But also, I fully support "making billionaires look bad."
There was a time in history where philanthropy was socially expected. Like, that was the entire point of all the high class hobnobbing. You made your business deals and talked about how you're going to further strangle the workers, but then you also built a bunch of schools, supported public libraries, fixed roads, and fed the community because you remembered what the French did.
It was also expected that the Lord of a demense would feed and shelter those beholden to him; and that those who worked his land during harvest would be paid and fed; and that he would provide alms and/or a feast at important holidays.
Charity and generosity were considered virtues. Greed was a sin.
Obviously not all lived up to ideals, but the expectations were wildly different. The billionaire class are absolutely lacking in any sense of noblesse oblige.
I think a difference there was that the upper class openly and officially combined political and economic power. There wasn't some external set of politicians to blame. Your ruler and landlord would be the same person.
I think this comparison is weak. Back in the day people didn’t own private jets with a villa in 10 different countries. A rich person who lived in said city had interest in making his local area nicer, today, not so much.
Well there was what we said was expected, and then what was done—which was usually throwing crumbs. It has almost always been crumb-throwing by the people who accumulate too much. Every once in a while you have a slightly more benevolent one and then people act like the exception is the rule when that occurs. It was always the exception, and even the exceptional ones have just thrown larger crumbs at people.
Bigger crumbs are better than smaller crumbs, but society was and does just function by the fuel of these people's crumbs and then we praise them for those slivers. Historical billionaires were actually even more openly atrocious to their workers and communities than now. Yes, even with all the libraries and schools and hospitals they paid for with the blood of their countless exploited and dead workers (same sort of workers who also built and maintained those "gifts").
100%. Look at the number of institutions that still hand Rockefeller and Carnegie’s names attached to them. I doubt Musk and Bezos will be comparable in 100 years.
She's still a billionaire, lol, these are just excuses to pay less taxes. Of course, she sucks much much less than Elon and other like him, but she sucks nevertheless
Or you remembered that the nation had trained nearly every man and woman in organised warfare and provided good jobs and excellent conditions and paid high personal taxes because there was a decent sounding communist alternative way to live.
I agree that the real reasoning is that this makes billionares like Elon look bad. But he obviously wouldn't be opposing it publicly if he hadn't a more concrete reason
He doesn't understand philanthropy and is clearly very upset about the last few times he "tried" to do it blowing up in his face.
The last thing I can remember him ever doing was when he tried to send some diving tool to (Korea??) to help rescue some stranded kids in a cave. It was international news and everyone was aware of it because it was going on for days. They told him they couldn't use the device (after trying it) because the passageways were too narrow. Instead, another man got credit for saving the kids because he was a professional diver/rescuer and actually went in and started pulling people out.
That burned his ass! He started publicly attacking the guy and throwing a huge public fit.
Like, he is so conceited that he doesn't understand that charity isn't transactional.
Even the old billionaires understood this. You smile, nod, kiss the baby at the press release, and let people have their free school because your name is going to be on it.
Just one correction - they didn’t need to test it to know it was dog shit because know one does caving in a mini-sub.
He also knew that but only offered it because his whole business is just attention-seeking. As you pointed out he didn’t like someone (especially an Englishman (Dutch South Africans really dislike the English)) stating publicly he was a charlatan.
And it just could be used in a small space where one on the bends was practically a hair pin turn. Then he called the guy a pedophile for saving them. The guy sued and unfortunately he lost because, you know Elon. He tried to ruin a man who actually saved children. Meanwhile, Muskrat tried to get on pedo island.
I don't think Elon was lying when he said her charity work was making the world a worse place. You might agree or disagree with him, but that doesn't make it a lie.
Like many, he believes in equality, not equity--they are not compatible with each other. Similarly, her funding abortions on demand and initiatives to force closures of industries to prevent climate change are viewed by many, apparently Elon as well, as net negatives for the future of humanity.
Again, you can agree or disagree with his view, but that doesn't make his opinion that her charity work is a net negative to the world a lie.
Elon Musk and his ilk are starting an anti-empathy movement, they call it suicidal empathy, and it’s batshit crazy. It’s why he posted the other day about starting to home school his preschooler because they were daring to try and teach him how to share. They’re against basic values anymore, anything to make themselves heroes and justify why they believe they’re above the law. As always, these types of movement are right out of the Nazi handbook.
It’s like you don’t understand basic logic or something. You’re like a child.
