The cost of additional fuel is so far down the list of various costs that it's essentially measurement noise. The recovery and refurb costs are already less than having to manufacture a whole new stage. That's all you need to make reuse economically viable. Even 10% savings is all it'd take to make it viable. As it stands, their recovery flow cost is much better than that. Think a couple times better than 10% saving. Alas, since nobody has ever done booster recovery, they are of course working on streamlining their reuse operations flow. It has literally never been done before by anyone else, you can't just hire someone with direct experience. SpaceX are the trailblazers here in the true sense of the word. And your arguments are just pathetic. I'm a tax payer too, and I'd gladly have my money go to SpX over ULA.