EPTUS Politics Mega-thread - Page 5841
| Forum Index > General Forum |
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets. Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source. If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread | ||
|
LightSpectra
United States3410 Posts
| ||
|
oBlade
United States6623 Posts
On July 07 2026 18:48 KwarK wrote: Elon famously offered to end world hunger if the UN World Food Program could say exactly how they’d spend the money and what the impact would be. After they produced a plan meeting his criteria not only did he not give them the $6b he said he would, he spent the money on political influence to take funding away from them. You are correct, he famously offered that. Meaning this is not the first time anyone but you has heard of that story. Meaning the honest among us already knew it turns out you can't "END WORLD HUNGER" for $6 billion. The US$6.6 billion required would help those in most need in the following way: one meal a day, the basic needed to survive – costing US$0.43 per person per day, averaged out across the 43 countries. This would feed 42 million people for one year, and avert the risk of famine. You can feed some people for a year. That's great. Someone should do it. Which Musk must do as he's the only person or entity in the world with access to the colossal sum of $6b, right? Oh. Poor Oprah could only "solve" half of world hunger. On July 07 2026 18:13 Jankisa wrote: No, he ballpark cost to save one person’s life through the global health programs funded by Bill Gates typically ranges from $118 to about $4,500. Him and his ex wife, over the 30 + years of philanthropy (actual philanthropy, not giving a few billion to your foundations) saved estimated 150 million people. Most of Musk's philanthropy is transferring Tesla stocks to his own foundation that doesn't spend it. If we extrapolated how wildly rich he is, if he was a normal human being with empathy, the opportunity cost of him being just like you, a heartless fascist is much more then the 150 million lost lives, especially since he actively killed hundreds of thousands by gutting USAID programs for no reason, which will cause more deaths down the line. Combined with him not even trying to pretend to care about people and donate to maximize impact on humanity he's one of the most malicious humans put on earth. Yeah... most of Gates' philanthropy goes through the Gates Foundation which curiously seems to focus on causes that Gates cares about. For billionaires their philanthropy might not revolve around giving away money randomly, even if you wish they would. | ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States46579 Posts
On July 07 2026 20:16 oBlade wrote: Yeah... most of Gates' philanthropy goes through the Gates Foundation which curiously seems to focus on causes that Gates cares about. For billionaires their philanthropy might not revolve around giving away money randomly, even if you wish they would. Uh yeah... causes like nutrition, sanitation, poverty, healthcare, education, and safety all around the world. Bill Gates is far from perfect, but it's a ludicrous whataboutism to try and redirect blame at the Gates Foundation when we're talking about how Elon Musk not only isn't charitable, but has actively undermined assistance (is "anti-charitable" a word? Musk and Trump have undone progress and reversed much needed help). You're 0 for 2 now with your red herrings (first Oprah Winfrey, then Bill Gates). | ||
|
Jankisa
Croatia1842 Posts
"He cares about children not dying horrible deaths, fuck that guy! Instead, he should donate $250 million to my favorite fascist so he can let me live out my fantasies of seeing brown people suffer!" I miss the days when billionaires still mostly pretended like they were not monsters, because of oBlade and people like him, they figured out that there are millions of easily manipulated morons who enjoy suffering of others, so most of them are just mask off ever since Trump got elected again. On July 07 2026 20:16 oBlade wrote: You can feed some people for a year. That's great. Someone should do it. Which Musk must do as he's the only person or entity in the world with access to the colossal sum of $6b, right? Oh. Poor Oprah could only "solve" half of world hunger. As of July 2026, a sum of $6 billion represents roughly 0.6% of Elon Musk's total wealth, whereas it represents about 176% of Oprah Winfrey's total fortune. Oprah, who I actively dislike, still gave roughly 15 % of her net worth over the years to charity, Musk is well below 1 %. | ||
|
oBlade
United States6623 Posts
