Speyside
6 years ago
Would you repeat your logic on how things should reopen. I thought it was pretty sound and was non political in manner, yet took into account COVID 19, and the desperate need to reopen from an economic perspective. I put this in general, both sides are making this political and it isn't. It is about devastated Americans, either from COVID 19, or financial ruin. Everyone else please have the decency not to politicize this. I know we all have politically driven opinions. But common sense will serve us far better.
ZRX1200
6 years ago
I don’t think the two wings of the 💩 bird want reasoned logic, conversation or emphasizing areas of agreement.
Speyside
6 years ago
I think you are right. But that is the only place to find real world answers.
tailgater
6 years ago
I gotta remember to write things down when drinking.
tailgater
6 years ago
It's not a mantra so I'm not sure which rant of mine you're referring to.
But sticking to the facts, I deviate from the current governmental overreach by considering the demographics and in order to avoid the debate about the numbers I use data from the CDC.

When you consider the data, it's obvious that young people aren't dying from this virus. I hate having to repeat this because I feel like I'm tempting fate, but if I were an insurance company I'd have very low premiums for those under 40 and I wouldn't insure anyone over 70.
Period.

In a nutshell, we need to let kids be kids.
Open the schools, camps, day care, colleges, sports, etc.
Allow the Millenials to go out to bars and restaurants.
Allow them to go into the office. Keep America working.

But double down on the geezers.
Assisted living facility are gasoline to this fire. My folks are 79 and 85 years old. They are in the danger category and it's my job to protect them, not my kids who are 20 something.
The government should not be limiting freedoms in the manner they are. They should not be running people out of business. They should be setting guidelines and let the adults be adults.















delta1
6 years ago
I agree with much of that tail...when you lay out your case, it is reasonable...

my problem is that too many Americans don't behave reasonably or rationally, and leading life as usual by the majority of people, they can easily become asymptomatic carriers: they can become infected in many inside places where ventilation is limited and close contact is unavoidable: whether in tight workspaces, restaurants, bars, clubs, stadiums, theaters, churches or large family gatherings ... compounding this is Americans in large numbers have a disdain for wearing masks...so they can unknowingly pass the virus on...

the virus does infect younger people, although they don't suffer the illness as seriously...many at risk geezers are forced to live with younger family members, especially among the population in the lower end of the income scale...

many of them don't have health care coverage and may wind up in the emergency rooms, stressing our health care systems ...

but I agree in the general principle of rational/reasonable restrictions based on evidence of spread of disease and the consequences it has on the healthcare system in specific locales...one tight size does not fit all
Speyside
6 years ago
Tail said something else that stuck out to me before. Common sense yes, forced no.
delta1
6 years ago
that'd be fine if there was a larger supply of common sense among liberty loving Americans...

there's a reason we lead the world in numbers of people infected and deaths - by a lot...

American exceptionalism doesn't help when most of the rest of the world shows what response is correct and what is foolish...just look at the stats, especially deaths per million population
tailgater
6 years ago
I thought of the other thing:

This whole nonsense of categorizing businesses as "essential".
We need to stop arbitrarily labeling and rather we should permit the reopening based on ability to meet certain criteria.
I don't care if you're a pharmacy. If you can't meet a reasonable and safe protocol then you shouldn't be open. And if you sell flavored cigarettes to underage kids, that's fine as long as you can do it safely.

A BBQ joint in a small town is different from a 5 star jazzy place in downtown.
Yet they're given the same status. The same time tables. Regardless of their ability to meet the new rules.

And I know it will suck for people in the big cities. But that doesn't mean everyone else should suffer unnecessarily.

This random and arbitrary labeling is counter productive. Massachusetts has screwed the pooch on this one. I can't think of a worse system and the governor is making it even worse with his last second power plays. You can't tell a business they can open on date XX, and then not offer the new regulations to allow them to open until that date arrives.
Yet here we are.
And because we're a blue state that likes to have the government stick it up our azz, we take it and ask for more.
It's pathetic.
MACS
6 years ago
How about we just open back up and the at-risk and scared people can stay the f--- home?

