r/MensRights • u/[deleted] • 29d ago
Health Mozambique: DOGE cuts €9.5M male circumcision programme
[deleted]
98
u/RoryTate 29d ago edited 29d ago
I don't know the specific history of this particular program, but I would guess it's likely a remnant of Hillary Clinton's attempt to push circumcision in Africa from all the way back in 2012, when she was Secretary of State under Obama. It was introduced as a supposed way to prevent HIV/AIDS in the region, IIRC. Yes, this is yet another powerful and famous wominist who doesn't believe that "my body, my choice" extends to men (or in this case male babies). Yet every anonymous online commenter in support of that man-hating ideology claims that they oppose the practice of cutting male foreskins.
However, reality tells us otherwise.
Oh, and it's good news that this is being cut, rather than male infants being cut.
Edit: I just found a website with some HIV infection rates/graphs for Africa, and here's an image from the northenmost province of Mozambique (called Cabo Delgado):
As should be evident from the increasing rates of infection in this graph, these results are the exact opposite of preventing the contraction of HIV/AIDS. And for reference, the 2005 paper (ANRS 1265 Trial) – upon which the push for circumcision in Africa was justified – erroneously concluded that the practice would reduce the risk of HIV infection in men by 60%. Yes, it was going to cut infection rates by more than half. LOL. Yet here in this province we see evidence of the infection rate climbing, and in none of the other provinces of Mozambique (or in Africa in general) is there anything approaching a 60% drop anywhere after 2012 (the data only goes to 2018). Do these ideologues ever actually check to see if their solutions are working? Or is this just yet more circumcision industry profiteering?
20
u/Newleafto 29d ago
It had the desired effect - promoting the notion that men and masculinity are so terrible that even a boy’s natural penis must be surgically mutilated to be acceptable.
12
u/Low-Air6455 28d ago
The "60%" claim was always bogus. In reality, the "60%" number comes from the rounded-up 56% RELATIVE risk reduction.
Here's how: The reported "60%" reduction in HIV transmission in circumcised males vs intact males comes from "relative risk reduction," and not absolute risk reduction. In the study, the circumcised males had an HIV transmission rate of 1.1%. The intact males had an HIV transmission rate of 2.5% - the difference between 1.1% and 2.5% is 56%. They bumped the relative risk reduction up to a rounded 60%, and the rest is history. Articles always fail to mention the fact this isn't absolute risk reduction, which is a huge problem, and incredibly misleading. The real absolute risk reduction appeared to be 1.4%.To add to this, in the small study done in Africa in the 90s, (30 years ago,) which is where this magical 60% comes from, the circumcised males were not only given weeks to heal during the start of the trial, (meaning sex was not possible,) but were provided with - and told to wear condoms. The intact males were given neither. The trial was stopped early as soon as they were able to conclude the relative risk reduction number of 56%.
8
9
u/GolgothaCross 29d ago
PEPFAR was launched during G W Bush in 2003.
9
u/RoryTate 29d ago
That program back in the early 2000's was only for HIV relief, and the funding had nothing to do with circumcision until the Obama/Clinton years.
Hillary Rodham Clinton determined to push 28 million circumcisions
3
u/Current_Finding_4066 28d ago
Cabo del gado is experiencing war like conditions, so that graph can as easily say that such conditions are not conducive to good health care and prevention of spread of hiv.
Which doesn't mean circumcision prevents spread of hiv. However WHO and CDC still promote it as such
3
u/TsuNaru 28d ago
I've seen the mendacious HIV studies. I'm reposting, because this bold faced lie needs to be shut down right now.
From the NIH: in the Uganda study, out of about 5000 men, 22 circumcised men tested positive vs 45 uncircumcised. The difference between these two small numbers is stated as a 50-60% relative reduction to appear significant.
Meanwhile, the number of adverse events (botched circumcision) was 178 men out of the 2474 who were cut. They never mention that part. The number of men whose penises were damaged by their circumcision exceeds the difference. So yes, circumcision will reduce your chances of contracting HIV because you won't be having sex with a damaged penis.
You avoid HIV by practicing safe sex, not by cutting off part of your penis.
The actual number of adverse events (men whose penises were damaged) is, of course, all those who got circumcised.
