That’s an interesting take. One on one side the death is a haphazard byproduct and on the other it is at least motivated by someone. Somebody has to have a vision for why these weapons need to be used. I’d argue though that in the case of Amazon, wether or not it’s of any priority to them, the suffering would be something worth ironing out over time whereas, for weapons companies, it’s the entire product they sell

Yeah but profiting off of starvation, homelessness or sickness is slightly less concerned with destroying human life efficiently, more so extracting value from suffering. Far harder to wiggle your way out of a bomb dropping on you. In that way, defense contractors are especially gross imo. I guess you could argue being blown apart may be more humane though idk

It exists to cover bank runs and it is your money. There is nothing wrong with wanting your money in any given moment. That’s just my take though, I’m not a lawyer.

I think it’d basically defeat its preventative purpose though if a story got out that people weren’t covered, even in an engineered bank run. What if you’re not in on the plot? What if it happens tomorrow at your bank? Are you just fucked too? Better withdraw all your money to be safe

Those stopped existing when it became cheaper to just throw the whole thing out and buy a new one

Just a thief?? That’s creative, solution seeking, and ecologically conscious problem solving right there

Be honest, post unfunny memes day is every day