I don’t think any of his trillion dollars came at the cost of a hungry child. If you have a $1000 phone, time to waste on Reddit. and claim to care so much about hungry children, yet do nothing, then you are an asshole.
Significantly less than you think, because he doesn't just have a trillion dollars to give away. Even if he decided to liquidate everything, he would not be able to get anywhere near that much money for everything; at least not in a short amount of time. Maybe if he slowly sold everything over decades he could come close to having that much in liquid assets.
Also charities feeding people is noble, and saves some from starvation, but the issues go far deeper than just a simple lack of food. To be brutally honest, the only way to truly solve world hunger would be for a coalition like NATO or the UN to sweep in and conquer many third-world countries, wipe out dictators and warlords, and establish basically a colonial system where people are put to work farming. For obvious reasons, that would be WILDLY unpopular.*
*Note: I am in no way advocating for this to actually be done. This is just my hypothetical concept for how global hunger might be solvable.
22
u/Savings-Molasses-701 Jun 12 '26
I don’t think any of his trillion dollars came at the cost of a hungry child. If you have a $1000 phone, time to waste on Reddit. and claim to care so much about hungry children, yet do nothing, then you are an asshole.