The thing is, I want an SKS. I just don't want one $300 worth.
Ironically, if you really look at what an SKS
IS, the idea of purchasing such an item for less than $300 of today's money is sort of absurd. I mean the materials and machine time and labor to create such a thing*, new, is more valuable than a couple day's pay -- or a case or two of ammo to shoot through it.
(* - "such a thing" being a very rugged, solidly-built, compact, self-loading 10-shot carbine capable of killing medium game or human adversaries at ranges of up to about 250 yds in skilled hands)
Sort of like how a K-31 is vastly more rifle than you could ever expect to create for $125 (what I paid a few years ago) to $300 (what they go for now). And yet that's all they're "worth" because -- as the governments that paid (a lot) for them no longer want them, they're basically sold off as, and thus
valued at, just above scrap metal.
Then the supply starts to fall below the demand and they gain back a small portion of their intrinsic "value" -- and folks perceive them as not "worth" that much.
So, as a functional item to fulfill a need, paying $300 for an SKS would be quite a bargain. But as a totally discretionary, "why not?," kind of purchase, the cost-to-benefit balance doesn't look as good.
So yeah, I guess this thread has ran its course.
Are you asking that it be closed?
