upvote
Maybe. I don't think we yet have a good understanding of how many deaths he will have caused as a result of DOGE so abruptly cutting off assistance to so many vulnerable people around the world, but I've heard estimates hover around 600,000.

Assuming that number turns out to be close to reality, how do you weigh so many unnecessary deaths against VTL rockets and the electric cars?

Perhaps a practitioner of Effective Altruism could better answer that question.

reply
I have FIRST-HAND seen corruption around USAID-style "assistance" back home. I fully support that work of his.
reply
I've seen corruption in the police. Government. Hospitals. Do you support immediately shuttering those offices with no replacements?
reply
deleted
reply
They could at least just get funded by their own government.
reply
There is corruption everywhere. But do you deny that these organizations by-and-large provided aid and therefore saves the lives of folks who may have otherwise died from illness?

This doesn't make corruption OK. But he tore out a lifeline for some people without giving them an alternative way to get aid.

reply
YES. I DENY THAT! USAID is a curse on my homeland. It lured the hopeful but never delivered.

In my 30+ years of life I have not seen a single successful project that either: wasn't a facade, or didn't benefit the ruling class only.

reply
> I don't think we yet have a good understanding of how many deaths he will have caused as a result of DOGE so abruptly cutting off assistance to so many vulnerable people around the world

Nor how many deaths will be caused by his support for far right parties across Europe, when they start ethnic cleansings.

reply
deleted
reply
>of how many deaths he will have caused as a result of DOGE so abruptly cutting off assistance to so many vulnerable people around the world

The US taxpayer has no moral obligation to send welfare "around the world". If you personally find this frustrating, you're welcome to donate that money yourself, directly. No one will stop you. If the world wishes to partake in the benefits of the American government, it should apply for statehood.

reply
> The US taxpayer has no moral obligation to send welfare "around the world".

Sure. It's a transactional purchase of stability and goodwill, via which the US has benefited enormously.

reply
Correct. But also, it's a bandaid (and a really ineffective one ie. 99% lossy) on real issues of that world.
reply
> The US taxpayer has no moral obligation to send welfare "around the world".

I mean, by way of the atrocities we've committed around the world, we kinda do.

Even if we buy your thesis, foregoing morals, geopolitics, and history, it's a useful soft power strategy...

I'm not saying fund USAID before healthcare for all in america. I'm saying of all the insane things our government wastes money on, USAID was far down on the list of most egregious.

reply
Even if his total contribution is positive, his current contribution is quite bad. And most of that bad has been tied directly to x.
reply
I can atleast still voice against Israeli genocide there. I am good for now.
reply
How many people do you think see those tweets, how many minds do you think you have changed, and at what mental cost to yourself?
reply
I see other's tweets. I don't think most are being shadowbanned. I am doing fine myself and pretty productive actually.
reply
What's the point of these questions? Seems like, "what's the point of dissent if the cards are stacked against you?"
reply
He was begging to go party with someone that spent time in prison for child exploitation.

That in itself should make you hate the dude.

reply
Yup. Hate him as person. But he is still net positive with his scientific/engineering contributions, is he not?

Wasn't Edison an asshole?

reply
Dunno, I'd rather have unabused kids than the technological breakthroughs he has contributed to. Anyone being giddy to meet with a convicted pedo is very sus in my books, and deserves no respect, regardless of their prior contributions.

Children were exploited, and we're doing this net positive analysis on whether he should face the scorn. I'm not having a go at you - it's just frustrating to see very little happening after so much has been exposed, and I think part of it comes from this mindset - 'oh he's a good guy, this is a mistake/misstep' while people that were exploited as children can't even get their justice.

It's sickening.

reply
> I'd rather have unabused kids than the technological breakthroughs he has contributed to

I'd rather have both. Hawthorne doesn't get nuked if Elon Musk goes to jail.

> Children were exploited

Abuse. Exploitation. CSAM. We're mushing words.

Child rape. These men raped children. Others not only stayed silent in full knowledge of it, but supported it directly and indirectly. More than that, they arrogantly assumed–and, by remaining in the United States, continue to assume–that they're going to get away with it.

Which category is Elon Musk in? We don't know. Most of the people in the Epstein files are innocent. But almost all of them seem to have been fine with (a) partying with an indicted and unrepentant pedophile [1] and (b) not saying for decades–and again, today–anything to the cops about a hive of child rape.

A lot of them should go to jail. All of them should be investigated. And almost all of them need to be retired from public life.

[1] https://web.archive.org/web/20220224113217/https://www.theda...

reply
Is there any evidence that Epstein was a pedophile?
reply
Direct? No. That he was indicted for it? Yes [1].

(Clarification: I’m using the term colloquially. Whether Epstein had a mental condition is unclear.)

[1] https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/press-release/file/1180481...

reply
Unless I missed something, that's not pedophilia.
reply
How so?
reply
nasa is fucked up. spacex is US’s only shot.
reply
[flagged]
reply