On July 07 2026 20:04 Biff The Understudy wrote: US aids budget was 20-40 billions per year and was saving hundreds of thousands of lives a year. The little war in Iran from the twat you voted for has costed more than 100 billions dollars for the net result of strengthening the grip of the regime and fucking the world economy up. The world economy seems roughly the same as half a year ago to me. Otherwise I'm all for making war cheaper and cutting the MIC out of profiteering, with you there. On July 07 2026 20:04 Biff The Understudy wrote: Your grand children will already suffer the consequences of your deplorable choices enough that you don’t have to worry about the fraction of the us budget that was spelt on saving people from disease and starvation. I'd rather my grandchildren not live in a world with people getting nuked. On July 07 2026 20:04 Biff The Understudy wrote: Elon does jack shit philanthropy. There is no Musk foundation building hospitals, fighting tropical diseases or helping with education for the poorest people. I just searched and found he donated $55 million to children's hospitals in one go? You can certainly come back and contribute "That doesn't count, that's nothing," the point is you need to know what you're talking about first instead of blurting out patently false stuff like oh he's never done anything. On July 07 2026 20:04 Biff The Understudy wrote: I live and pay my taxes in Norway, and we spend proportionally far more than you guys ever did in international aid. And no one i know here is enough of a twat to lament that their grand children tax money is spent saving African kids from aids and malaria. Congratulations. You know the first reason nobody in Norway worries about how their grandchildren's tax dollars are being spent? Norway has a surplus. The US doesn't. Duh. If you don't even know how borrowing money works, what are you doing talking about US budgets at all. I mean this seriously. The world does not run on your vibes. You seem to have missed an entire political theme that motivates the people you disagree with. That's weird because it's not complicated or esoteric. Constantly shitting on the US while thinking everything is both our fault AND our job is contradictory. You should in fact be SO proud of your per capita charitable humanitarian foreign aid that you should be chomping at the bit at the opportunity to help make up for USAID in these difficult times, in accordance with the national virtues of Norway. But more fascinatingly to me, if nobody in Norway minds their tax dollars being spent that way, it shouldn't have to be tax dollars being spent that way to begin with, should it? Just donate. On the other side of the ocean, when the US Constitution says "promote the general welfare" it's assumed to mean "of the US" at least as a priority. On July 07 2026 20:32 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: Uh yeah... causes like nutrition, sanitation, poverty, healthcare, education, and safety all around the world. Bill Gates is far from perfect, but it's a ludicrous whataboutism to try and redirect blame at the Gates Foundation when we're talking about how Elon Musk not only isn't charitable, but has actively undermined assistance (is "anti-charitable" a word? Musk and Trump have undone progress and reversed much needed help). You're 0 for 2 now with your red herrings (first Oprah Winfrey, then Bill Gates). I never attacked the Gates Foundation. I am saying that you have to attack Gates. It's different. The US government is not an infinite money glitch. 75 million people voted for this. You cannot spend something forever just because it was spent once so that makes it the status quo. The money is not there. But the money IS literally somewhere else. Gates Foundation saved 150 gajillion people? Okay. How much has its spent in its history? $80 billion? What is the net worth of Bill Gates? $100 billion. Look. The money is right there. *points* 150 gajillion more lives are savable. You want money to be spent on something, the easiest way is do it with your own money or someone who has the money and wants to do it. Not compel someone else. | ||
|
Jankisa
Croatia1842 Posts
Not a beep as Trump adds trillions to debt, no issues with him trying to use the federal government to pay out violent rioters, no problems with pardoning criminals and letting them off the hook for more then $200 million so far. Speaking of Elon, the same POS who promised that his Doge ghouls will reduce deficit and shrink the Federal government budget by a trillion, ended up being more like between $1-7 billion . But none of those facts and figure matter, what matters is that oBlade gets to watch children and brown people suffer, because that's what gets him going. Onus on saving the federal budget is on the people who are actively making it worse. Onus on helping save lives in Africa is on people who have the means to, much more then a random person who, in most cases, already spends more of their net worth then an average billionaire on charitable causes. I understand that this last point is not something that oBlade can understand, but it's still worth mentioning. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States24418 Posts
