having the power to destroy a government agency that provides aid and actually going through with it is not morally equal to not donating a few dollars of your income
1 - the moral calculus is different if you were already doing so and then suddenly shut it off
2 - i was happy with the arrangement of the government doing it on my behalf, and in doing so making the united states stronger and have allies around the world
3 - elon musk did this illegally
4 - elon musk also caused additional deaths by virtue of supporting trump, rfk, and these other lunatics which he was definitely affirmatively a part of doing
While the quantification isn't inherently reliable, the reality of many dead at the hands at Elon Mush is a simple fact that's not up for dispute. The only question is how many he's killed so far. He cut off life saving meds to sick kids and food aid to the areas with food shortages, the deaths are known and reliably reported.
It is easy to prove, it is shown in the linked model. The model is simple. If I spend X amount of dollars feeding people, I can save Y lives. Since this model is obviously bunk, I'm sure you can easily articulate why this model is inaccurate, untrustworthy, or otherwise unhelpful.
Technically his department produced and advised on the data. It's just a government BI team. This is like blaming the BI team for the CEO's decision to fire people. Part of the process, sure. But this a decision made by the majority of Congress. Let's not forget who the bad guy is.
Absolutely true. But it's certainly not the bad guy with no power to do what parent accused him of that deserves blame. It's a logical impossibility. We still follow logic, I hope.
So the kids died as a result of the action taken (withdrawing meds from impoverished children), but the person who took the meds away from the sick kids who then died as a result is innocent? I feel like you might want to look at that word "sophistry" long and hard, and do a bit of soul searching.
African women dying of HIV did not contract it from Elon Musk. They got it from somewhere. I'm open to theories that do not involve blaming a pretentious billionaire who will inseminate anything except black women.
Subrogation could not be more central to the discussion if you're using blame to justify disbursement of money from parties with no obligation or responsibility to provide free healthcare to another continent.
USAID should never have been created; it serves no strategic purpose unless the purpose is exfiltration of wealth to NGO networks. Auditing government programs for efficacy is not a scam, it's accountability. Eliminating a program that benefits others at our expense is not homicide.
All of your arguments are made in bad faith. You don't really have one beyond emotional blackmail and ad hominems. Sophistry.
The argument is very simple, Elon Musk's decision led to hundreds of thousands of deaths, and will result in millions more. Auditing government programs for efficacy is not a scam, but Elon Musk did not do that. He said he would do that but did not.
The USG spend is higher than it ever has been, most of the savings cited were fake, and thus he killed a lot of people for no reason.
Eliminating USAID led to deaths. Just because you don't like that it existed did not mean it was preventing deaths. Pulling the plug on someone is killing them, even if you didn't give them the disease and paying for their healthcare was expensive for you.
