Asklemmy

43757 readers

2316 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

Open-ended question
Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

Lemmyverse: community search
sub.rehab: maps old subreddits to fediverse options, marks official as such
!lemmy411@lemmy.ca: a community for finding communities

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

What would you do with 100 billion dollars to have the most positive impact on the largest number of people? (waveform.social)

submitted 1 year ago by CableP13@waveform.social to c/asklemmy@lemmy.ml

77 comments fedilink hide all child comments

My partner and I were discussing this over dinner, our ideas went from buying up land to finance organic farming and distributing it at the lowest price to crashing the financial system to "reset" everybody's bank account with no possible recovery. Any other ideas?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] blanketswithsmallpox@kbin.social 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

200,000,000,000 / 200,000 = 1 million homes.

There are about 140 million homes in the USA.

You have ~2.5 people per home in the USA.

You would essentially be able to buy everyone living in Chicago or Houston their own home per population.

Chicago, IL (Population: 2,670,406)
Houston, TX (Population: 2,378,146)

[–] housepanther@lemmy.goblackcat.com 5 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I think I would rather work with a builder for higher density housing simply because the money could be stretched further. We need to rethink the concept of housing and homes.

[–] Instigate@aussie.zone 1 points 1 year ago

I think you’ve touched on a great point as to how some of the money should be spent - finding the brightest people with the best ideas and adequately funding them. Yet another folly of most billionaires is that they think they have all the answers; if you’re able to eschew that idea then you can really get some serious bang for your buck by not going full-blown Elon with the Captain’s Calls.

[–] VediusPollio@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

Bet you could buy a lot of teepees with that money and increase the curb appeal of tent cities.