This is already well past stupid.
JadeRose
6 years ago

I thought of the other thing:

This whole nonsense of categorizing businesses as "essential".
We need to stop arbitrarily labeling and rather we should permit the reopening based on ability to meet certain criteria.
I don't care if you're a pharmacy. If you can't meet a reasonable and safe protocol then you shouldn't be open. And if you sell flavored cigarettes to underage kids, that's fine as long as you can do it safely.

A BBQ joint in a small town is different from a 5 star jazzy place in downtown.
Yet they're given the same status. The same time tables. Regardless of their ability to meet the new rules.

And I know it will suck for people in the big cities. But that doesn't mean everyone else should suffer unnecessarily.

This random and arbitrary labeling is counter productive. Massachusetts has screwed the pooch on this one. I can't think of a worse system and the governor is making it even worse with his last second power plays. You can't tell a business they can open on date XX, and then not offer the new regulations to allow them to open until that date arrives.
Yet here we are.
And because we're a blue state that likes to have the government stick it up our azz, we take it and ask for more.
It's pathetic.

tailgater wrote:




You may be surprised to find I agree with you, TG. We should let Capitalism define what is "essential" and what isn't. I seriously doubt that there is a huge pent-up demand for people to go to JC Penney and other stores like it. The Pandemic just hastened their demise. Besides....Americans are children. When we are told no, what are we going to do? That very thing we have been told not to do. Also like kids, we need to learn that there may be consequences to our actions. Doing things like keeping lakes shutdown during the summer is absurd. People WILL do those things. Why put more burden on more law enforcement? Pretty soon they will start kneeling on the necks of campers and fishermen.
Speyside
6 years ago
MACS, you are incorrect, but I can understand your reasoning based on that the media has sensationalized the deaths and are basically focusing on that. The real danger is the autoimmune problems the virus is causing. This is the game changer. It just isn't sensational enough. These problems are effecting all ages and they are coming in many different forms.

So what does all of the above mean? Reopen, but in the best manner possible. We are worried about the wrong statistic, deaths, we should be worried about infections. The medical community isn't even looking where the real need is. I think specific sections of the scientific community is.

So what is reopen in the best way? Not just a total reopen and forget precautions. Reopen in a reasonable way that what we do know about the virus. Texas just reopened, their infections are spiking. New York is doing what I am talking about and their cases are continuing to decline.
tailgater
6 years ago

You may be surprised to find I agree with you, TG. We should let Capitalism define what is "essential" and what isn't. I seriously doubt that there is a huge pent-up demand for people to go to JC Penney and other stores like it. The Pandemic just hastened their demise. Besides....Americans are children. When we are told no, what are we going to do? That very thing we have been told not to do. Also like kids, we need to learn that there may be consequences to our actions. Doing things like keeping lakes shutdown during the summer is absurd. People WILL do those things. Why put more burden on more law enforcement? Pretty soon they will start kneeling on the necks of campers and fishermen.

JadeRose wrote:



But we are NOT children. That's where you and I differ on this.
We aren't doing things because we're told not to.
We are demanding to do things that we have the right to do.

The difference isn't even subtle.

When there is a good reason to ban something, we're OK with it: Drunk driving, owning a nuclear bomb, getting a mullet, etc.


opelmanta1900
6 years ago
Chicks with mullets are hot... Fight me...
victor809
6 years ago

But we are NOT children.

tailgater wrote:


wrong right out of the gate. damn
teedubbya
6 years ago
If I disagree on all three reasons being good I guess I can throw a fit and do them anyway. I want to drive drunk with a nuke and a mullet. I think you are talking about when you agree there is a good reason rather than when there is actually good reason. That is an important distinction.

You may think it is good reason, virtually every expert in the field may find it's good reason but since I don't I get to throw the fit and do what I want. As a matter of fact I'm going to harass everyone who isn't driving drunk with a mullet and nuke. I'm not a child and can make these decisions on my own. The folks scared of any of these should stay away from me.

