OV9

Remember kids, money's not real, and stock and shares? An order of magnitude moreso.

Be interesting to see how many retail investors have been burnt.

Oh, also, he's finally gonna get himself on one of those lists of notable people.
Sauce:
https://www.thelancet.com/article/S0140 ... 9/fulltext

The microsimulation models (table 3) indicated that, in 2025, reductions in USAID funding per capita would result in approximately 1 776 539 (95% uncertainty interval 967 604–2 496 308) all-age deaths and 689 900 (436 368–911 004) deaths in children younger than 5 years. Over the remainder of the period, the complete defunding of USAID would cause an estimated 2 450 000 all-age deaths annually, leading to a total of 14 051 750 (8 475 990–19 662 191) excess all-age deaths and 4 537 157 (3 124 796–5 910 791) excess under-five deaths by 2030.

DeskJockey wrote: Thu Jun 25, 2026 7:17 pm Be interesting to see how many retail investors have been burnt.

I assume anyone with a pension or global index funds will have taken a hit.

Someone's got to hold the bag.

240PP wrote: Thu Jun 25, 2026 9:59 pm

DeskJockey wrote: Thu Jun 25, 2026 7:17 pm Be interesting to see how many retail investors have been burnt.

I assume anyone with a pension or global index funds will have taken a hit.

That'll be all (or most) of us then.

Beany wrote: Thu Jun 25, 2026 7:17 pm Oh, also, he's finally gonna get himself on one of those lists of notable people.

MuskList.jpg

Sauce:
https://www.thelancet.com/article/S0140 ... 9/fulltext

The microsimulation models (table 3) indicated that, in 2025, reductions in USAID funding per capita would result in approximately 1 776 539 (95% uncertainty interval 967 604–2 496 308) all-age deaths and 689 900 (436 368–911 004) deaths in children younger than 5 years. Over the remainder of the period, the complete defunding of USAID would cause an estimated 2 450 000 all-age deaths annually, leading to a total of 14 051 750 (8 475 990–19 662 191) excess all-age deaths and 4 537 157 (3 124 796–5 910 791) excess under-five deaths by 2030.

People on the left have completely lost it

I think this is fully into Elon Derangement Syndrome at this point.

GG. wrote: Thu Jun 25, 2026 11:26 pm

Beany wrote: Thu Jun 25, 2026 7:17 pm Oh, also, he's finally gonna get himself on one of those lists of notable people.

MuskList.jpg

Sauce:
https://www.thelancet.com/article/S0140 ... 9/fulltext

The microsimulation models (table 3) indicated that, in 2025, reductions in USAID funding per capita would result in approximately 1 776 539 (95% uncertainty interval 967 604–2 496 308) all-age deaths and 689 900 (436 368–911 004) deaths in children younger than 5 years. Over the remainder of the period, the complete defunding of USAID would cause an estimated 2 450 000 all-age deaths annually, leading to a total of 14 051 750 (8 475 990–19 662 191) excess all-age deaths and 4 537 157 (3 124 796–5 910 791) excess under-five deaths by 2030.

People on the left have completely lost it

I think this is fully into Elon Derangement Syndrome at this point.

I'd be interested in your opinion on the flaws in their simulation.

I’d be curious to hear what’s wrong there too tbh

Published in The Lancet, that famously lefty peer-reviewed scientific medical journal which has been published for over 200 years.

If it’s wrong there will be another paper to refute it. Though since that was published 11 months ago nobody seems to be rushing to correct it.

Beany wrote: Thu Jun 25, 2026 7:17 pm Oh, also, he's finally gonna get himself on one of those lists of notable people.

MuskList.jpg

Sauce:
https://www.thelancet.com/article/S0140 ... 9/fulltext

That caused me to go and google.... I know what 95% Confidence Intervals are, but I'd never heard the term "uncertainty intervals"..... my brief search suggests they are broadly the same.

If we use the London clean air statistics the EVs he’s sold and kick started along with chargers have probably saved a billion kids from dying from asthma

Well yes - these type of epidemiological modelling projections are notoriously unreliable (see Neil Ferguson) - in addition, the first huge flaw that I can foresee is that I expect it assumes that assistance is not replaced by any other agency or aid (and query if it accounts for economic development, etc). Sadly I don't have time to read the paper in full...

In any event I actually wasn't referring to that aspect at all though - 14 million people may (or may not) die but you can't equate that with deliberate murder and genocide and put Elon's name on a chart - that's quite frankly insulting to those that died and that type of argument by the left goes a long way to undermining legitimate criticism as it makes them look like loonies and not serious people. Its a basic tenet of most legal systems that you're responsible for your actions, not your omissions. On this logic - everyone that mismanaged an economy is then equated as a murderer of the people that died as a result of those worsening economic conditions.

Mao is the interesting dilemma in this debate because he did cause the death of millions during the great famine of 59-61, however, the forceable overthrow of farmers and placing them into collectives (citizens of his own country, not others for whom a government owes much less of a direct moral duty and responsibility, even if you argue with your "world citizen" hat on that there still is one) and huge political repression and human rights abuses pulls this much closer to a point where it there is an obvious positive causal link.

I think it’s fair to ascribe deaths directly related to USAID cuts DOGE made to Musk tbh.

Like, he seems very proud of his work to this day.

That's fine but there's isn't any mileage in discussing further if you think that's reasonable to equate with mass murder.

He didn’t do it by accident.

I find myself agreeing with you a lot this week Zed...

Must be the heat...

Happens to everyone in the end Dinny

Whilst I don’t like Elon, I’d certainly not put him in the same category as Mao, Stalin or Hitler. Arguing he has orchestrated state-sponsored mass murder, genocide, or campaigns of political terror would be nonsensica, risks trivializing those events and obscuring the important differences between corporate influence in a democratic society and the coercive power of authoritarian regimes.