|
Red Ken posted:Whilst I am very excited at the ability of the US Army to burn money at competitive rates (especially now that the Chinese military is experimenting with similar fires), is it not possible that these fires could spread, and burn up other reserves of money aside from the intended target? I know that burning money is the mission of the US Army, I just don't see how this method will be accurate than the old lighter-and-dollar-per-soldier techniques. I wouldn't want to see civilian funds combusted by this (admittedly magnificent) new fire. Look, despite whatever liberal garbage you want to spew out, the solid truth is that militarized money-burning is fundamental to the way that America works. The more money we can burn up at once, the farther everyone else keeps their money away from us. This is good because of all the dirty germs their money could carry, and potentially affect us. But you anti-money-burning liberals would never understand that, so just go back to your Prius 
|
#
¿
Feb 5, 2009 23:37
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 27, 2024 03:48 |
|
|
airza posted:I don't know why the goverment ignored my proposal for a supplemental civilian operated money hole. Providing the citizens with their tax refunds in the form of ten dollar bills dipped in lighter fluid with a box of matches encrusted with diamonds is an effective way to keep costs up while helping to burn money as quickly as possible. A civilian-operated money hole is doomed to failure. The world cannot think even for a second that we would set money ablaze for non-military usage. It sends the wrong smoke signal.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 6, 2009 00:05
|
|
|
Goatstein posted:The thing that blows me away about their protests is that if not for fire, they wouldn't have any of their snazzy computers or iphones or pita wraps! Talk about shortsighted... Exactly. And without the vast amounts of money burned over the last eight years, we wouldn't be a quickly-rising economy growing more quickly by leaps and bounds, like we currently are. It amazes me how anti-burning activists can ignore the facts and jump right to the same tired old conclusion.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 6, 2009 00:12
|
|
|
airza posted:Look, you obviously misinterpreted my post. I'm not saying that the military does a bad job of burning money as fast as possible. America is the best in the world at it. But imagine the worst happens and we need to deploy modern money burning technology. The setup required for money burning of this power and efficiency does require some setup and a quick response civilian money-burning team could help provide temporary relief while the goverment finds whatever kindling is available in the area. (In a pinch, poor people will do if the bank is not packing enough.) A fire of the magnitude needed to secure an area's oxygen and vital resources doesn't just happen overnight. To quote a great man: "Rome wasn't burned in a day." I'm unsure of what you mean by "relief," is this some new sort of technology? Last I heard, the Marines' RELEF-332 was put on indefinite hold while planning for future committee assignments was considered for future RETCON FUBAR.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 6, 2009 00:16
|
|
|
Mr Chips posted:I think it's interesting that the US is dedicating such resources to making the paper notes burn faster. I think that you're putting the cart before the horse here: why not make the notes out of paper that burns faster? That should reduce the need to find exotic additives to piles of notes to achieve acceptable rates of combustion. But that's not military technology, so what good does it do?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 6, 2009 06:56
|
|