Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame
44B is bigger than the GDP of some small countries.
Imagine what that could have done to help a cause in this world rather than buy a bird app.
|
This is a fundamental misunderstanding of large financial transactions though. It's not like 44B dollars just appeared to be spent on programs. Musk likely barely went out of pocket on this, the majority is probably leverage financed off of other assets he owns. So musk didn't really buy Twitter, more like he put his name on as front man for a syndicate of banks who bought twitter and said he would pay them back if it goes sour. Individual shareholders profited from this and maybe you could say they should all donate a specific amount of those profits to a noble cause.
It's not the same as trying to throw 6B at global hunger, when there's no infrastructure set up at all to accommodate that spending. Yes, there are more important things on earth than Twitter, and global resources are certainly outlayed in strange ways, but I hate nitpicking about this transaction using the idea that the money could be better served. Yeah, lots of money on earth could be better served. Why doesn't the US government divert 6B of yearly military spending?