Worldwide eternal Frankenstein living death slavery

And now I have a fiancé who skips sex scenes in movies, and right now is having a bachelor party grilling out at the park with friends and family instead of getting "one last day of freedom" at a strip club.

People killed: around three quarters of a million.

Everyone quoting this number is quoting what certain people predicted would be the number after a year without aid. I have never seen anyone cite a number that was not a projection written beforehand, based on estimates of what would happen with no aid.

Except that isn't what happened.

The "dissolution" and "aid freeze" were constantly tied up in the courts instead of being implemented. Marco Rubio was put in charge of USAID, and despite being a Republican, he is an actual human being who would show activity on an EEG and not an arc node of Trumpism. He issued waivers to keep funding the "critical" lifesaving operations of USAID going during the funding freeze, regardless of the courts' decisions. His explicit intent was to dissolve USAID as he saw it as a wasteful and counterproducrive program, but incorporate the parts of USAID that actually were useful (like these programs) into the State Department. From other pages linked on the same site, he appears to have done that. Rubio's "America First Global Health Strategy" lays out an extremely reasonable argument for what he is doing and why. He even goes into specific detail about how great PEPFAR is and why so much of its budget is being wasted on buck-wild overhead costs and inefficiencies instead of integrating local services.

The moral reason is that "refrained from rescuing" is not the same thing as "killed"; the equivalence is made up by people who will grab onto anything to Get Trump but they never apply the same standard for e.g. the Obama Presidential Library "killing" thousands of people by spending that money on something other than aid. (Except for like five Effective Altruists.)

The practical reason is that we don't have to lean on hypothetical "sophisticated modelling tools" any more now that we have data from countries that got their aid cut, and the data indicates the model was wrong, the projected deaths didn't happen.

Like when people argue whether warhammer 40k is fascist propaganda that says that fascism is good, or if it's actually a satire of fascist propaganda saying that fascism is bad. When it isn't really either of those things. That's not what it's going for and that's not what it's doing. It's got satirical elements floating around in there in varying degrees depending on era and author, but the point of them isn't to instruct the audience whether fascism is bad - it's for drama, and mood, and weird interestingness, and humour, and all the other reasons why things are in art other than political and moral instruction. It portrays a bunch of fucked up stuff connected by in-setting circumstance and lets you make your own mind about it, or just let yourself think "damn that's fucked up" and leave it at that.

It's not even, like, complex, by almost any literary standard. It's the same thing with them being unable to understand marvel movies, literally the most accessible movies ever made, when they crack out the most basic #101 nuance for teenagers where a villain has a sympathetic motive or a hero makes a mistake, and they can't really understand it, thinking that because the villain has a sympathetic quality then the movie is trying to demonise that sympathetic quality, because they assume that the film is operating at the level of basic propaganda, when it's, like, even slightly above that.

And, I'm gonna be honest, I believe them. Specially since they were only saying they got paid $2-5 each.

Did this change the outcome of the election? Who knows. But it's still a massive problem. And I can't help but feel that if the Republican candidate were being accused of this, the media would be more willing to talk about it.

OP only wants Republican fraud prevented and prosecuted.

Which one do you think the media is more upset about?

Spin the wheel again. That’s who’s trying to protect you.

(If you have zero idea about a name you got, spin until you see someone you recognize.)

Clearly doesn't matter if the person is trained or not to teach, apparently. Public schools are not really teaching kids.

Meanwhile, my brother is homeschooling his kids, matching their level of each subject to where they're at, and in many subjects, they're ahead of their peers. In others, they're on par to what their grade would be.

So the question is, why is it unacceptable in homeschooling -most of the time to the point of removing it as an option or putting more safeguards against it- yet acceptable en masse in public school?