Musk Said No One Has Died Since Aid Was Cut. That Isn't True.
Produced by Derek Arthur
What does it look like when some of the world's richest men withdraw assistance for the world's poorest women and children? After Elon Musk claimed no one had died from cuts to American foreign aid spending, the Opinion writer Nicholas Kristof traveled to South Sudan to see the impact for himself. In this episode, he shares how millions of people now face death and starvation and why Americans — including those who believe in 'America First' — should care.
Read Kristof's interactive essay with photos and charts at nytimes.com/opinion.
(A full transcript of this audio essay will be available within 24 hours of publication in the audio player above.)
Thoughts? Email us at theopinions@nytimes.com.
This episode of 'The Opinions' was produced by Derek Arthur. It was edited by Alison Bruzek and Annie-Rose Strasser. Mixing by Carole Sabouraud. Original music by Pat McCusker and Carole Sabouraud. Fact-checking by Mary Marge Locker and Kate Sinclair. Audience strategy by Kristina Samulewski and Shannon Busta. The director of Opinion Audio is Annie-Rose Strasser.
The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We'd like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips. And here's our email: letters@nytimes.com.
Follow the New York Times Opinion section on Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, Bluesky, WhatsApp and Threads.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Post
22 minutes ago
- New York Post
Trump defied the world with truth — and upended the status quo
In less than six months, the entire world has been turned upside down. There is no longer such a thing as conventional wisdom or the status quo. The unthinkable has become the banal. Take illegal immigration — remember the 10,000 daily illegal entries under former President Joe Biden? Recall the only solution was supposedly 'comprehensive immigration reform' — a euphemism for mass amnesties. Now, there is no such thing as daily new illegal immigration. It simply disappeared with common-sense enforcement of existing immigration laws — and a new president. How about the 40,000- to 50,000-soldier shortfall in military recruitment? Remember all the causes the generals cited for their inability to enlist soldiers: generational gangs, obesity, drugs and stiff competition with private industry? And now? In just six months, recruitment targets are already met; the issue is mostly moot. Why? The new Pentagon flipped the old, canceling its racist DEI programs and assuring rural, middle-class Americans — especially white males — that they were not systemically racist after all. Instead, they were reinvited to enlist as the critical combat cohort who died at twice their demographic share in Iraq and Afghanistan. How about the 'end of the NATO crisis,' supposedly brought on by a bullying United States? Now the vast majority of NATO members have met their pledges to spend 2% of GDP on defense, which will soon increase to 5%. Iconic neutrals like Sweden and Finland have become frontline NATO nations, arming to the teeth. The smiling NATO secretary-general even called Donald Trump the 'daddy' of the alliance. What about indomitable, all-powerful, theocratic Iran, the scourge of the Middle East for nearly 50 years? Although it had never won a war in the last half-century, its terrorist surrogates — Hezbollah, Hamas and the Houthis — were supposedly too dangerous to provoke. Now? Most of its expeditionary terrorists are neutered, and their leaders are in hiding or dead. Iran has no air force, no real navy, no air defenses and no active nuclear-weapons program. Its safety apparently depends only on the mood of the United States or Israel on any given day not to fly into its airspace and take out its missiles, nuclear sites, generals or theocrats at will. What happened to the supposedly inevitable recession, hyperinflation, stock-market collapse, unemployment spikes and global trade war that last spring economists assured us would hit by summer? Job growth is strong, and April's inflation rate is the lowest in four years. GDP is still steady. The stock market hit a record high. Trade partners are renegotiating their surpluses with the United States. It turns out that staying in the US consumer market is the top priority of our trading partners. It seems their preexisting and mostly undisclosed profits were large enough to afford reasonable symmetrical tariffs. For now, news of tax cuts, deregulation, 'drill baby, drill' energy policies displacing Green New Deal strangulation and $8 trillion to $10 trillion in potential foreign investment has encouraged — rather than deterred — business. Then there were our marquee elite universities, whose prestige, riches and powerful alumni made them answerable to no one. And now, after the executive and congressional crackdown on their decades of hubris? Supposedly brilliant university presidents have resigned in shame. The public has caught on to their grant surcharge gouging. Campuses have backed off their arrogant defiance of the Supreme Court's civil rights rulings. They are panicked about the public exposure of their systemic antisemitism. They are scrambling to explain away their institutionalized ideological bias and their tawdry profit-making schemes and mass recruitment of wealthy foreign students from illiberal regimes. So, the mighty Ivy League powerhouses are now humbling themselves to cut a deal to save their financial hides and hopefully return to their proper mission of disinterested education. What happened to the trans juggernaut of sex as a social construct and its bookend gospel that biological men could dominate women's sports? People woke up. They were no longer afraid to state that sex is binary and biologically determined — and that biological men who dominate women's sports are bullies, not heroes. Where are the millionaire scamming architects of BLM now? Where is the 'DEI now, tomorrow, and forever' conventional wisdom? Where are Professor Ibram X. Kendi and his $30,000 Zoom lessons on how to fight racism by being racist? They have all been exposed as the race hustlers they always were. Their creed that it is OK for supposed victims to be racist victimizers themselves was exposed as an absurd con. So, what flipped everything? We were living in an 'emperor has no clothes' make-believe world for the last few years. The people knew establishment narratives were absurd, and our supposed experts were even more ridiculous. But few — until now — had the guts to scream 'the emperor is naked' to dispel the fantasies. When they finally did, reality returned. Victor Davis Hanson is a distinguished fellow of the Center for American Greatness.
