Click to expand
What do you think? Give us your opinion. Anonymous comments allowed.
#4 - gliese (04/20/2013) [-]
soo much money lost by shutting down the city, but they got their badguy so, good for them.
User avatar #71 to #4 - garymotherfingoak ONLINE (04/20/2013) [-]
i agree with you here. it didn't take a whole army and a police state to catch 1 guy that already performed his endgame. 500 million dollars keeps thousands alive.
#79 to #44 - korben (04/21/2013) [-]
just found this very related
#68 to #44 - cammyT (04/20/2013) [-]
so 			******		 true
so ****** true
#48 to #44 - seananderson (04/20/2013) [-]
that would be the perfect comment if not for the joker though
#81 to #48 - jordanthebored (04/21/2013) [-]
its a scene from the film
#36 to #4 - angelusprimus (04/20/2013) [-]
When choice is money or lives everyone but a complete idiot or sociopath would save lives.
What were they supposed to do? Let everything go on normally and give him more targets where large groups of people gather?
Maybe wait until he blows up a crowd at a bank, or some other tourist gathering.
And if you ARE a sociopath and just care about economy, think of THIS. Boston's tourist season is just starting.
Terrorist not caught "Lets not go there, they have a bomber loose"
Terrorist caught "Lets go to the city that stayed tall and caught the ************ "
Which do you think costs more money? City shut down for two days, or entire ruined tourist season?
User avatar #35 to #4 - EdwardNigma (04/20/2013) [-]
Money doesn't matter when justice is on the line.
#47 to #35 - hillbillypowpow (04/20/2013) [-]
says the riddler.
#37 to #35 - byposted (04/20/2013) [-]
It costed 500 million dollars for that whole episode and a civilian was the one who found the perp, not a pig.

#75 to #37 - yomommabinshoppin (04/20/2013) [-]
This is a conservative asking this, but how does the desire for justice make you a liberal?
User avatar #101 to #75 - byposted (04/21/2013) [-]
Shutting down an entire city and basically enacting a low-form of martial law is not the proper thing to do if you're only LOOKING FOR ONE GUY.

The Police went into people's houses without warrants or permission in certain areas. They never found anybody and it costed the taxpayer $500,000,000
#104 to #101 - yomommabinshoppin (04/21/2013) [-]
also I want sources cited...
#103 to #101 - yomommabinshoppin (04/21/2013) [-]
Well, lets see, 500 million dollars, I am going to estimate that it would cost every citizen in the nation about 1.50, I think the people would be willing to donate a buck and a half to **** over an asshole that killed 5 people...
#67 to #51 - deadpoolisgod (04/20/2013) [-]
I like you...
#70 to #67 - spazzin (04/20/2013) [-]
Comment Picture
#39 to #37 - EdwardNigma (04/20/2013) [-]
Would you rather the guy be free?
To get away with murder and severe injury of many more? People lost their ******* limbs, others lost their lives.

I believe in justice. I believe in whats right. How can you give any hint of a **** about money in this case? Human life is such a glorious gift, by all odds we shouldn't be alive or where we are now, but we are. This man took that away from several people and ruined it for even more. I don't know a damn thing about politics, because I don't care, I'm on no side, I'm not even in America, so I don't see how I'm a liberal faggot for believing in whats right. People care too much for money.
#59 to #39 - icametocomment (04/20/2013) [-]
I need to be able to multi-thumb posts.
I need to be able to multi-thumb posts.
User avatar #5 to #4 - noblexfenrir (04/20/2013) [-]
You mean they caught the guys that killed and injured many people and had a plan and setup to do it again, you're right how awful. Yes the day long shut down resulted in certain businesses and therefor money was lost, however the heavy expenditure of police and other related resources will put more than enough money back into the system.
#7 to #5 - gliese (04/20/2013) [-]
and the heavy use of police and other related resources will not put the money back into Boston's economy. Spending to use all those assets actually uses up money.
User avatar #10 to #7 - noblexfenrir (04/20/2013) [-]
I'm sorry but where do most of the officers and companies who supply the related resources live? Oh right Alaska my bad...
#12 to #10 - gliese (04/20/2013) [-]
do you have any idea of economics and opportunity costs?
using their assets like police, SWAT, EOD does not put money back into the economy.
User avatar #13 to #12 - noblexfenrir (04/20/2013) [-]
So overtime pay, resources that directly come from public businesses (supplies and what not), emergency responders, the supplies they require which are expended and then must be re-supplied from other public businesses, etc etc.

