and he's done it with technology, not thru the court system.
![]() | Thank you for being a valued part of the CNET community. As of December 1, 2020, the forums are in read-only format. In early 2021, CNET Forums will no longer be available. We are grateful for the participation and advice you have provided to one another over the years. Thanks, CNET Support |
Discussion is locked
and he's done it with technology, not thru the court system.
To be honest, this government handing out honours to its favourites is like Mother handing out popsicles to the family brood. There have been calls for the whole honours system to be scrapped as irrelevant since it has become little more than a snob party for Blair's Babies. Oh, and if anyone thinks for one second I would ever revere him for being a KBE, think on. I don't do it for our own citizens, so sure as hell won't for a foreigner.
someone asked you to revere anyone?
Betcha dollars to the things dogs leave on your front lawn that you would genuflect reverently if invited to an audience with the Queen.
She is our Queen, that is different. Beknighted fools like Gates aren't even close to her league.
It has gotten inflationary! I mean, it seems as if just about anybody can get honors from the Queen nowadays. Plus the fact that I think monarchy is one of the least logical things to remain in a modern society (or under developed too for that matter) that calls itself a democracy. I know, we still have it in Sweden and I don't see the reason why we have kept it for so long.
One more thing. Gates claims to be concerned about the world's situation and in particular the poor parts. I wonder if he is willing to contribute to a change in their political system too... I doubt it!
"Gates claims to be concerned about the world's situation and in particular the poor parts. I wonder if he is willing to contribute to a change in their political system too... "
I take you're pulling something from something else you've read? at least I couldn't find that in the article.
Whose political system? the poor?
Or are you going to use my question as a setup for another attack on US society ills?
roger
Why are they poor?
Who benefits from that poverty?
These are the only questions that need an answer. Not necessarly from you. I actually posted my opinion to Dale as you may see... So it wasn't directed at you at all. But you are obviously free to comment my post and I am free to answer your comment. ![]()
You bought up Bill's concern for the world's situation and "particularly it's poor parts" and asked if was willing to contribute to change their political system.
I asked what you were referring to since I must have missed any reference to his concern for the poor in the referenced article. And what political systems you think he should be paying to change. Is that a bit clearer.
But your questions in reply are in line with expectations. I'm just surprised you didn't continue to explain how most of Bill's money should be used to "save the poor".
THe only opinion I saw you post to Dail was that the honors were for almost anyone. AND that monarchy is the "least logical thing...", something I'm sure will endear you to Dale.
OH wait, you doubt Bill Gates will contribute to change in some unknow "their" political system. Waiting for him to give all his wealth to the Palestinians?
Shrug, ok. Preach on, never stop hinting at some not quite right about whatever the subject is by your ask "Who benefits from that poverty?"
roger
You could move to one of those areas now and start helping out. You could also give them your money. Lot's of people in the US do exactly that.
Kiddpeat,
You don't know how I earn my money.
You don't know how I spend my money.
You don't know what or who I support.
You don't know if I'm helping out nor where I am helping out.
IOW, stop drawing coclusions and if you do, do it on the walls...
.
I don't know the percentage but I think about 90 percent of the citizens live in abject poverty and have for decades in spite of the fact that so much aide is poured into the country. Why? How is it kept so poverty struck and why? Who benefits?
)))))))))))???????????????(((((((((((((
Too bad David's link didn't mention this ...
The honor was granted in recognition of Gates' contributions to business, employment, and education in England, and the charitable work of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, which in 2000 earmarked $210 million for college scholarships at Cambridge University.
Incidentally, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundationis one of, if not the largest foundation of its kind. Gates contributed 5 BILLION to his foundation. Click on my links, as well as checking out "Is Bill Gates a closet liberal?" and "United Nations Hails Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation's $57 Million Grant to Protect African Youth Against AIDS " to see that he appears to be giving to causes that you support.
Once again, your rants fall short.
The Queen dows not give the honurs, she only presents them at the awards ceremony. If you knew anything about our society, you would know the honours are selected and approved by the PM, which is specifically why I referred to the toadies who have lately been getting them as Balir's Babies.
As for saying our Queen is irrelevant, that is your personal opinion. It does nothing to engender friendly feelings between you and I however.
mick jagger for example roflol!
I have nothing against the Queen as a person. It is the Monarchy per se that I don't like since I don't believe in inheritance of power. I believe in power thru democratic elections - one man, one vote and no veto...
