Why I’m Going to India
thegatesnotes.com
Why I’m Going to India
1–10 of 116 posts
Re: Why I’m Going to India
#2While what he's doing is obviously good, I am uneasy with the whole idea that one man accumulates so much wealth in the first place, and then decides as an unelected individual what's best for a country. Having said that, I'm not sure i have a particularly good answer to this conundrum.
Re: Why I’m Going to India
#3While what he's doing is obviously good, I am uneasy with the whole idea that one man accumulates so much wealth in the first place, and then decides as an unelected individual what's best for a country. Having said that, I'm not sure i have a particularly good answer to this conundrum.
Neither being elected nor success in business necessarily qualifies someone to decide what it best for a country.
And I don't consider one worse than the other, each will be biased in a different way.
Re: Why I’m Going to India
#4While what he's doing is obviously good, I am uneasy with the whole idea that one man accumulates so much wealth in the first place, and then decides as an unelected individual what's best for a country. Having said that, I'm not sure i have a particularly good answer to this conundrum.
I'm fairly uncomfortable that one elected individual with a fairly small majority and a rapidly declining approval rating can decide what is best for a country. Consolidation of power is the problem; not the method by which it is acquired.
Re: Why I’m Going to India
#5While what he's doing is obviously good, I am uneasy with the whole idea that one man accumulates so much wealth in the first place, and then decides as an unelected individual what's best for a country. Having said that, I'm not sure i have a particularly good answer to this conundrum.
Who care if he represents nobody if he do good for humanity? There are lot of people in this world that represent a people and they're rotten.
Think about the representatives that you elect to represent your district. By default, they only represent the interest of your district, but not for the greater good of everyone. Otherwise, they get booted out of office for failure to do their job.
Bill Gate can afford to care about poor people, because he doesn't have to answer to anyone. It's not his job to care for India versus the United States. It's not his job to hate China. It's not his job to ensure 25 years in technological advantages against America's enemies.
Re: Why I’m Going to India
#6Uh, there's plenty of poor people in America. There are kids at my son's elementary school who don't have enough food. In Los Angeles. In California.
Re: Why I’m Going to India
#7Uh, there's plenty of poor people in America. There are kids at my son's elementary school who don't have enough food. In Los Angeles. In California.
Maybe one day a Chinese billionaire will show up and help solve the issues surrounding the food desert/insecurity present in LA?
Re: Why I’m Going to India
#8Uh, there's plenty of poor people in America. There are kids at my son's elementary school who don't have enough food. In Los Angeles. In California.
You haven't seen real poverty then. Go visit India someday. (Hint: You will find kids that have to work, beg, get abused just so they can eat once, often rotten or throw away food. Forget clothes, forget school, forget sanitation, forget having even some kind of roof on the head and blanket to sleep.)
Besides I am not sure bringing nationalism into charity is classy or even logical - given Bill Gates is spending his own money as opposed to tax payer one or national funds.
Re: Why I’m Going to India
#9Uh, there's plenty of poor people in America. There are kids at my son's elementary school who don't have enough food. In Los Angeles. In California.
If there's a chance to help more lives elsewhere I think he should do it. Why should he limit himself to America? I don't really understand what you're trying to get at with this comment.
Re: Why I’m Going to India
#10While what he's doing is obviously good, I am uneasy with the whole idea that one man accumulates so much wealth in the first place, and then decides as an unelected individual what's best for a country. Having said that, I'm not sure i have a particularly good answer to this conundrum.
You think philanthropy is an evil conspiracy of the wealthy? :)