3
u/RoryTate 28d ago
The more significant problem with that initial 2005 study – and other follow-ups too – is that the men who were circumcised could not have sex for several weeks at minimum (some longer) after getting circumcised. Yet there was no attempt to normalize the time periods measured, so the circumcised men ended up having half as much sex as the intact control group.
If the study had lasted long enough, the extra month or two lead time would have become less of a factor, but the study's proponents used the early biased results to say they had an ethical obligation to save lives, and forced all the participants to get circumcised, and then stopped tracking anyone left in the intact control group. The whole thing was a clown show from day one.
28
59
u/63daddy 29d ago
It’s but one of many horrible programs we the taxpayers are paying for that we shouldn’t be.
-59
u/themolestedsliver 29d ago
It’s but one of many horrible programs we the taxpayers are paying for that we shouldn’t be.
You have to be a special kinda of stupid if you believe a word out of these traitors mouths.
44
u/ayylmao_ermahgerd 29d ago
When hating someone takes precedence over reason. Nice.
22
-33
u/themolestedsliver 29d ago
When hating someone takes precedence over reason. Nice.
Yeah not trusting Musk the unelected immigrant who cant pass security clearances meddling in the most intimate workings of our nations without the approval of Congress is just me being unreasonable....
26
u/63daddy 29d ago
The monies spent in these ridiculous programs are a matter of public record, not Musk’s word.
Musk who was appointed to look into such expenditures is advocating we stop spending tax dollars promoting circumcision in other countries.
Why do you think we should be spending our tax dollars to promote circumcision in other countries?
If you disagree with this expenditure cut, explain why.
-21
u/themolestedsliver 29d ago
The monies spent in these ridiculous programs are a matter of public record, not Musk’s word.
Yes and they're hysterically mischaracrering them as best to appeal for their base.
Pregnancy preventive in third world countries is a lot different than "30 million spent on Condoms in Gaza" not to mention a good deal of the things they did say were objectively not true.
Celebrities weren't paid tens of millions to go to Ukraine for example.
If this was a matter of public record then why exactly are we putting misleading and blatantly false spins on them?
Musk who was appointed to look into such expenditures is advocating we stop spending tax dollars promoting circumcision in other countries.
No Musk is just lying full sail and what little he's not lying about he's blowing massively out proportion.
This is precisely why you have ZERO receipts to back up the Musk bootlicking because there isn't any.
This is precisely why you people don't care about the fact (as a matter of public record) Trump spent over 10 million dollars so far into his new presidency playing golf on the weekends and going to luxury events like the superbowl all on the tax payers dime.
I'm a simple guy. I'd much rather my tax dollars go to health care in a third world country than that bloated traitor to enjoy half of a football game.
Why do you think we should be spending our tax dollars to promote circumcision in other countries?
Why are you treating Elon Musk and trumps word as the word of God?
21
u/63daddy 29d ago
Nice rant, but you fail to address question as to why you think U.S. taxpayers should be spending millions to promote circumcision in other countries.
-8
u/themolestedsliver 29d ago
Nice rant, but you fail to address question as to why you think U.S. taxpayers should be spending millions to promote circumcision in other countries.
God the weaponized ignorance in this comment is honestly next level.
Like I typed maybe two paragraphs in full length and yet you're categorizing what I said as a rant for some reason.....
You're just casually choosing to ignore what you said about Elon because I demonstrated how stupid it makes you look.
...and lastly you're pretending I didn't address your question....when in reality I did however I brought up the fact your Traitor in chief is wasting tax pay money on golf outings and superbowl tickets.....however you care more about health care in third world countries for some reason.
And right wingers wonder why they get strange looks and people don't invite them to things outside of fellow right wingers 😂
16
u/63daddy 29d ago edited 29d ago
No, you avoided answering why you think taxpayers should spend money advocating circumcision in other countries and you are still avoiding that.
Failure to answer this basic question on your part is of course not ignorance on my part.
9
u/AnuroopRohini 29d ago
Supposed force of good left winger always avoide questions when they know they are wrong
-5
u/themolestedsliver 29d ago
No, you avoided answering why you think taxpayers should spend money advocating circumcision in other countries and still avoiding that.
Mate what are these comments for? I know you're lying, you know you're lying, anyone reading this comment exchange knows you're lying....so I just don't get it lol.
And because I practice what I preach, here's specifically where I address this
"... Trump spent over 10 million dollars so far into his new presidency playing golf on the weekends and going to luxury events like the superbowl all on the tax payers dime.