New York Post
22 minutes ago
- New York Post
Mamdani would make New York a gloomy city of handouts and moochers
For centuries, New York City was the place strivers came to make something of their lives — where smarts, hard work and grit turned pushcarts into prosperity, and where the streets were paved with gold for those willing to mine them. Success in New York was always tougher than anyplace else. Making it here meant you could make it anywhere. Only the very poor received charity or government assistance, and only enough to help them get on their feet and start helping themselves. Advertisement Zohran Mamdani has a very different philosophy. Much of his 'affordability agenda' isn't targeted to the neediest — but to New Yorkers who should be paying their own way. Take fare-free buses: The city already offers a half-price 'Fair Fares' program for low-income bus and subway riders. Advertisement Free buses would be available to everyone, including well-paid professionals and even loathed billionaires. Food stamps, too, are means-tested, but city-run grocery stores wouldn't stop millionaires from scooping up avocados at below-market prices. Plenty of wealthy people already live in rent-stabilized apartments, so freezing the rent would benefit some rich tenants at landlords' expense, even those small landlords who are less well-off than their tenants. Advertisement But Mamdani isn't asking everyone to share the burden evenly by raising taxes across the board. He wants to tax corporations and the wealthiest. It's welfare for the upper-middle class, with no strings attached. It's also a paradigm shift, a belief that government — not our own efforts — should guarantee security. The traditional American free market rewards those who work hard, delay gratification and take risks. Advertisement Those efforts benefit wider society — making companies more productive, adding to the tax base through growth and extending new opportunities for others. In much of the country, homeownership is the reward for these sacrifices — a marker of having earned one's place in society and holding a stake in a stable neighborhood. In rental-heavy New York, paying rent for a comfortable place confers a similar status. Every morning, the NY POSTcast offers a deep dive into the headlines with the Post's signature mix of politics, business, pop culture, true crime and everything in between. Subscribe here! Rent stabilization, by contrast, provides these benefits through government mandate. Stabilized tenants can pass along a legal entitlement to live in the below-market apartment to family members and even in some cases to non-related co-residents. Unsurprisingly, these tenants rarely give up their sweetheart deals, making it harder for younger New Yorkers to find a foothold. Doubling down on these programs would make New Yorkers more dependent on them — and on the government. As always, those who benefit from a government program have a strong stake in seeing it continue — and they vote. Mamdani's proposals are tailor-made for his base of young, highly educated, far-left NYC newcomers. These bright and capable young voters aren't chasing big dreams. Advertisement By many measures, they experience higher rates of mental health challenges and lower well-being at work — and are turning to the government for a more comfortable, secure life. But New York has never been content with 'good enough.' Is it difficult to buy a house or afford rent, especially for the young? Absolutely. But is it the answer to hand more power to City Hall and let it determine more of our lives? Advertisement The government's track record isn't pretty. Get opinions and commentary from our columnists Subscribe to our daily Post Opinion newsletter! Thanks for signing up! Enter your email address Please provide a valid email address. By clicking above you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Never miss a story. Check out more newsletters The single biggest reason why housing is so expensive in NYC is that, for decades, City Hall has prevented the private sector from building enough supply to meet demand. And in the housing stock the government does control or influence, residents aren't thriving. Advertisement Rent-stabilized apartment stock is rapidly deteriorating. Landlords are prohibited from collecting enough in rent increases to cover higher operating and maintenance costs. Conditions in NYCHA buildings are so poor that far-left Public Advocate Jumaane Williams has repeatedly named the public housing authority the worst landlord in the city. On average, it takes 413 days for NYCHA to complete repairs. At its best, New York rewards aspiration, not entitlement. If the city is to be a place where strivers thrive, its government must reward diligence and productivity. Advertisement It must allow for growth, making it easy for businesses to set up shop and create jobs. Instead of making life more comfortable for young professionals, the next mayor should inspire them to make the most of their skills and talents — to make them dream bigger than what mere government can offer. Allowing the private sector to build much more housing would give young New Yorkers a better chance to buy or rent new, modern apartments. They'd feel like their hard work is getting them somewhere. The alternative is stagnation — a sadder, less dynamic city. That's not New York. John Ketcham is director of cities and a legal policy fellow at the Manhattan Institute. All views expressed are those of the author and not the Manhattan Institute.