These don't go back into the economy?
#14 to #13 - gliese (04/20/2013) [-]
no because youre using american money to pay for it. using $100 american for $100 dollars worth (american) of resupplied goods doesnt do anything just puts your balance back at $0. 100$ going out, then 100$ coming IN effectively puts you back at 0 . IF you sold those assets to CHINA then yes because they are paying you for these goods and Currency is not leaving it's coming in at no extra cost unlike your scenario.
User avatar #15 to #14 - noblexfenrir (04/20/2013) [-]
You have absolutely no idea what we are talking about do you?
#16 to #15 - gliese (04/20/2013) [-]
seems you dont if you think expenditures of Police, swat their equipment, EOD teams, gasoline actually puts money back into the economy. I actually took economics my first year of college so yes i do. Im not an world class economists but i do know a thing or two.
User avatar #17 to #16 - noblexfenrir (04/20/2013) [-]
Good but you would have realized I'm purely talking about the base economy of Boston itself. In which case 100$ of american money for 100$ of american goods but supplied from different states or even within the state itself can produce a increase in profit from basic utilization of each resource. You would be right if I was even remotely talking about what you were in the beginning, but I wasn't.
#18 to #17 - gliese (04/20/2013) [-]
it could but the expenditure (spending) of things like Police, SWAT, EOD, National guard gasoline for APC's cruisers, helicopters basically the man power they needed to find these guys does not put money back into the economy.
Your sentence in your first comment states "however the heavy expenditure of police and other related resources will put more than enough money back into the system"
you just said however the heavy spending (expenditure) of police and other related resources will put more than enough money back into the system.
No, it will not.
User avatar #19 to #18 - noblexfenrir (04/20/2013) [-]
In this specific case as I mentioned due to the overtime accrued by the police and emergency responders and resources expended that come from local sources, WILL put money back into the local economy.
#20 to #19 - gliese (04/20/2013) [-]
the officers spending their overtime will put money back in yes, i agree. But you said more than enough back in if you refer back to your first comment. These officers spending their overtime pay WILL NOT put more than enough money back into the economy. You think some guys spending a little overtime would of put Boston's GDP back up to where it would be had the bombs not gone off?
I rest my case for not knowing about economics and youre the one who seems not to know what he is talking about.
User avatar #21 to #20 - noblexfenrir (04/20/2013) [-]
I never said it would put them back up to where they were, I was simply saying it will account for a large enough portion to make the economic hit less damaging.
#22 to #21 - gliese (04/20/2013) [-]
some officers spending their overtime wont even really make a dent in the millions the city lost by being shut down for the past 2-3 days.
User avatar #23 to #22 - noblexfenrir (04/20/2013) [-]
They were only shut down for 1 day I believe and as I've said it's not just officers spending overtime. Resources utilized as I've said had a massive impact and other variables. The head of Loop Capital is quoted saying that the capital loss for the city is projected at, or very close to, Zero. With these reasonings and various others included in.
#24 to #23 - gliese (04/20/2013) [-]
the city was officially shut down for a 1 day manhunt but i dont think people did alot to help the economy like spending their money after the bombs went off. This whole week is a mini recession for the city of Boston.
Im just going top stop trying to explain this to you.
The city's economic loss is definitely not at zero or close too it and to think so after a terrorist bombed the marathon, the city being a literal ghost town for the past week and on top of that all the government spending that was used to make this manhunt a possibility is completely idiotic and naive
User avatar #26 to #24 - ctenop (04/20/2013) [-]
also just my two and eight, but most of the stuff will have been outsourced....In England you can't police where you live, my friend's dad in armed response has to get the train to London everyday. It is a shame they had to shut down all economic activities, one day sounds like little, but it has a lot of repercussions, and the money on the police will definitely be a loss to the area, as can a Chechnyan terrorist on the loose. Still, kudos that they actually found them.
#6 to #5 - gliese (04/20/2013) [-]
did i say it was bad? i think you took my comment the wrong way bud
User avatar #8 to #6 - noblexfenrir (04/20/2013) [-]
I may have, I took the "but they got their badguy so, good for them" as sarcastic.
#9 to #8 - gliese (04/20/2013) [-]
i really meant good for them. Why would i not want these terrorists captured?
User avatar #11 to #9 - noblexfenrir (04/20/2013) [-]
As I said, I thought it was meant sarcastically, not that I understood the reasoning behind if it was so.
 Friends (0)