Bill Gates: White kids not eligible for my scholarships

PeakOutput

me-skywalker wrote: »

that part.... he never donated that amount to charity... he has only said that he intends to.....

just the other day he donated(donated not pledged) £6Billion or around 1/7th of his wealth

the total including donations and pledges is £24billion or 66%(got a bit carried away with the 95%)

i think its petty begrudgery to question his desire to help people of all nationalities genders and race

TomTom

magma69 wrote: »

Classic reverse racism.

I love that phrase. No such thing as reverse racism, any discrimination based on race is racism, regardless of weather you are white or not.
I do know someone who though that as a black person he could call white people what ever he wanted as you cannot be racist when it's to a white person.

me-skywalker

PeakOutput wrote: »

i think its petty begrudgery to question his desire to help people of all nationalities genders and race

it is completely your right! but come on this this stinks of damnation to the white poor of america.

Think of the amount of extra kids he could be helping out and giving a hand to. WHy should he jsut limit his charitable donations when its to such an extent? What is the motive behind this? Im sure he's thought abuot it deeply and has been advised on this but to the layman it looks bad.

Dudess

PeakOutput wrote: »

i think its petty begrudgery to question his desire to help people of all nationalities genders and race

I don't think it's begrudgery, more an objection to the fact his desire isn't to help people of all races.
I agree America is a very unequal society, but while white people generally have the upper hand, that doesn't mean there aren't countless white people who are extremely disenfranchised.

ascanbe

TomTom wrote: »

I love that phrase. No such thing as reverse racism, any discrimination based on race is racism, regardless of weather you are white or not.
I do know someone who though that as a black person he could call white people what ever he wanted as you cannot be racist when it's to a white person.

You're right. There is no such thing as reverse racism; racism is racism.
You cant' be racist when it's to a white peson? Yes, you can.
A black person, or someone from another ethnic background, could call a white person whatever they feel is an ethnic slur against that person; in any society that values free speech he/she won't go to jail for that, but he/she will be viewed negatively by many people.
And, perhaps, positively by, what i would could call, wrong thinking people.
Similarly, a white person could call a black person whatever they feel is an ethnic slur against that person; again, they will not go to jail for this, in any society that values free speech, but will be viewed negatively by many people.
And, perhaps, positively by, what i would call, wrong thinking people.
The negative consequences for abusing people on the basis of their race will, in any country that values free speech, be felt in its effect on your reputation.
Similarly, some people look to gain from engaging in this sort of rhetoric; by appealing to other people who find this language/way of thinking appealing.
This isn't just a black/white issue, either; it also includes people from other ethnic backgrounds, religous groups, etc.
Everyone, infact.

ascanbe

Dudess wrote: »

I don't think it's begrudgery, more an objection to the fact his desire isn't to help people of all races.
I agree America is a very unequal society, but while white people generally have the upper hand, that doesn't mean there aren't countless white people who are extremely disenfranchised.

He's choosing to use his money in a way he sees fit; in a way he feels will benifit his country and, by extension, himself.
Let's say he thought, for instance, that there was a dearth of opportunity to participate in sport for girls in America and chose to invest in order to address this.
Would this mean he's discriminating against boys of all ethnic backgrounds?
Technically, yes.
Would this mean he has something against males; perhaps. But, for obvious reasons, this would be a perverse assumption to make.
Everytime a person chooses to spend their money on something they wish they are being discriminatory; they're choosing to spend their money on what they feel benificial and discriminating against all the other things they didn't spend their money on.
Does that mean they're ideologically opposed to everything they didn't spend their money on?
Anyway, i think people are confusing the issues and addressing this as if it were a political point.
This is a private citizen choosing to spend his money in a certain way; it doesn't equate to the debate around how a state/government should deal with issues of education/inequality.

Rycn

ascanbe wrote: »

He's choosing to use his money in a way he sees fit; in a way he feels will benifit his country and, by extension, himself.
Let's say he thought, for instance, that there was a dearth of opportunity to participate in sport for girls in America and chose to invest in order to address this.
Would this mean he's discriminating against boys of all ethnic backgrounds?
Technically, yes.
Would this mean he has something against males; perhaps. But, for obvious reasons, this would be a perverse assumption to make.
Everytime a person chooses to spend their money on something they wish they are being discriminatory; they're choosing to spend their money on what they feel benificial and discriminating against all the other things they didn't spend their money on.
Does that mean they're ideologically opposed to everything they didn't spend their money on?
Anyway, i think people are confusing the issues and addressing this as if it were a political point.
This is a private citizen choosing to spend his money in a certain way; it doesn't equate to the debate around how a state/government should deal with issues of education/inequality.

Exactly.

IrishManSaipan

Who gives a damn what he spends his dollars on...........

