Here's something you need to consider though. We need a well trained Navy and Coast Guard. It's kind of a necessity that those guys know how to perform water rescues and can perform them well. And it's for that reason that they actually use events like this for training when they can. Obviously this is extraordinarily rare, so typically they stage trainings for deep water recoveries instead. This is more useful, more real training than the latter option. Likely no one is going to need to pay for the recovery because it's built into the Navy and Coast Guards budgets set aside for training that would have otherwise paid for a staged recovery. Only this time, they were able to use an actual disaster as a training opportunity. They likely knew, or we're at least confident that the sub imploded on that Sunday but still spent 4 days on the recovery effort partly to train and partly to get additional evidence to confirm their suspicions.

Okay, let's assume for the sake of argument that it's "okay" to just let people die because you don't like them.

What about the 19-year-old kid who was on board the sub, who didn't really want to be there but who was trying to please is dad for Father's Day by accompanying him? Screw him too because you don't like his father, I guess?

Odd, because I hear about it in nearly ever comment section on articles about the sinking of the Titan.

The difference is not money, it's novelty. The fact that a submarine built with hubristic lack of adequate safety was lost at the site of the Titanic's wreck is going to catch a lot of attention. It fits so perfectly into the narrative of the original Titanic's sinking. And losing a submarine at all is noteworthy, that doesn't happen very often.

A ship loaded with immigrants sinking in the Mediterranean is, unfortunately, a Tuesday. It's like the Joker says, nobody panics when everything goes as expected, even when what's expected is horrible.