If one were asked to describe eccentric billionaire Elon Musk in a few words, not many would resort to likening him to “squeezing, wrenching, grasping, scraping, clutching, covetous old sinner” Ebenezer Scrooge. Unlike the Dickensian anti-hero, Musk’s businesses are far removed from a Cornhill warehouse. Yet, just like Scrooge, Musk is a “man of good credit”—which may have just landed him in hot water.
In an interview with CNN’s Connect the World programme, David Beasley, executive director of the United Nations World Food Programme, urged billionaires to “step up now, on a one-time basis”. His overture was clear: if billionaires donated an insignificant percentage of their wealth as a lump sum they could effectively counter world hunger. Citing specifically Jeff Bezos and Elon Musk, Beasley doubled down on the latter, spelling out that: “$6 billion to help 42 million people that are literally going to die if we don’t reach them”, adding, “it’s not that complicated”.
Musk was quick to respond on Twitter in a thread directed at the World Food Programme. In a series of tweets, Musk declared that “if WFP can describe on this Twitter thread exactly how $6B will solve world hunger, I will sell Tesla stock right now and do it”. His only caveat? “But it must be open source accounting, so the public sees precisely how the money is spent”. In the same Twitter thread, a user echoed the sentiment that the public often does not trust organisations such as the WFP because of the lack of visible outcomes. The user tweeted, “The public will see that most of the money is wasted on bureaucracy and incompetence”.
According to the latest Bloomberg Billionaires Index reporting, Elon Musk is currently worth more than American oil giant ExxonMobil, with a total net worth of $311 billion. Following the WFP’s logic, Musk could solve world hunger by donating less than 2% of his total net worth.
Beasley took to Twitter to explain how his words had been taken out of context in global headlines. The head of the World Food Programme tweeted in response that, “$6B will not solve world hunger, but it WILL prevent geopolitical instability, mass migration and save 42 million people on the brink of starvation. An unprecedented crisis and a perfect storm due to Covid/conflict/climate crises”.
Beasley’s punchy alliteration unwittingly cites a recent report published by the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. The report identifies a series of devastating outcomes, showing how climate change will exacerbate mass migration, political instability and starvation. The former Republican governor turned NGO executive may also have been echoing recent accusations levelled at Musk and Bezos that billionaires should focus on solving problems on Earth rather than exploring space.
Whatever the case may be, addressing global hunger should remain a paramount policy agenda for global leaders, until it is solved. As certain parts of the world are at the desperate stage of “knocking on famine’s door”, the focus on solving it may increasingly be laid on the doorsteps of the world’s billionaires.
