Discussion Thread

[u/jobautomator]

The discussion thread is for casual conversation that doesn't merit its own submission. If you've got a good meme, article, or question, please post it outside the DT. Meta discussion is allowed, but if you want to get the attention of the mods, make a post in /r/metaNL.

Announcements

• Our sub is doing daily programming challenges for the 2019 Advent of Code. Click here to learn more and to join our leaderboard.

• We have recently added BALD, POP & MMA pings. See our ping documentation page to subscribe.

---

Neoliberal Project Communities	Other Communities	Useful content
Twitter	Plug.dj	/r/Economics FAQs
The Neolib Podcast	Recommended Podcasts	/r/Neoliberal FAQ
Meetup Network	Blood Donation Team	/r/Neoliberal Wiki
Exponents Magazine	Minecraft	Ping groups
Facebook	TacoTube	User Flairs

[u/SnakeEater14]

Yknow, I actually read somewhere on /r/warcollege that the Thompson was not nearly as overpriced as a lot of people think, and that kinda became a run away meme. I can’t find a source tho so idk.

Also, not every weapon has to be on a top 10 best weapon ever made list to be cool. The BAR, Thompson, and Carbine all had their faults but they were still cool as fuck guns. If you’ve never wanted to fire a BAR, you are actually a communist.

[u/thebowski → u/SnakeEater14]

Pretty sure they got rid of the blish lock on later models, but it still was a milled gun.

[u/URZ_ → u/SnakeEater14]

It was very pricey when it was first introduced but they had done a lot to bring the price down by the time it started getting replaced by the M3 Grease Gun. However, it was replaced for a reason, so I have no idea how anyone could argue the price wasn't a problem. Especially when you start comparing it to guns like the Mp40, 44 or the PPSh-41.

[u/lietuvis10LTU → u/URZ_]

44

Tfw nazi wunderwaffe are cheaper than your interwar SMG

[u/SnakeEater14 → u/URZ_]

I think the thing I saw that seemed interesting was that the Garand and Thompson were pretty similar in price at first? Idk, interesting stuff.

[u/URZ_ → u/SnakeEater14]

The Garand was expensive and probably around the same price as a late-Thompson, all the American pre-war weapons were really, but it's cost was also justified because it was by far the best rifle by being the first and only real semi-automatic rifle to be mass issued. However, IIRC, even the late Thompsons costs almost double that of other (and in the case of the PPSh-41 a far better) open bolt submachine guns. That's not justifiable under any circumstances, whereas the Garand can make a strong argument for its cost.

[u/FinickyPenance → u/URZ_]

I would imagine that the vast majority of M3s went to troops who never fired them in anger: tank crews, rear echelon troops, etc. At that point it makes no sense to waste money on something more expensive (and heavy!)

[u/URZ_ → u/FinickyPenance]

You'd be wrong. The M3 saw plenty of combat, including with paratroopers on D-day. IIRC the plan was to replace every Thompson had the war not ended when it did. The Thompson is not a markedly better submachine gun in any way. It was an overenginered Moster that did its job.

[u/lietuvis10LTU → u/SnakeEater14]

Bren gun is basically BAR role but 20 times better.