• Scrubbles@poptalk.scrubbles.tech
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    106
    ·
    10 days ago

    What was the figure? All it would take to end world hunger is 500 billion or something like that? Half one person’s weath?

    What sort of person has that amount and decides not to end world hunger.

      • errer@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        47
        ·
        10 days ago

        The same kind of person who ends government programs that help those hungry people, killing hundreds of thousands of them

    • Diplomjodler@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      34
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      10 days ago

      Hunger is a political problem, not a money problem. You can’t just say “here are X billion dollars, let’s end world hunger”. Having said that, the system that allows people like Musk to get that rich, is also the same system that creates hunger.

      • xtr0n@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        22
        ·
        10 days ago

        Here in the good ole USA money and politics are the same thing. If you have the political will, you can get the money and if you have the money, you can but the political will.

        That said, didn’t Elmo have a beef with the fucking United Nations because he said he’d pay the 6 or 7 billion to end world hunger if the could prove that it’s possible and then they produced a detailed plan and he quibbled and but-akshually’ed his way to a reneg because he never intended to do jack shit for anyone other than himself?

    • Soup@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      10 days ago

      What it would really take to end world hunger is massive systemic change that’s actually pretty straight-forward but is fought by every single person who loves a deaperate workforce and their insane conservative followers who believe that their greatest enemy is a hungry person.

    • krisevol@lemmus.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      10 days ago

      He didn’t have that much money. He has stocks, and stocks from companies that don’t turn a profit won’t solve world hunger.

        • krisevol@lemmus.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          10 days ago

          California spends 1.5 billion already and hasn’t accomplished anything. You think 10 billion would fix homeless across the country?

          • Scrubbles@poptalk.scrubbles.tech
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            9 days ago

            We were talking about world hunger, but k. You’re obviously trying to pick a fight here on what was obviously not a concrete plan. I’m not sure if you noticed but I’m actually not an expert and don’t haven’t a 32 part plan on how to solve it. Instead pointing out the obvious fact that the man is worth more than the gdp of many nations and how none of that will go to help others, but please keep telling me how the idea of him helping is silly.

            • krisevol@lemmus.org
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              9 days ago

              I get it I’m not expert as well. I’m just saying his stocks are over inflated in a bubble economy, and if you tried to extract any cash from this, the bubble pops and nothing if value can really be extracted.

              Here is my thinking. Most of his stocks are trading at 350p/e. Most normal companies trade at 10. Give it a high end of 35, his real “wealth” is 100 billion, not 1 trillion. Or if the 100 billion he would owe 20 billion in taxes, and we know he still owes 40 billion on X. On the high end we can safely say he could extract 40 billion in cash “if” he didn’t owe money on other projects or loans. Realistically he would get a free billion.

              The reason i say the high drop in p/e is because every speculative investor is investing in him, and not his stocks. And if he put in the required paperwork to sell all of his stocks, he would trigger a mass sell off from investors and the p/e would go to realistic values. The other reason is there isn’t enough liquidity in the market to support 1 trillion in sell off to support a zero crash anyways.