On July 07 2026 20:39 Jankisa wrote: Isn't it amazing how this guy completely ignores the exact and palpable numbers of hundred and fifty million people who are alive as a direct result of Gates foundation only to once again do his "He cares about children not dying horrible deaths, fuck that guy! Instead, he should donate $250 million to my favorite fascist so he can let me live out my fantasies of seeing brown people suffer!" I miss the days when billionaires still mostly pretended like they were not monsters, because of oBlade and people like him, they figured out that there are millions of easily manipulated morons who enjoy suffering of others, so most of them are just mask off ever since Trump got elected again. On July 07 2026 20:16 oBlade wrote: You can feed some people for a year. That's great. Someone should do it. Which Musk must do as he's the only person or entity in the world with access to the colossal sum of $6b, right? Oh. Poor Oprah could only "solve" half of world hunger. As of July 2026, a sum of $6 billion represents roughly 0.6% of Elon Musk's total wealth, whereas it represents about 176% of Oprah Winfrey's total fortune. Oprah, who I actively dislike, still gave roughly 15 % of her net worth over the years to charity, Musk is well below 1 %. Can we not use that word like that here please? EDIT: Much appreciated. | ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States46579 Posts
On July 07 2026 20:44 oBlade wrote: I'd rather my grandchildren not live in a world with people getting nuked. What a weird thing to say, given how MAGA you are. Obligatory reminder that Trump has made the world significantly more dangerous and significantly more likely to eventually experience nuclear warfare, due to what he's done (and undone) throughout both of his presidential terms. Do you want your grandchildren to be healthier and better educated and wealthier too? Because none of those align with your champion either. | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland27464 Posts
On July 07 2026 18:48 KwarK wrote: Elon famously offered to end world hunger if the UN World Food Program could say exactly how they’d spend the money and what the impact would be. After they produced a plan meeting his criteria not only did he not give them the $6b he said he would, he spent the money on political influence to take funding away from them. How that didn’t convince the relative fence sitters that Musk was absolutely full of it is beyond me. I mean I get why it didn’t shift his rather strange fanboys and fangirls, but he got called out on a claim, and given the choice to put up or shut up he did neither. | ||
|
oBlade
United States6623 Posts
On July 07 2026 20:54 Jankisa wrote: Oh, look, the oBlade who pretends to care about deficits and spending is back, after spending months cheering on insane budgets and inflationary spending, curious. Not a beep as Trump adds trillions to debt, no issues with him trying to use the federal government to pay out violent rioters, no problems with pardoning criminals and letting them off the hook for more then $200 million so far. Speaking of Elon, the same POS who promised that his Doge ghouls will reduce deficit and shrink the Federal government budget by a trillion, ended up being more like between $1-7 billion . But none of those facts and figure matter, what matters is that oBlade gets to watch children and brown people suffer, because that's what gets him going. Onus on saving the federal budget is on the people who are actively making it worse. Yeah I've never cheered on insane budgets. At some point, when you get spare time, read Article I of the Constitution. Just for fun. On July 07 2026 20:54 Jankisa wrote: Onus on helping save lives in Africa is on people who have the means to, much more then a random person who, in most cases, already spends more of their net worth then an average billionaire on charitable causes. I understand that this last point is not something that oBlade can understand, but it's still worth mentioning. In America we call such a "random person" a "taxpayer." On July 07 2026 21:01 DarkPlasmaBall wrote: What a weird thing to say, given how MAGA you are. Obligatory reminder that Trump has made the world significantly more dangerous and significantly more likely to eventually experience nuclear warfare, due to what he's done (and undone) throughout both of his presidential terms. Do you want your grandchildren to be healthier and better educated and wealthier too? Because none of those align with your champion either. Who do you think is more likely to nuke who now? | ||
|
Jankisa
Croatia1842 Posts
Also, it's funny how you will spend so much time and energy arguing if charitable giving and helping other countries is good, but again completely ignore all the ways that people like Trump and Musk use the goverment to enrich themselves. I mean the main thing DOGE did was stop a bunch of investigations into Musk's companies, but that doesn't concern oBlade. Also, very unconcerned about goverment dishing out $30 + billion in subsidies to his companies enabling him to become incredibly rich. Finally, dude, no one believes this stupid "we had to go otherwise nuke", no one, you can stop this, no one thinks you are stupid enough to believe this shit. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States24418 Posts
