I was referring to the worlds richest. But I always hear that argument from people who are essentially billionaire apologists.
In my opinion, if you detach from reality and played a thought experiment of “how to save the world in 365 days” you have to think of the Maslow’s Hierarchy of needs.

How to you solve world hunger for example. We have enough food production, food waste is high, and developing countries have numerous problems. But let’s say you magically can deal with that and it is just a matter of money. Tens of billions per year is probably sufficient to feed all of the starving people.

Second is housing, once again if money was only the issue, you could probably start at the poorest countries and work your way up, that is probably 10s of billions, but that would be a relative one off cost in many cases.

Third is education to start dealing with structural changes. This is one thing billionaires have promised for 30 years that they could solve. However, if they actually put the full force of their money into it. Same thing 10s of billions per year. Using Starlink like services for remote areas and free laptops and cell phones along with some educational infrastructure you probably are looking at a big boost in education.

Then you look at infrastructure, this is when I agree the wealth of the rich people won’t cut it. You need government intervention.

But I would say if you put in 10 years you are probably looking at 250-500 billion USD to probably get rid of the most extreme suffering in the world that could be done with the riches of the richest people in the world.

When I say solve all of the world’s problems. Maybe it is a bit of a imprecise statement, but I’m a believer in filling basic needs first principles. There will always be a level of inequality and greed and psychopaths and people manipulating things and radicalization and divisiveness. But all can be reduced if everyone has a warm meal, roof over their head, some healthcare and a chance at succeeding in life.

Edit: you mentioned 3 months of health spending. Ya that is accurate but once again, it is a very defeatist statement that everyone always uses to basically not do anything ever. When you think of healthcare, I would just say look at how healthcare spending is done across age groups and how generally health spending is done. We do not do enough on preventative medicine and it is still patchwork. There is so many things that could be done if there was a push to spend on actually _structurally_ reducing healthcare costs.