scientists were poor to be a hard one to accept. You're going to have to support that with some sort of article I can check out or something.

I have actually tried googling on the subject, but information is difficult to find. The bit I can find relates to inventors, which is not quite what I meant by scientist. My knowledge on the subject comes mainly from the miniature biographies textbooks often write in the sidelines when discussing some proof or other scientific contribution.

I'm sure the "top 50" scientists of all time list won't be populated with a bunch of piss-poor people, but this list often includes inventors who made a ton of money off their inventions and that defeats the point I was making earlier. That many scientists regularly contributed to science with little (if any) benefit to themselves.
 
I have actually tried googling on the subject, but information is difficult to find. The bit I can find relates to inventors, which is not quite what I meant by scientist. My knowledge on the subject comes mainly from the miniature biographies textbooks often write in the sidelines when discussing some proof or other scientific contribution.

I'm sure the "top 50" scientists of all time list won't be populated with a bunch of piss-poor people, but this list often includes inventors who made a ton of money off their inventions and that defeats the point I was making earlier. That many scientists regularly contributed to science with little (if any) benefit to themselves.
I reckon most inventors can easily be considered scientists. You can't just ignore them.

I'm sure there have been plenty of scientists that don't receive monetary compensation in proportion to the contributions they make to the advancement of mankind. However there are plenty that do receive adequate compensation. Then there are some that receive disproportionately obscene compensation.
 
Last edited:
No, I'm genuinely curious about what your comment meant.

ok, in my understanding, "Big Pharma" is a blanket title that people use to imply "Big Scary Corporations or Public Private Partnerships Making Potentially Evil Or At Least Very Expensive Patented Medicines", while "Big Biometrics" is a title invented by me that means "Big Scary Corporations Building Biologically-based Identification and Authorization Schemes Being Rapidly Adopted By Governments, Workplaces and Communal Residences Everywhere".

India is busy, or has recently completed, a huge biometric ID rollout, similar to what South Africa is beginning with now.
 
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X