On July 07 2026 21:16 Jankisa wrote: Sure GH, since that word is more problematic then dead children I edited it out. + Show Spoiler + Also, it's funny how you will spend so much time and energyarguing if charitable giving and helping other countries is good, but again completely ignore all the ways that people like Trump and Musk use the goverment to enrich themselves. I mean the main thing DOGE did was stop a bunch of investigations into Musk's companies, but that doesn't concern oBlade. Also, very unconcerned about goverment dishing out $30 + billion in subsidies to his companies enabling him to become incredibly rich. Finally, dude, no one believes this stupid "we had to go otherwise nuke", no one, you can stop this, no one thinks you are stupid enough to believe this shit *sigh* That's why I thanked you... I can see how my polite request for you not to use an offensive slur totally means I believe it's more problematic than dead children. /s oBlade has your brain scrambled. You know better than to engage with that nonsense. | ||
|
oBlade
United States6623 Posts
On July 07 2026 21:16 Jankisa wrote: Sure GH, since that word is more problematic then dead children I edited it out. Also, it's funny how you will spend so much time and energy arguing if charitable giving and helping other countries is good, but again completely ignore all the ways that people like Trump and Musk use the goverment to enrich themselves. I mean the main thing DOGE did was stop a bunch of investigations into Musk's companies, but that doesn't concern oBlade. Also, very unconcerned about goverment dishing out $30 + billion in subsidies to his companies enabling him to become incredibly rich. By the broad pejorative "subsidies," do you mean contracts? Where the government is a customer that buys something? Or the EV tax credits for consumers Bush and Obama and California made? Because if that's how you look at things every drug bought above cost by USAID is probably a pharma subsidy. On July 07 2026 21:16 Jankisa wrote: Finally, dude, no one believes this stupid "we had to go otherwise nuke", no one, you can stop this, no one thinks you are stupid enough to believe this shit. You are on a website dedicated to esports which originated in South Korea and you think it's impossible for someone to actually believe that if you don't stop someone who wants to get a nuke, from getting a nuke, that they will get a nuke. Think about this for two seconds. | ||
|
Velr
Switzerland10978 Posts
On July 07 2026 21:38 oBlade wrote: You are on a website dedicated to esports which originated in South Korea and you think it's impossible for someone to actually believe that if you don't stop someone who wants to get a nuke, from getting a nuke, that they will get a nuke. Think about this for two seconds. If only we didn't know from 100% accurate and thrustworthy sources that the Iranian Nuclear Program was allready obliterated last year. | ||
|
Razyda
1088 Posts
| ||
|
Velr
Switzerland10978 Posts
| ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States46579 Posts
On July 07 2026 22:18 Razyda wrote: I am with oBlade on this one. Helping someone and then stopping help is nowhere close to murder, idea is deranged. If I give homeless guy a tenner and then on the next day pass the same guy and not give him a tenner, it is not that i started starving him to death. Just lol. That's not what Musk and his DOGE program did. Just the second part ("stopping help"). | ||
|
Billyboy
2605 Posts
| ||
|
Jankisa
Croatia1842 Posts
I'm even more shocked that language police GH is siding with actual fascist who love cutting off aid from starving children because they are arguing with people who hurt their feelings. oBlade comparing Bush admin who was hunting for imaginary nukes in Iraq under similar pretenses that they are doing in Iran now and was thus too busy to prevent Kim dynasty from getting their own in order to "make a point" is absolutely hilarious. This episode has sent a huge signal to the whole world that the only way to be safe is to have nukes, it made it more likely, rather then less that Iran and any other country gets one, there are no serious geopolitical analyst or military analysts who think otherwise, but oBlade would much rather take the word of his daddy Trump and his daddy Bibi then use his brain for a change. | ||
|
WombaT
Northern Ireland27464 Posts
On July 07 2026 22:30 Jankisa wrote: I'm shocked that Razyda "all socialists should be killed" is on the side of "let people die from preventable diseases so Musk can add another 0 to his net worth". I'm even more shocked that language police GH is siding with actual fascist who love cutting off aid from starving children because they are arguing with people who hurt their feelings. oBlade comparing Bush admin who was hunting for imaginary nukes in Iraq under similar pretenses that they are doing in Iran now and was thus too busy to prevent Kim dynasty from getting their own in order to "make a point" is absolutely hilarious. This episode has sent a huge signal to the whole world that the only way to be safe is to have nukes, it made it more likely, rather then less that Iran and any other country gets one, there are no serious geopolitical analyst or military analysts who think otherwise, but oBlade would much rather take the word of his daddy Trump and his daddy Bibi then use his brain for a change. Did Razyda actually express that sentiment? If so I must have missed it, but just to clarify. | ||
| ||
