• Bennyboybumberchums@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    29
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 day ago

    should be cross posted with “fuck billionaires”. Musk could end homelessness in the US and UK, and still have more than half his current worth left. But corrupt politicians are still lining up to give him money.

    • boonhet@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      1 day ago

      Friendly reminder that there are far more unused homes in the US than homeless people

      • ChaosSpectre@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        15
        ·
        edit-2
        1 day ago

        Also a friendly reminder that if every US church were to house 2 homeless people, homelessness would be ended.

      • Bennyboybumberchums@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        1 day ago

        End homelessness = buy everyone a home.

        But the point was more about the fact that he could buy every single homeless person in two countries a house, and still have more than half his current wealth. In your desire to be contrarian, you miss the actual point.

        • eskimofry@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          No they think giving free houses to someone makes it unfair to them as they think they are the only ones with suffering in life and the “poors” deserve poverty as they don’t work as hard as them.

          I often wonder how miserable it must be to bear such ignorance, malice and unkind, distrustful thoughts in someone’s mind.

          • ricecake@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            1 day ago

            Well, they didn’t actually say that, it’s just a very common attitude. Given that they said “permanently end homelessness”, id imagine they meant closer to “cash can’t solve the structural issues that cause homelessness: if you give every homeless person a house, you’ll still have people falling through the cracks and ending up homeless”.

            If they weren’t saying that, then I am. Obviously a bandaid is better than the “fuck all” currently being done, but let’s not pretend that a billionaire can just fix societal level problems.

            • Jtotheb@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              1 day ago

              Agree on point #1, but on point #2 I lean toward “yes they can”. Billionaires’ constant PR campaigns that they conduct to avoid having their heads chopped off are what normalizes a society where people are okay with looking the other way when confronted with such unimaginable wealth disparities. There are limited resources, and the ones that are being hoarded are what will help. Obviously we the people have to do better, but intrinsic in the discussion of why we suck so much at helping one another is the fact that this culture was crafted and nurtured by the people it benefits.

              • ricecake@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                6 hours ago

                Hmm, that’s a good point. I’m not sure I’d entirely agree. I think the influence of individuals on the course of history is often exaggerated because it gives a greater sense of control to the affairs of the world.

                The theme of society not giving a damn about poor people goes on well before we had anything like the modern billionaire. People were building the notion that they must deserve it into their religion before then. I think people largely have a bias towards the notion of justice in the world, so if you’ve been treated unjustly you must have done something to deserve it, and vice versa.
                The people who have benefitted from the notion certainly have done what they can to resist the idea that we can be better, but protecting money is so much smaller than changing societal trends. Keeping yourself balanced on top of the crest of disfunction is trivial compared to changing the wave.

      • valek879@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 day ago

        Send like a cool thing to attempt.

        Like even if someone still wants to sleep outside, a safe place to store your shit so it stays dry seems pretty dope. A place you can show up to when the temperature drops and your shivering and just sleep at with no strings attached…

        Shelter is one of our basic needs, kind of like food and water… Seems like our basics shouldn’t be driven by profit.