The funniest part is that this article is trying to make an economic argument without even pausing to consider that since aid programs are underfunded, they are obviously serving the most easily saved children first.

Each child doesn't cost exactly the same amount of money to save, and the current estimates presumably are based on trying to save the most easily saved children.

I bet you that number doubles or triples or quadruples real fast, once you actually start seriously spending money on it.