It's not enough that virtually every expert finds drunk driving and personal possession of nukes to be a problem. It's got to be the right experts. The ones that agree with me. As long as I can find a small vocal group to disagree then there isn't agreement and I can do what I want.

Sarcasm aside who decides good reason is important. In this instance (pandemic) pretty much the whole world is in agreement, including our President, Congress and the majority of local governments. It's a pretty small vocal group that isn't/wasn't.
Speyside
6 years ago
All 3 lead to helping repopulate the world to various degrees, so I'm good with it. Personally I want many nukes. Though all tactical in nature as my agenda is specific. Also weapons small pox. Though bioengineered such that the initial dispersment dies in three days, those infected cannot infect others, and the kill rate is 100%. The SIP needs a reset.
tailgater
6 years ago

If I disagree on all three reasons being good I guess I can throw a fit and do them anyway. I want to drive drunk with a nuke and a mullet. I think you are talking about when you agree there is a good reason rather than when there is actually good reason. That is an important distinction.

You may think it is good reason, virtually every expert in the field may find it's good reason but since I don't I get to throw the fit and do what I want. As a matter of fact I'm going to harass everyone who isn't driving drunk with a mullet and nuke. I'm not a child and can make these decisions on my own. The folks scared of any of these should stay away from me.

It's not enough that virtually every expert finds drunk driving and personal possession of nukes to be a problem. It's got to be the right experts. The ones that agree with me. As long as I can find a small vocal group to disagree then there isn't agreement and I can do what I want.

Sarcasm aside who decides good reason is important. In this instance pretty much the whole world is in agreement, including our President, Congress and the majority of local governments. It's a pretty small vocal group that isn't/wasn't.



teedubbya wrote:



You're too quick to respond on this one.

It's not as simple as me not agreeing. It's the implementation.

You can't open up a wholesale nursery, but you can open up the home depot.
Walking on the beach is (was) verboten, but walking down the aisle at Target is OK.
Billy Bobs BBQ in East Boondock is a restaurant and therefore can't open until Snob-City Grill in downtown Manhattan is allowed to open.
A drive in theater isn't "essential" so it's closed.

I'm not a rabble rouser. I don't attend protests. I do call my elected officials (No, Liz Warren has NOT responded to my call nor my 3 emails). But most importantly, I don't "just accept" what is spoon fed by the governor if it doesn't make sense. This isn't rocket science. it's not even infectious disease transmission. It's a power grab in the name of safety. It's random and arbitrary and poorly defined. It's debilitating. To individuals and the economy. And the best part? I doesn't even save lives. Not when anyone named Walmart can remain open just because they sell day old bread along with their flat screens.
It's a fuquing joke, and you of all people should recognize that. Going along to get along is dangerous. And it's creating animosity with the natives.
People that lash out against something as simple as masks are doing so because the rules make zero sense.
It's like finding a fake Cuban cigar at a shop in Mexico. If one is fake, what do you assume about the others?
The government is saying: "you're safe at the Piggly Wiggly, but in danger at the beach". Oh, and wear your mask.

Stop. Just stop.


tailgater
6 years ago

wrong right out of the gate. damn

victor809 wrote:



You are once again the exception that proves the rule.

teedubbya
6 years ago
I'm ok with arguing implementation. Some of it has been stupid.... jade was saying the same.

I think some of the decisions were made not as your safe at piggly wiggly but rather food is something you will need access to so it is a necessary risk. Same with home depot. I had to go there during our stay at home to get a valve to repair my shower. The other option was just letting it leak for months.

Some of the decisions were nonsensical. Like you can take a boat on the water as long as there is no engine.

That is all debatable. I've said so all along. It's a tough balance and no one right answer. Best guess.

It's the idiots that try to minimize the virus when making those arguments that are an issue. They don't know of which they speak which makes it hard to listen to what they really want..... to be able to do whatever they want. They try to change the facts to support their opinion. This virus thing is sort of real, it is brutal and it is world wide. We are still learning about it but those things are certain.





Users browsing this topic