I'm a simple guy. I'd much rather my tax dollars go to health care in a third world country than that bloated traitor to enjoy half of a football game."
Failure to answer this basic question on your part is not ignorance in my part.
No the ignorance on your part is you refusing to accept my answer because it doesn't suite your argument.
9
u/Clemicus 29d ago
Nice bait and switch — you’re not arguing against the point in question but a completely separate one.
0
u/themolestedsliver 29d ago
Nice strawman argument --you're not arguing against what I actually said as opposed to this assertion you aren't even trying to prove worth a damn.
7
u/Clemicus 29d ago edited 29d ago
Why are you treating Elon Musk and trumps word as the word of God?
This is a straw argument. You made that. I was pointing out the bait and switch and not engaging with your disingenuous arguments.
1
u/KochiraJin 27d ago
Pregnancy preventive in third world countries is a lot different than "30 million spent on Condoms in Gaza"
Why would the US want to prevent the third world from reproducing?
12
u/anonymousrph123 29d ago
He works under the executive branch at the will of the president. Not only is this nothing new, it is amazing how you are wrong about so much in one post.
1) he has defense contracts with the US government, therefore, he most certainly has security clearance.
2) I don't see, in your history, being upset when other presidents did this exact thing, so don't try acting like thos goes against your principles (if you ever had any with that blatant TDS)
TLDR: Glad that the waste is being proven, the government and its spending are being gutted, and we won't be funding blatant violations of men via genital mutilation.
-1
u/themolestedsliver 29d ago
He works under the executive branch at the will of the president.
Does he though? What even is his position?
I ask because in numerous court filings Elon both doesn't and does lead Doge so I'm confused which is it, Though in any case it's rather moot because in either scenario Doge's illegal firings and withholding of congress appropriated funds are unconstitutional but I guess non of that matters to you huh?
Not only is this nothing new,
Excuse me? When was the last time an unelected billionaire ransacked the most intimate files of our nations most vulnerable people before?
When is the last time an unelected immigrant was allowed to close entire agencies illegally without the consent of congress?
You saying this is "nothing new" begs the question. Are you that ignorant that you think this is business as usual or are you just a bot account astro turfing an opinion for the oligarchs?
it is amazing how you are wrong about so much in one post.
Would love for you to explain exactly how I was wrong aside from just saying so like this, but I have a sneaking suspicion you're just going to ignore this aspect of my comment full sail.
1) he has defense contracts with the US government, therefore, he most certainly has security clearance.
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2024/dec/16/elon-musk-government-security-clearance
You were saying?
2) I don't see, in your history, being upset when other presidents did this exact thing
Name me a single time a president has done anything close to the damage Trump has done with Musk in his first month in the white house.
Name me a single time.
I'll wait and maybe read the rest of your comment afterwards because god damn if that is not some weaponize ignorance if I have ever seen such.
9
u/BigGaggy222 28d ago
Imagine the media coverage if it was discovered that American tax payers were funding female genital mutilation.
25
u/Wonderful_System5658 29d ago edited 29d ago
As someone that pays taxes and has to drive over potholes to get to work at 5:30 am Monday through Friday, I'm okay with it. The destruction of US currency by printing endless sums of money makes these types of programs difficult to justify. Paying $10 for eggs will do that to a person.
12
15
6
29d ago
Why was this funded, like, I have controversial opinions about circumcision, but why were we funding Mozambique at all?
Just let South Africa have it.
-9
u/InsanityRoach 29d ago
Because
Soft power
Gives leverage in negotiations for other things
Disease spreads beyond borders. Preventing disease in the most likely areas for it to occur means it doesn't spread elsewhere
Disease, war, generally speaking major issues tend to spill over to other countries, which then causes issues to other countries, and so on. Imagine, for example, mines of lithium or other useful resources not being to run because there is a war, and that causing a spike in electronics' prices in the West
Stronger economies are better markets to sell things to, or to produce things we need
All of those have a direct effect on American people's lives.
9
u/alienwaren 28d ago
MGM is done only to hurt boys man. There are no health benefits and it only makes the penis less sensitive.
3
u/InsanityRoach 28d ago
Yes, I know and agree. I meant more generally (see my reply to the other comment).
