Am I the only one who find this flawed ? Why won't you take into account the deaths that would have occured both in short/long run if that money/time wasn't spe

Am I the only one who find this flawed ? Why won't you take into account the deaths that would have occured both in short/long run if that money/time wasn't spent ? Note that this has kind of a butterfly effect. There is a possible argument for doing it more efficiently or differently, but this extreme comparison makes no sense.