Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Tall-_-Guy t1_j8s32b1 wrote

Not to be grim, but a bullet is cheaper than taking care of a lot of hungry people. I'm not political, but there has obviously been recent attempts to disrupt the election process. This would be an absolute nightmare and the masses would lose handily. Let's be honest, the American Govt doesn't care about any of us peons.

6

Psychomadeye t1_j8tge3e wrote

It'll be more expensive to fight everyone by a long stretch. It's literally cheaper to do nothing. Also, you can get about 25lb of flour for less than ten .308 rounds.

2

Tall-_-Guy t1_j8thuaa wrote

Ahahahahahahaha. Ahhh, I needed that laugh.

2

Psychomadeye t1_j8tpaqv wrote

I'm not sure where you are at but .308 cost about a dollar each here. Flour is about eight dollars for twenty five pounds. Assuming 200% accuracy and soldiers who fight for free with zero causalities, it would still have been cheaper to not fire those rounds and feed 37 people for the day. But if you do fire those rounds, you can make more by shooting other things as human flesh might not net you as much in the food market.

1

Tall-_-Guy t1_j8tvvtf wrote

You think they'd use bullets. Hahaha. Plus feeding a person for the rest of their life. Now multiply that by millions and they'll have children too. It's unsustainable. Dead is cheaper in the long run.

1

Psychomadeye t1_j8tx0ix wrote

You think they'll suddenly grow foresight? I was fucking with you but now I'm kinda worried you think there's direction to any of this.

2