I’m surprised he chose to express his point in this manner. Unless this is an expression of humanity from Mr Musk that we’re so otherwise unaccustomed to that it’s hard to recognise, then I assume he wants to persuade people to have less empathy or sympathy for homeless people, not more. This statement, taken at face value would seem to suggest that contrary to what some may think, homeless people are facing significant challenges not of their own making that have contributed directly to their circumstances.
I’m going to guess that’s not how he meant it
Homeless: without a home.
Weird how he’s lying again. I’ve been there, and I can promise this fuckwit that not having a roof or food in the middle of winter in a city where the stoplights literally freeze is not some kind of illusion. That being prodded away from a public bench in sub-zero temperatures so you can shamble a few blocks whilst the sleep in your eyes freezes, over and over for weeks, so you can’t get more than an hour sleep at a time for months, isn’t the holiday he thinks it is.
Jesus christ, I bob my head to the surface for this? It’s like he’s not even trying to be relatable now.
Let’s say, for sake of argument, that Elon is correct. Should we not be helping people with severe mental illness?
He is a literal NAZI! So he wants mentaly ill to suffer for losing the gene lottery!
Wait weren’t they doing that already?
If not, where was all that money going?
Gonna need you to define “that” in "that money.” If you mean government programs, much of those were defunded back in the Reagan admin. While institutions back then did need broad changes, their removal without a suitable replacement vastly increased the homelessness issue.
You know, even if what he’s saying is half true. We HAD systems to help those mentally ill drug addicts and they got gutted. Making them, wait for it, Homeless! you prick.
Homelessness is never a lie. Beggars, however, do sometimes game the system trying to get easy money. They are not nor ever have been homeless
One of the talking points in South Africa goes like this:
The “homeless” black people that live in corrugated metal slums all have mansions that were stolen from white people and given to them by the government when apartheid ended.
They choose to live in slums to work in the cities, and go back to their mansions when they’re not working. Alternatively, they don’t live at their mansions because they are too lazy/dumb to actually take care of the property.Hahaha that’s gold. It’s kind of hard for me to accept anybody really believes that. Feels like some disingenuous conviction there or deliberately not examining the statement because they know on at least one level it’s too completely illogical to be true but then again there are some people who’ve had such serious distortions to their reasoning over time that they’re not even lying anymore when they claim to believe this stuff.
the US in total is a right-wing place that thinks that “hard work” is the way of life, and anybody who doesn’t adhere to that is a “drug-addict” or a psychopath.
Which is wildly ironic because billionaires don’t actually work.
*working and grifting
where grifting essentially means forcing your subordinates to work harder
Bet Elon he can’t beat homelessness with 19 billions.
Bro will do it just to prove you wrong
Also half of all homeless people are foster kids who aged out of the system. They don’t have a family to fall back on.
Not allowing billionaires to exist would end homelessness
tax the rich!
Says the homeless illegal.immigrant from a apartheid
take it from him
Wild claim, considering Musk is one of the most violent drug addicts who has ever lived.
I wonder what we should call a violent drug addict, convicted of inciting insurrection, living in housing paid for by the public ?
He is so fucking incoherent from all the ketamine it isn’t funny.
Elon spouts BS all the time, but $20 billion to end homelessness is some of the biggest bullshit I’ve ever heard.
You should have some sympathy for Musk, since apparently you also like to talk out of your ass without looking into it.
https://aah-inc.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/whomeless.pdf
I work serving the homeless. We spent $10 billion for one year during COVID just to include all of the students who didn’t already get free school meals to have it during that time. Unless you’re only providing cots and Porto-johns, that number might work as an annual figure, until inflation hits, or the numbers go up because once you offer free housing, more people will try to become eligible.
Sounds to me like you’re the one talking out your ass.
Then present your data. Hell, publish your data. If you know better than the experts at HUD, and can prove it, it should be quite the boon to your career.
But you’re not wrong that band-aids for systemic problems are much more expensive than solving them.
Most free housing doesnt allow drugs, which is the main problem homeless people have with living in them.
Then you have the general maintenance issues, fire risk, nimbyism. Is it really that simple?
You’re perpetuating capitalist propaganda. Most homeless people do not have a drug problem. At least half of homeless people in the US are employed.
It’s not a drug problem. It’s an unaffordable housing problem.
Ah, that could very well be true, we really printed a lot of money during Covid. In Canada the government is already buying 50% of all mortgage bonds, inflating the debt people can take in order to juice home prices.
These numbers are extremely unsubstantiated. If you think giving someone $40k will permanently save them from homelessness I have a bridge to sell you.
If you can provide six months of housing, food and support then a person could start earning for themselves. You don’t have to provide a lifetime of help for $40,000
Let’s see your study. What do you know that HUD experts don’t?
People also said you can’t solve homelessness by giving them homes, and Finland did it with ease.
For example, California spent over $24 billion over a period of five years and didn’t even make a dent.
Homelessness is not a simple problem you can just throw money at. People will consistently fall through the societal cracks.
Yes, California’s half-assed efforts have been rife with fraud and waste.
https://calmatters.org/housing/homelessness/2024/04/california-homelessness-spending
Similarly, it costs many billions more to fund our half-assed healthcare system than it would be to simply give people healthcare. Dealing with problems in a way that only attacks the symptoms is far more expensive and wasteful.
But it has been proven that guaranteeing housing is both cheaper and produces superior results.
https://pulitzercenter.org/stories/look-finlands-housing-first-initiative
@Confidant6198
“secular talk” is wrong here.Musk is an absolute psychopath without any empathy. He doesn’t need any excuse to sleep at night knowing all the harm he did to the world.
By destroying USAID, this devil just threw millions of people into starvation.
I’d say destroying USAID is the one good thing they did. Long term mind you. I won’t deny the short term effects of such an instant cutoff to these programs.
But USAID is primarily used to disrupt the economic systems of nations that the US exploits for cheap labor.
I’d quote the revolutionary Thomas Sankara
Those who come with wheat, millet, corn or milk, they are not helping us. Those who really want to help us can give us ploughs, tractors, fertilizers, insecticides, watering cans, drills and dams. That is how we would define food aid.
The US primarily uses its food aid to disrupt these nations from being self sustainable and force their industry into a single crop that is most beneficial for US capitalist to export.
So, while the shorterm is bad. The disconnection of these exploitative relationships are good.
Obviously it would be better if these programs were slowly removed. But continuing them for the next 4 years would be worse then ending them drastically.
Also, mind you, I don’t think Trump even realizes why these programs exist to benefit the US exploitation of the third world. I think he sees them simply as “foreign aid”. So his own ignorance of them actually ends up destroying an important part of US Imperialism by mistake.
Removing the exploitative relationships that the US has with third world countries in the form of “foreign aid” is good. It’s just that (1) Trump actually thinks these benefit these nations. Which they do not. And (2) the well intentioned liberals thinks the same as Trump does. So we end up with this weird state where both are wrong but the policy is actually good long term.
Again, there will absolutely be problems as these dependencies are cut of so quickly. But no more than the continued exploitation in the long term would result in.
What do you know that HUD doesn’t?
https://aah-inc.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/whomeless.pdf
Read the rest of the comment. They weren’t talking about the $20bn number being wrong.
Right, it was mostly irrelevant. Also a person who doesn’t understand the role of USAID.
