this post was submitted on 24 Dec 2024
1228 points (98.4% liked)

Enough Musk Spam

2268 readers
461 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
 
(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 day ago (3 children)

pretty sure you can't end homelessness with $20b unless we're talking about absolute homelessness or something..

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 day ago (1 children)

pretty sure you can’t end homelessness with $20b

The math is straightforward: Cost of a housing unit * number of unhoused people. Even assuming the extraordinarily inflated market rate for housing in 2024, $20B is more than enough to house 650k people.

Now, will the institutional actors that produced homelessness stop existing? Will we see an end to predatory lenders, robo-signed foreclosures, police harassment and civil asset forfeiture of the working poor, and unregulated real estate scammers targeting our most vulnerable neighbors? Probably not.

But we wouldn't have so many billionaires running about squandering our national wealth on vanity projects like Twitter without billions to be fleeced from the public to begin with.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 day ago

$20B is more than enough to house 650k people

I got curious, so I whipped out my phone's calculator. $20B/650k = $30,800, give or take. I truly don't know if that's enough to break the cycle of homelessness, but if it is that seems like a pretty low number. We spend 40x that number on the defense budget, which is totally a jobs program but it seems like fighting homelessness would also ultimately be a jobs program.

[–] JasonDJ 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

There's a potential solution for less than $20B if they look towards their inspiration. I think they called it "Endlösung".

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 22 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

I wonder if they use drugs to cope with the mental illness they got from being forced to live on the streets?

Naw, that's pseudoscience. We all know that it's proven that poverty is a character trait that you actively choose. Not rich? Obviously you don't want it hard enough. /s

[–] [email protected] 23 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

Funny because elon is a drug addict who's showing he has some affective disorder because his daddy didn't love him and is a malignant narcissist.

[–] [email protected] 26 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Wait, I can't tell, is Elon talking about himself?

[–] [email protected] 15 points 2 days ago (1 children)

By his own definition, he is homeless, yeah.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 21 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Completely ignoring that addiction is an illness.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 days ago

Doesn't matter. We have the resources available to house, feed, educate, provide health care, and community for every American but don't out of greed. The US won't survive unless we mobilize every American to achieve their best self.

[–] [email protected] 20 points 2 days ago

These are the defenders of Christianity in the US? Jesus would take the side of the richest man in the would and his gluttonous sack of pride sidekick as they attack immigrants, the homeless, and other marginalized people?

The guy who hung out with lepers, prostitutes and illiterate fisherman and attacked Rome and the Pharisees?

[–] [email protected] 15 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Homeless folks are generally no more violent than homed folks. Drug addiction and mental illness or not.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 day ago

About a year ago a homeless woman had a miscarriage in my city and a couple local media outlets jumped on it, reporting that 'police had found a dead fetus in an encampment'. Ya know, after she called 911 because she had a miscarriage. Really helped solidify my belief that a lot of people would rather just stigmatize them than do anything else

[–] [email protected] 15 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

I know someone with moderate substance abuse issues and diagnosed severe mental illness - basically as bad as it gets if left untreated. But she also lives independently and holds down a solid middle class desk job. How? She has rich parents who pay for treatment (individualized psychiatry) and care (housekeeping mostly), as well as an array of friends who help oversee her.

Homelessness is not necessary, even in the most desperate cases. It's just a question of what we're willing to pay and how much we're willing to care.

[–] [email protected] 12 points 2 days ago

YES. Anyone reposting Kyle's daily eviscerations on Lemmy is fine by me. Kyle's consistency through my years of watching Secular Talk has always been admirable, especially in this age of soulless online grifters

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 day ago (4 children)

Fuck Elon, but also there's absolutely zero chance you can solve homelessness with $20b unless you're just building tent cities with no other resources available there.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 day ago

What til you find out about the number of unoccupied houses in the USA. Zero chance anybody is getting rich solving homelessness so we ain't doing it.

[–] JasonDJ 1 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

I mean...you could really build rather modest dormitories outside of cities for not much money. Throw free bus rides into and out of the city (where jobs and social resources are) at it, and you've got not a solution, but a pretty damn good bandage to help people and families get (back) on their feet.

Hell, rent them on a sliding scale if so inclined. But the scale has to be $0 up until a decent income, like at least the first quintile.

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 day ago

That assumtion is an annual cost. Although doing it for one year only would still probably reduce the homeless numbers considerably.

https://www.sciotoanalysis.com/news/2024/1/16/what-would-it-cost-to-end-homelessness-in-america

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 day ago (9 children)

20 billion could house and feed our entire homeless population for twenty years. While that would not solve the problem, it would drastically improve their lives.

load more comments (9 replies)
[–] [email protected] 11 points 2 days ago (3 children)

Somehow I actually yearn for the days of robber barons. At least they found socially productive ways to build monuments to their own vanity. If Musk wants to spend $20 billion to build social housing in cities across the US, I'm not going to complain if he slaps his name on the buildings. At least Carnegie built libraries.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 days ago

It's because the modern day wealth disparity has no equivalent in human history, at least to my knowledge. Maybe slavery - but they were at least valuable enough to shelter and feed.

Elon Musk shows in this just how much worse he is than robber barons.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Where's the mental health care then? Oh, slashed to ribbons by the department of government "efficiency". Fancy that.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›