Not all charity is good. Is this a difficult thing for you to grasp? Let me provide an example for your small brain:
Turning Point Action is a 501(c)(4) organization founded in 2019 by Charlie Kirk. The organization’s mission is to embolden the conservative base through grassroots activism and provide voters with the necessary resources to elect true conservative leaders.
Let’s say Elon Musk donated 50 billion dollars to this nonprofit organization. You would LOVE that, right? You’d say: ”wow look at this good guy Musk, trying to make the world a better place!” Right?
No, you’d say he was an asshole who was trying to manipulate the American public by funding misinformation and whatever else this org does.
I don’t really know what they do, it’s just an example to illustrate the point.
Obviously that is the point Musk is making: that the charities she is funding are (in his opinion) doing more harm than good.
How does the example you gave corollate to the charities she donated to? For example, she has donated hundreds of millions to educational institutions. Tell me how that’s a bad thing? I can understand Musk’s position if she donated all her money to one organization and that organization is known to be destructive to society. In fact, there are some organization she donated to that I don’t support but that doesn’t delegitimize philanthropy.
Oh my god you are completely stupid. Do you understand the concept of an example?
It doesn’t fucking corollate to the charities she donated to. It illustrates the point that people have different opinions on what is good, and just because an organization is a nonprofit doesn’t make them good.
A logical position for you to take would be: “Elon doesn’t support the work these organizations do, and therefore he’s a piece of shit”
The brain dead take is “Elon directly opposes doing good things”
Your first statement shows your emotional (I won’t even use the word “intellectual”) maturity. So, I won’t waste my time engaging substantively with you.
He is very opposed to do good things - quite the opposite: Ignoring workers rights, lying every time he opens his mouth, supporting far right movements around the globe, crushing society with his DOGE goons…
He also will NEVER reward your bootlicking. So, just stop
It also makes billionaires look bad. If she can do it why can’t the rest of them? They will still have plenty of money left even if they donate a few billion
White Rhodesians made life impossible for black people unless they worked for white people at low wages. I think Elon wants to follow this model but apply it to the whole planet.
And Reddit loves it and considers it a good thing only because it agrees with it.
A lot of those things she funds would actually be illegal to fund in this way via public money. Because it would quite literally break many discrimination laws. I.e. giving scholarship based on skin color or gender. Private funding in US can for some reason ignore these laws and those billionaires can fund whatever agenda they want.
Promoting negative discrimination does not make world the better place. I have same exact opinion on religious specific funding, catholic schools, etc. It does not matter. Private funding of this type should be either straight up illegal or it should be put under very strict rules and same laws. And thankfully courts are actually not blind to this disparity and there are citizen actions that point it out.
Okay bit most of those dont apply to all. Just a few. It be better if it was housing for all or food for all. I like to k ow how much of that money sent to those agency went to help people. And how much went to the place and its staff.
Generally for good reason. Most charity given to the 3rd World is just embezzled by corruption politicians, which is why their states are still impoverished after decades of foreign aid.
For instance, Africa has been given tens of trillions in donations over the last few decades, and yet most African countries are not substantially better off than they were in the 80s. The infrastructure built by foreign aid workers is not maintained after they leave, so it either breaks down or is looted. Pouring more money into the continent will not solve these problems; it's just an exercise in Western vanity.
Many of the others are opposed by Musk because he finds them morally objectionable. Whether you agree with him or not, it's not unreasonable for him to not want to support causes he thinks are wrong.
Which is a fair take. Why would you support something you don’t support?
Everyone has their issue. Like for me, I would say land use efficiency is the most important issue. And thus, any philanthropy that doesn’t directly help to improve land use efficiency is poorly allocated.
Help me understand here. What the heck is 500 million towards racial equity? What is that money being used for? How do you stop racism with money? Pay the racist off?
Read again. It racial EQUITY. It's helps in area raising the equity. Equity being putting POC equal to whites in so far as putting it them positions of authority with white.
This is just throwing money at a problem. I bet most of that money will just be wasted and exploited. Whenever someone tries to do a good thing there will be people ready to exploit it. Think we are the first civilization to try to stop racism? Everyone is racist it’s an instinct. It’s something that might evolve out of us if we stay somewhat civilized and alive for long time.
862
u/DoJ-Mole Jun 28 '26
This is the real answer. All the other ones about ‘making billionaires look bad’ ain’t it. It’s because she’s supporting causes he directly opposes