The previous "ratio" was a little unclear and vague. Just what is "worth," after all? And Monique's objection about fractional options holds. So here is the new question: ------------- If you have the ability, through distributing money and manpower, to save x lives from terrorists or y lives from other causes, how great does the ratio y:x need to be before you are undecided which group of lives to save? -------------- For example, if you choose y = 15 and x = 5, then that means that if you are given the choice to save 6 lives from terrorism or 14 lives from other causes, you would save the 6 and let the 14 die, and that if you are given the choice to save 4 lives from terrorism or 16 lives from other causes, you would save the 16 and let the 4 die. "Other deaths" are deaths to cancer, heart disease, stroke, Alzheimer's, accidents, pneumonia, etc. Groups X and Y are equal other than their manners of death and their sizes. This is not merely an abstraction. This is the question that must be asked by all those who allocate funds on the national level.