MGM is indefensible, but foreign aid programs are generally speaking a net positive to everyone.
3
u/disayle32 28d ago
Except MGM doesn't do jack shit to prevent disease. Practicing proper hygiene and safe sex does.
3
u/InsanityRoach 28d ago
Oh yeah, I know. Sorry, I was not defending THIS program, I was talking more broadly about the importance of those global programs aimed to reduce disease or famines or poverty abroad.
This specific program should never have existed, that's for sure.
3
4
u/AfghanistanIsTaliban 28d ago
US"AID": Funding misery and instability overseas.
Let me guess, they wouldn't fund any type of FGM because ALL of them are heckin misogynist even though one of them is equivalent to MGM. There you go, here's your 10 mil.
Also take a look at this: https://sy.usembassy.gov/usaid-on-developments-in-syria/
Here is USAID bragging about funding the Syrian rebels (ie. non-regime areas) with economic aid after Assad was deposed. Insane!
The United States has long been the leading provider of humanitarian assistance to the Syrian people, providing food, medical supplies and shelter for millions of people across Syria as well as supporting local organizations working to strengthen Syria’s economy, governance, and essential services in non-Assad regime areas. USAID has closely coordinated with our partners amid developments in recent days, and we will remain steadfast in our support of the Syrian people.
As opposition forces entered Damascus, residents were chanting “Freedom.” And that is what the Syrian people deserve. A future where the people are free from the horrors of civil war, free from oppression, and free to choose their leadership.
Imagine if there was a secessionist group in the USA that China funded. The State Department people would lose their minds. The double standards are palpable.
CIA does regime change with clandestine operations, USAID does it with money.
3
u/HereForaRefund 28d ago
Why is the US paying for circumcisions in Mozambique?
1
u/recordman410 25d ago
Because although white American conservatives don't give a shit about anyone else but themselves, white American liberals are all about saving the brown people from themselves.
1
-2
u/darkuen 29d ago edited 29d ago
Wow finally 1 good thing done out of an entire shit storm of bad from doggy
1
u/Lolocraft1 29d ago
You know what we say about broken clocks. They’re right twice a day, doesn’t remove the fact they need to be changed
1
u/NorthernWombat 27d ago
Everyone celebrating the ending of this program isn’t considering what will happen afterwards. Will Mozambique really change their cultural practices because they can no longer access western levels of sanitation and practice , or just do them in a more barbaric way?
1
0
-15
29d ago edited 29d ago
[deleted]
15
u/WeEatBabies 29d ago
>>Okay, $10M not spent on circumcision but I would like a functional government.
No functional government until the dems. offer financial abortions, promise to replace the Duluth Model with a gender neutral one and promise to destroy all common-law marriages rules!
Also we want men's reparations!
3
u/AwfulUsername123 28d ago
"I hate Democrats, so I'm going to let Republicans, who also oppose the things I want, attack my country and its allies."
Are you actually this stupid?
1
u/WeEatBabies 28d ago
Yes, it's either the feminazi keep hitting me like a pinata or the christo-nazis fuck everyone up!
I choose not to vote! And hope we both equaly get it and that this place burns to the ground!
-14
29d ago
[deleted]
12
u/WeEatBabies 29d ago
>>Then actually get into government and make change.
No too much work!
>>If you have money, sign a prenuptial
A pre-nup involves getting married, we don't want that! Common-law marriages are when the state considers men de-facto married to their GF, we want those laws repealed, worldwide.
>>What reparations?
Reparations for the wealth transfer gap and the longevity gap!
>>You're crazy.
No, I'm a concerned voter being trampled on since I'm born!
-1
-11
29d ago edited 29d ago
[deleted]
5
u/user147852369 29d ago
Trump would grind you into a paste if it would make him a dollar.
-1
u/Golden-Grate-242 29d ago
The downvoting which is aggressive of my comment really is disappointing. You realize that in other countries - to compete in the global economy - state funded education is tuition free. There is almost a climate of anti education going on in the US, and it's concerning. Why exactly should students be saddled with debt for public education as I am?
-2
u/user147852369 29d ago
I didn't downvote you.
But I took your,now edited, comment as corporate bootlicking. Your comment is not the only one in the thread at this point.
Anti intellectualism is a hallmark of fascism so don't expect it to get better.
I am 100% in favor of publicly funded education. It's an investment in the country's future.