LiberalUtopia

I applied for a William Gates scholarship back in 2007. Got rejected and had to pay for my college fees using my own money. Perhaps it's cos I'm a white, Christian English-speaker from south Dublin? Makes me feel better hearing this story!

Anyway Bill Gates is an evil eugenicist. The man has too much money and is a danger to society.

IrishManSaipan

LiberalUtopia wrote: »

I applied for a William Gates scholarship back in 2007. Got rejected and had to pay for my college fees using my own money. Perhaps it's cos I'm a white, Christian English-speaker from south Dublin? Makes me feel better hearing this story!

Anyway Bill Gates is an evil eugenicist. The man has too much money and is a danger to society.

If you can afford it, and you believe in liberalism............:cool:

pickarooney

LiberalUtopia wrote: »

I applied for a William Gates scholarship back in 2007. Got rejected and had to pay for my college fees using my own money. Perhaps it's cos I'm a white, Christian English-speaker from south Dublin? Makes me feel better hearing this story!

Anyway Bill Gates is an evil eugenicist. The man has too much money and is a danger to society.

But you went cap in hand to him for a scholarship? Maybe he doesn't give out cash to those who call him evil and a danger to society.

LiberalUtopia

pickarooney wrote: »

But you went cap in hand to him for a scholarship?

Do you go "cap in hand" into work every day?

pickarooney wrote: »

Maybe he doesn't give out cash to those who call him evil and a danger to society.

If someone wants to give me €10k, then all well and good. Just as well he doesn't eh?

Thirdfox

People do realise Asians of the south-eastern variety can't get this scholarship either right? (Chinese, Koreans, Japanese - a demographic that sends more kids (proportionately) to university than Caucasians). Don't hear of the Chinese, Korea and Japanese community complaining about this.

Maybe the OP should change it to "White and Yellow kids not eligible for my scholarships"? At least it would be more honest then. But then people can't complain that "white" people are being selectively discriminated against...

baalthor

Thirdfox wrote: »

People do realise Asians of the south-eastern variety can't get this scholarhship either right? (Chinese, Koreans, Japanese - a demographic that sends more kids (proportionately) to university than Caucasians.

So does this mean that Caucasians are under-represented and should receive affirmative action?

Thirdfox

If the imbalance gets too high I suppose - but as one of the top two demographics in university (proportionately) there's not that much need for affirmative action for caucasians

And personally, I'm in a split mind about affirmative action (I'm yellow :P) but wanted to point out something the OP seems to have overlooked in his zeal to paint Bill Gates as being out to get "White" people.

Naikon

Billy G can do what he wants with HIS money in fairness. It's a pretty noble gesture. This somewhat offsets the gigantic amount of damage the organisation has inflicted upon the computing industry since 1975 though.

WindSock

Thirdfox wrote: »

But then people can't complain that "white" people are being selectively discriminated against...

Haven't you heard? It's only the white straight male that is suffering the real discrimination these days

hooradiation

Naikon wrote: »

Billy G can do what he wants with HIS money in fairness. It's a pretty noble gesture. This somewhat offsets the gigantic amount of damage the organisation has inflicted upon the computing industry since 1975 though.

oh please, do stop being silly.

Naikon

hooradiation wrote: »

oh please, do stop being silly.

How am I being silly? Microsoft is hardly the bastion of innovation in fairness. Sure, they brought computers to homes that would not otherwise
have a computer due to costs, yet nothing from Microsoft really stands out as a fundamentally new proof of concept. A monopolised market is not
good for the consumer at all. Virtually forcing people to buy your software is not morally sound. I want choice when it comes to computing issues.

Then there is the bastardization of open protocols which are then repackaged and designed not to work with the intended specification.
Kerberos being a prime example. There are too many reasons to keep jabbering on about, so I will leave it here to avoid turning to a post war.

PeakOutput

Naikon wrote: »

How am I being silly? Microsoft is hardly the bastion of innovation in fairness. Sure, they brought computers to homes that would not otherwise
have a computer due to costs, yet nothing from Microsoft really stands out as a fundamentally new proof of concept. A monopolised market is never
good for the consumer. Virtually forcing people to buy your software is not a morally sound issue. I want choice when it comes to computing issues.

Then there is the bastardization of Open protocols which are then repackaged and designed not to work with the original specification.
Kerberos being an example. There are too many reasons to keep jabbering on about, so I will leave it here to avoid turning to a post war.

ye but its completely irrelevant to the discussion tbh

Naikon

PeakOutput wrote: »

ye but its completely irrelevant to the discussion tbh

I agree. I won't go any further because it will de-rail the thread.

Mike 1972

LiberalUtopia wrote: »

Anyway Bill Gates is an evil eugenicist. The man has too much money and is a danger to society.

eugenicist ???