Trump

shakahislop

shakahislop

Well-known member
mixed_biscuits said:
It's also gonna be massively overstated as everyone will be sour about losing their work, which will make it hard to believe and so it won't have any effect. For example, the NPR article you linked to claims there will be quote "a million million tragedies that could have been avoided". A million million is a trillion which is 100x bigger than the population of the world, so there will be roughly 100 tragedies per world citizen. That one claim torpedoes the entire article's credibility.
Click to expand...
I dunno. there will be public communications, which I guess is what you'll see. but especially the public health guys will be working through this methodically. you can't really get away with making wild claims without showing your working, and all the nerds will have massive arguments about that working. Methodologically difficult, but there will be a whole literature on this that's probably already under development
 
IdleRich

IdleRich

IdleRich
I think it's reasonable to infer that the cost of scrapping USAID will be calculated more carefully and verified more rigorously than any of the 'savings' announced by DOGE in cutting it.
 
mixed_biscuits

mixed_biscuits

_________________________
IdleRich said:
I think it's reasonable to infer that the cost of scrapping USAID will be calculated more carefully and verified more rigorously than any of the 'savings' announced by DOGE in cutting it.
Click to expand...
It's easy to estimate the savings by seeing what was spent in previous years.
 
shakahislop

shakahislop

Well-known member
mixed_biscuits said:
I think Africa has a case against these operations, as they clearly weren't insured against this hiccup in funding.
Click to expand...
I don't get what you mean. yeah it's a massive problem, everything was built on the assumption that aid would continue as it had. fuck knows what's going to happen now. but hard to see how it plays out without a lot of people no longer having access to basic health services. like you know nutrition for children who are severely malnourished etc. or whatever kind of healthcare you want to pick, that's just one of the more acute ones.
 
mixed_biscuits

mixed_biscuits

_________________________
If shaka is right and this aid comprises almost exclusively know-how, I really don't see where the trillion tragedies are going to come from. Also, why can't these people continue giving know-how for a couple of months? I can't imagine rent is that expensive over there, and they say themselves that it's super important. Or is it just a big grift.
 
mixed_biscuits

mixed_biscuits

_________________________
shakahislop said:
I don't get what you mean. yeah it's a massive problem, everything was built on the assumption that aid would continue as it had. fuck knows what's going to happen now. but hard to see how it plays out without a lot of people no longer having access to basic health services. like you know nutrition for children who are severely malnourished etc. or whatever kind of healthcare you want to pick, that's just one of the more acute ones.
Click to expand...
I thought you said this aid was know-how rather than stuff.
 
shakahislop

shakahislop

Well-known member
mixed_biscuits said:
I thought you said this aid was know-how rather than stuff.
Click to expand...
it's a mixture. it's heading in the direction of 'building local capacity' as we would call it. that's definitely the case for healthcare. feeding children who might otherwise die ('severe acute malnutrition') is a mix. you need the systems and people in place to do it en masse. and you need to do it well. it's pretty serious obviously, it's life or death for pretty large numbers of children depending on how well you do it. that's the know how bit. you also need the specific food as well, which falls into the stuff category. all of it requires money though and without the money it's likely already stopped happening in some places.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top