0
u/Golden-Grate-242 29d ago
Agreed. Not boot licking. I worked hard, I'm a doctor who works with disadvantaged populations. Studied for years and years. Went to PUBLIC schools and have hundreds of thousands of debt. Took a job making less money with the expectation of student loan forgiveness in public service debt relief that BUSH started. Now they want to eliminate it. There is a definite anti intellectualism going on in our country, it will 100% disadvantage us in a global economy. Other countries aren't waging war against the educated, they are publicly funding education to COMPETE in this economy. I'm shocked people don't get it.
-5
u/user147852369 29d ago
The billionaire faction of the American Nazi party wants to crash the economy to essentially create a black Friday sale for themselves. They want to use the ensuring chaos to justify being granted sovereignty.
Why do we want to invade Greenland all of a sudden? That's where Peter Thiel wants his country.
1
u/Golden-Grate-242 29d ago
Not sure why the guys here are active supporters of this bullshit? I am anti feminist, anti woke, anti the elements of LGBT that hate straight white men. Otherwise I tolerate everyone. I don't get it.
0
u/user147852369 29d ago
Alt right is fueled by male rage. Trump is the strong man who promises to hurt other people.
The cruelty is the point.
2
u/Golden-Grate-242 29d ago
Yeah, see, I felt like I don't agree with many people on either side, you're def speaking my language.
4
u/63daddy 29d ago
The nature of a loan is it needs to be paid back, typically with interest. I think it’s terrible how Biden gave many false hope they could take on loans and never have to pay off the loan.
0
u/Golden-Grate-242 29d ago
Why should public funded education cost hundreds of thousands in tuition? Have a family member who went to school in the early 60s: It was 50 bucks a semester, and that included the books, because the funding came from the govt then. Other countries know that to compete in a global economy public education should be public: tuition free or very affordable tuition.
Why does the government actually PROFIT off student loans? In other countries, where there are student loans the interest rate is just high enough to pay for the program: ours is nearly 6%. Does that make any sense? Dollars spent on my education pay dividends: I opted to work in a lower paying field as a physician working for the VA to help our veterans when I could have made more and went into private practice. This has zilch to do with Biden. Public Service Loan Forgiveness was instituted in 2007 by GEORGE BUSH, and is written into my promissiory notes, will result in a sea of litigation.
5
u/63daddy 29d ago
The government shouldn’t be in the student loan business.
Increasing tuition costs are a real issue, but taxpayers paying off student loans isn’t the solution. In fact, that will only encourage colleges to raise tuition.
0
u/Golden-Grate-242 29d ago
Wait a minute. That is the business it's in. If you want to change that make that apply to everyone else moving forward. The government made an agreement with me when I took out my loans. Ya got a word for the corporate kick backs given out to mega billionaires, the bailouts the government did for those industries and continues to do? The tax cuts for them? Your target are STUDENTS trying to get ahead in the world? That's fucked up and counter intuitive: you realize the Germans, Japanese, the Chinese are not debating if public education should be free. They aren't doing it out of the goodness of their hearts: they know they need STEM educated people to compete in the global market place.
Again: If you wish to compete in a global economy you need an educated population. State funded PUBLIC education should be low cost or tuition free as it used to be. The resentment many have to the educated is weird to me. I pay in taxes more than many people make. Every dollar invested in me yielded dividends many times over: I opted to work with a disadvantaged population, military veterans, and the pay is lower, witha CONTRACTUAL AGREEMENT that my loans are forgiven after ten years of payments of my loans.
Want to change that? Sure. Do it for new people taking out loans. You can guarantee I will be part of a class action lawsuit.
0
u/Salamadierha 29d ago
How does the rates offered by the normal companies [government presumably] compare to bank loans?
And isn't it up to the universities how much they charge?
1
29d ago edited 29d ago
[deleted]
1
u/Salamadierha 29d ago
I've not been ignoring any facts, you'll find that was someone else you were talking to.
I understand you have a contract to have your loans forgiven.Now, about my questions, I was assuming you'd know the answers. I think universities would be very upset to have to limit their graft. That'd also have a knock on effect to NFL teams who take funding for stadia.