Where the females are disenfranchised? Hardly supports your claim to socialist thinking, Charlie. ![]()
Sorry but in Sweden we have managed to get about 45% of the parliament to the women... Not because of the King, but because of political decisions!
What is it that makes a republic prevent women from being part of the parliament/senate/congress or whatever you want to call it? To me there is no conflict between Republic and women in power! But there certainly is a comflict between Monarchy and democracy.... ![]()
Like Kiddpeat indicates...love him or not...he has done a lot for computers regardless of some defects that some people love to constantly blast him about personally. So, I don't begrudge his billions or 'The Donald's' millions... they did it under the old capitalistic system and hard work. Hell's bell's so he has hogged and dominated, which just makes others jealous. But, look what this guy is doing for charity with his excess billions..which I admire...
"The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation will win the Nobel Peace Prize within twenty years. The global impact of the Gates Foundation (GF) is not only due to its enormous size ($24 billion), but for its innovation and emphasis on global health."
".....the GF will have a larger impact on the world than even Carnegie & Rockefeller did on the US. If you still dislike Gates, remember that these other guys were robber barons, too. At least your Microsoft Tax will be spent wisely."
http://www.zefhemel.com/192.php
I didn't see your post JR before replying to Charlie. The 24 billion was more of the figure I had in my mind but in searching for an exact one came up with 5 billion which sounded like enough for me
Thanks for also bringing this to folks' attentions.
I've always wondered at the hatred for Gates. Windows is far from perfect, and there are security issues, etc. But, I remember DOS systems and how you really needed to know a lot to be able to use them for the most basic of functions -- installing and running a wordprocessor required far more knowledge than the average PC user. I kinda like that some of the security features are NOT integrated into MS products. That's part of the problem to begin with because hackers could then target those features. With a minimum of knowledge, folks can enjoy pretty trouble free use of Windows machines. I suspect most who don't have probably fiddled too much with them in the search for some mythical optimized supermachine capable of controlling a space shuttle, and shutting out the hacker form the Bad Boys movies, when it's not what they need. My newer, basically untweaked system, has run almost trouble free for over 3 years now. No different than my souped up previous Windows box that I used to defrag, update, tweak, optimize, and had locked down so tight I couldn't even enjoy the internet. Computer life's much simpler and better now!
Evie ![]()
that suceeded, probably beyond all expectations. It suceeded because it was GREAT technology in its day, and has since been central in enabling all sorts of great software now commonly including audio and video editing and creation software.
The $5 Billion was just pocket change that
Bill and his wife added in January 2000 to their philanthropic foundation, making it the world's wealthiest, with assets of $21.8 billion (yr 2000).
With that gift(Jan 2000), the foundation passed the Wellcome Trust in Britain, which has assets of $21.4 billion, according to the Chronicle of Philanthropy, a publication that covers ranks them by the size of their assets. The second-largest foundation in the United States is the Ford Foundation, with assets of $13.1 billion (yr 2000).
Bill and Melinda have always said that they're committed to giving away a good part of their wealth.
I don't have the 2003 annual report but for 2002 the
Foundation Assets: $24,082,053,000
Giving away in 2002: $1,158,280,084
http://www.gatesfoundation.org/nr/public/media/annualreports/annualreport02/finPosition.htm
I find that a curious assertion re. "they always said". As I understand it, and it was quite recently reported in one of our quality broadsheets, it is Bill Sr. who pressed his egocentric son into spreading his wealth in philanthropic activities. Until that father son talk, little Gates had no such thoughts in that direction.
I also understand it is his father who heads up the distribution for his son, and Bill Sr's target is to dispose of as much as 90% of it. So sure it does good works, but as I read it, without that essential paternal influence, none of it would be happening at all as the concept of charitable works is otherwise beyond his son's mental capacity.
The reporter said, "However, unless he renounces his American citizenship he won't be able to refer to himself as "Sir Bill Gates" -- the US constitution doesn't tolerate such titles -- but writing KBE after his name will be allowed.".
I'm curious as to what in the Constitution forbids him. He could call himself "Queen of the May" or Mr. Microsoft if it struck his fancy. But I dare say that if he started refering to himself as "Sir Gates" or some such, he'd be laughed at.
Look for "title of nobility" here
http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.articlei.html#section10
DE