we can’t afford not to seize this opportunity

[GoodTaste]

President Biden just tweeted:
My Build Back Better Agenda and the Bipartisan Infrastructure Deal will spur economic growth – creating and supporting 4 million jobs a year.

As we continue our economic recovery, we can’t afford not to seize this opportunity.

Source: https://twitter.com/JoeBiden

The phrase "we can’t afford not to seize this opportunity" sounds a bit peculiar to me because the usual usage of "afford" is that it is followed by a noun:'
The country can't afford another drought.
The transaction afforded him a good profit.

Now President Biden used an infinitive to follow "afford" and it seems that the phrase is not very secure or stable. The typical form, to me, is "We can't afford the loss of this opportunity." But the President's appears to be more powerful, aggresive and vivid, showing the urgency of a great mission. I am not sure. Because he's President, let be it even if the usage is atypical.

The question of this thread is whether the phrase "afford not to (verb)" unusual in English.

 

[probus]

Following can't afford with a negative, as the president did, strikes me as unusual and slightly puzzling. But following it with an infinitive is very common.

 

[Rover_KE]

No. 'Afford' is often followed by an infinitive.

I don't find it followed by a negative at all unusual.

 

[probus]

Upon furrher reflection, I agree with Rover. There is nothing wrong with following can't afford with a negative.