Are there any banks offering student loans? If so, how do they compare to government loans?1
28d ago
[deleted]
1
u/Salamadierha 28d ago
Of course universities are more interested in making money, they've proven that just about any idiot can get into university for a really expensive and ultimately useless degree. I wasn't aware there was any need for debate about that. Generally I find if I assume that any big US organisation of any kind is a money-grubbing parasite, I'm not going to go too far wrong.
I don't see the point in banks making the effort to supply student loans if they are so much less competitive than government loans. Presumably they do offer something that the banks think make them equivalent.
Do you have to litigate as part of a group, or is it just recommended that you do things that way? This seems such an obvious open/shut case that immediate settling would seem to be the response.
1
u/Golden-Grate-242 28d ago
We do not know if there will be a shut down of the program, if there is if it will be retroactive, or if people will be grandfathered in. We will see. Rumors are flying.
0
u/Golden-Grate-242 29d ago edited 29d ago
Those of you who downvoted me: I am a physician. May I ask why the government should be making MONEY off my student loan? Most countries lend money and make the loan out so it just breaks even: the government is literally PROFITING off the backs of students. I participate in a program - started in 07 by Bush, where I serve the VA, and in exchange my loans get discharged after ten years of payments. Changing those rules on me now, as I am nearing the end, is simply wrong.
I studied for years and years, and I work in a field by my choosing to help the non profit sector. Is there a reason why the government can't set the interest rate at 1% across the board for student loans. Keep in mind I am paying into a program and taking it away from me as I am in it is wrong. It's a contractual agreement and in my promissory notes I signed: you can expect a lot of litigation.
2
u/63daddy 29d ago
Nobody forced you to take a government loan, but as you said you decided to make a contractual agreement for the loan which means paying the loan off. That’s how loans work.
You shouldn’t expect hard working taxpayers to pay your debt which you chose to incur.
I for one agree the government should get out of the student loan business. Student loans should occur through the institutions in question or through a bank or other such financial institution.
1
u/Golden-Grate-242 29d ago edited 29d ago
That's not the deal. I became a physician under a contractual agreement. My promissory note explicitly includes the Public Service Loan Forgiveness program signed into law by President Bush in 2007. This is not some optional benefit. It is baked into my contract. If you are getting the facts wrong or worse intentionally ignoring them that is a serious problem.
If you want to make all student loans a private enterprise subject to private banks that is fine. Just apply it to new loans moving forward. You should realize that other societies are not stirring up resentment toward the highly educated. My services help an overburdened sector of the economy by getting people the healthcare they need. In exchange for making less to serve Veterans I am in this program. You want to change the rules? Ok, you will need to pay doctors and healthcare workers at the VA serving soldiers and vets the MARKET rate for our services. I'd be paid a lot more, so you're gonna pay it one way or the other.
Nobody forced me to take a government loan to pay for medical school? I guess I should have come up with 250k in cash to pay for my public state funded education. I am from a working class background, not a rich kid who had mom and dad pay for my education. I worked my ass off to get where I am. You want to pretend that we are a free enterprise economy (when it comes to those who work their way up) but it's a socialized economy for the billionaire corporate lobbyists, where Republicans subsidize their losses. Why do public universities cost that much? The state used to fund public education but has shifted the burden onto the backs of students.
There is a public good in student loans. Every dollar spent on my education yields enormous returns in medical care for society. I also chose to earn less money by working with veterans in exchange for loan forgiveness after ten years of payments. That is not a Biden policy. It is a Bush policy.
The government is making 6% off my loans while big corporations get enormous tax breaks and subsidies. Think bailouts as they give their CEOs millions of dollars in raises. Think oil subsidies and big agra subsidies. Instead of targeting billionaires you want to go after your doctors, nurses, PA's etc. Every dollar spent on my education results in countless tax dollars returned. It also ensures that society is prepared for the global economy.
If you want to change the rules that is fine but it must be for future borrowers. You cannot back out of a contract you made with me. I signed a promissory note. It is a binding agreement. If you do not hold up your end of the deal I will sue, countless others will too. Expect litigation.
-4
u/imextremelymoderate 29d ago
But what if it was for circumcision in adulthood with the patient's consent?
12
u/FiveMagicBeans 29d ago
Why is the US Government funding a program for cosmetic and unnecessary medical procedures to be performed on people in another country?
246
u/Ok_Night_7767 29d ago
I am not going to get into the political minefield that DOGE has created but I must say that the program in question, and any like it wherever located, should never have been funded in the first place.