No. Go read the source material more carefully. I've checked like 5 of the trackers and not a single one I've read reports a single actual, verifiable death. Ita pure math. That doesn't mean there aren't deaths, it just means this is a purely mathematical estimate. The discussion should be "is this estimate reasonable", not "lets assume this estimate is reasonable and talk about how bad Trump is".
I took a look at the tracker they're using as a source, and this appears to be (for the few categories I checked the methodology for) referring to mathematically projected deaths, and not literal counted dead humans. I think that's a pretty important note, especially if we're titling it "at least 600,000 dead". I'm not saying noone died, but "I've used math to estimate that half a million people died based on this set of assumptions" is a very different statement from "We have tallied up literally half a million dead people over here explicitly because of USAID going away"
I can't decide if Trump thinks this will make him look like less of a lame duck when the vote passes the house, or if Trump is trying to reverse psychology them out of it.
I'm being less than 100% precise here. The line I'm drawing is that abolition of private property rights is co-terminus with abolition of capitalism.
"Ask them 'what's more important, human rights or property rights'. If they reply 'property rights are human rights, they're on the right".
e: I'm just going to add explicitly, since there's clearly some confusion looking at the other sister comments. It's not about monarchism or any of that. Its two things: Property rights and social hierarchies. If you want em gone, you're on the left. from that perspective you need not change the definition of left and right in 1799 and 1848, and all the same from Maréchal to Mélenchon.
I mean, its not really a purity test. It's just kind of definitions. The political terms "right" and "left" have meant the same thing since the French Revolution. Democrats are not left wing. We can have a whole bunch of ancillary discussions about whether that means people should or shouldn't vote for them, which I'm not interested in having, but i struggle to see how one could argue in good faith that the Democrats are left wing. Its really not even clear that Ocasio-Cortez or Sanders are "left wing" since neither seems to oppose private property rights, nor do they advocate for the weakening or abolishment of capitalism - the traditional dividing line of left and right.
I've been waiting for something like this so we can see who's heads roll when AI fucks up. I figured we'd see doctors and lawyers losing their licenses first, but maybe it'll be this. So, who shoulders the blame when a program that can't learn from its mistakes fucks up a quarter of the internet?
No. Go read the source material more carefully. I've checked like 5 of the trackers and not a single one I've read reports a single actual, verifiable death. Ita pure math. That doesn't mean there aren't deaths, it just means this is a purely mathematical estimate. The discussion should be "is this estimate reasonable", not "lets assume this estimate is reasonable and talk about how bad Trump is".