Miami Herald
41 minutes ago
- Miami Herald
The Trump-Epstein circular firing squad is just like an episode of ‘Seinfeld'
The Jeffrey Epstein scandal that has engulfed the Trump administration and MAGA world is like an episode of 'Seinfeld.' Somebody does something stupid and the remainder of the show is about the reactions of a cast of soulless characters who are so without redeeming qualities, you can't root for any of them. Donald Trump's decision not to release whatever is in the Epstein files has paralyzed the most MAGA of conservative media outlets. When I checked earlier today, The Federalist, The Daily Caller and Breitbart were all doing their best to ignore the story dividing Trumpists like never before. It is like the digital outlets are waiting for orders from on high, but the leading voices are a confused cacophony, not the usual Trumpy chorus. Fox News and the Wall Street Journal opinion page are both promoting an op-ed by former Epstein lawyer Alan Dershowitz that is as confused as this Seinfeldian story about nothing. You see, Dershowitz says there's nothing to see here, Epstein committed suicide and was not murdered, but the jail staff may have helped him. Oh, also there's nothing incriminating about Trump. Suicide is a fraught subject that must be handled delicately in all instances, but I am not so clear on how there can be help from the people who are supposed to be guarding you. I didn't know it was OK for the guards to deliver 'assisted' suicide services normally provided by medical personnel. Wouldn't that be a scandal? Dershowitz blames the fact that you can't see the Justice Department files on court-ordered secrecy, as if suddenly the Trump administration has gotten all Emily Post about following judges' orders. Meanwhile the formerly conservative Drudge Report, enemy of all things Emily Post and still frequented by many on the right who want a dose of the day's tabloid fare, is promoting rumors that a big Trump-Epstein story is about to appear in the pages of either The Washington Post, The New York Times or The Wall Street Journal. Just as I am writing this, The Wall Street Journal breathlessly published a story marked 'exclusive' that, along with dozens of other people, Trump wrote a bawdy letter to Epstein for his 50th birthday. In this letter, Trump allegedly drew a naughty picture with breasts and pubic hair. Oh, my. The only thing worth being on the front page is that Trump called the Journal's top editor to try to stop the story with a lawsuit threat. So it is no wonder the White House and Trump himself are livid at all this attention with the press secretary blasting people like me who keep covering this 'like it's the biggest story that the American people care about.' For once, Karoline Leavitt appears to be sticking to the facts. Conservative talk radio hosts who I listen to, such as Erick Erickson, report that while their 'very online' listeners are mad as hell, their ideological cousins who have touched grass more recently couldn't care less. If it is not clear already, I am watching the whole kerfuffle and enjoying every minute. If a political movement born of nothing but Trump's grudges, conspiracy theories and self-interest deserves anything, it is to suffer a circular firing squad about Trump holding a grudge against his supporters who still believe a conspiracy theory that is suddenly no longer in Trump's self-interest. This won't be the last time that Trump's imaginary hobgoblins will come back to haunt him. Wait until his handpicked Attorney General Pam Bondi fails to come up with anyone to indict for stealing the 2020 election, as all Trump's supporters have been promised. We'll think back on this week's Epstein blowup as a little family disagreement. If we were watching a 'Seinfeld' episode, this is where Jerry would be told, 'No soup for you,' and we'd all have a good laugh. It isn't so funny when the job prospects of our top law enforcement officers depend on the outcome of a scandal about nothing and the president seems more engaged with the fate of a dead sex trafficker than the real lives of the people he is supposed to govern.
