this post was submitted on 24 Dec 2024
1236 points (98.4% liked)
Enough Musk Spam
2283 readers
277 users here now
For those that have had enough of the Elon Musk worship online.
No flaming, baiting, etc. This community is intended for those opposed to the influx of Elon Musk-related advertising online. Coming here to defend Musk or his companies will not get you banned, but it likely will result in downvotes. Please use the reporting feature if you see a rule violation.
Opinions from all sides of the political spectrum are welcome here. However, we kindly ask that off-topic political discussion be kept to a minimum, so as to focus on the goal of this sub. This community is minimally moderated, so discussion and the power of upvotes/downvotes are allowed, provided lemmy.world rules are not broken.
Post links to instances of obvious Elon Musk fanboy brigading in default subreddits, lemmy/kbin communities/instances, astroturfing from Tesla/SpaceX/etc., or any articles critical of Musk, his ideas, unrealistic promises and timelines, or the working conditions at his companies.
Tesla-specific discussion can be posted here as well as our sister community /c/RealTesla.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
What does it matter about the exact dollar amount? The top 3 wealthiest people in the US could provide housing, sanitation and food for every single homeless person in the US and still be multi-billionaires. It doesn't matter if the cost of tackling homelessness is $20bn or $200bn, it's still a fact that a handful of people hoarde enough wealth that they could actually pay to house every single homeless person, and still have millions (if not billions) left over.
Yes, this is a trite example and doesn't address the systemic failures in healthcare and education that are a major factor in people becoming homeless. But the wealth the ultra-rich hoarde could help with that too.
If it's an amount that exceeds the means of the person you're complaining isn't paying for it, it's pretty relevant, don't you think?
This is literally false. The combined total net worth of the three richest in the US (~$800 billion) is less than the US government spends on welfare EVERY YEAR (over $1 TRILLION), lol.
Hell, even that nonsensical $20 billion figure put forth was ANNUAL, not one-time, so even IF we used that figure for the sake of argument, and even IF you could wave a magic wand and convert all of Musk's net worth straight into cash 1:1, it STILL would barely last 10 years. Then what?
You have no idea of the magnitude of the cost of solving this problem. Stop writing as if you know what you're talking about when you obviously don't.
You uhh aren't doing yourself any favors trying to compare the entirety of welfare to a fraction of what welfare does and yes an annual 20B is affordable on a national level. Elon's wealth jumped 170B just since November. He could absolutely afford 20B a year.
You uhh aren't doing yourself any favors taking that already-debunked 20B figure seriously.
And a couple of years ago, it shrank by $182 billion.
Stop treating net worth like it's an amount of cash. It isn't.
It is literally equivalent amount of cash lol
It is not annual income, but it would support a decade of expenditure for 10 years though, ie enough time to solve the issue.
One billionaire is a price most of are willing to pay too lol
Cash can't increase or decrease in quantity without any transaction having happened.
It's absolutely cash. It's cash when they want to use it, but not when we want to tax it or talk about using wealth differently in our country? Bullshit. It's cash.
And you might be surprised to find out politifact is in fact not the arbiter of reality.
When you sell a possession, you can obtain cash in exchange for it. It's not cash until then--up to that point, it's only a price tag, a valuation.
And taking out a loan using a possession of yours as collateral isn't income at all. Loans are not income--you need to pay loans back.
Until it debunks a claim made by the Other Team, right? That article goes into a lot of detail about how and why the claim is wrong/misleading.
That article goes into a lot of detail well beyond the original claim. Which is why it's a strawman argument. And Elon used his stocks to buy Twitter. It's cash.