Who wants to watch any sport and have political propaganda shoved down your throat?
Printable View
Who wants to watch any sport and have political propaganda shoved down your throat?
It is getting very hard to muster enthusiasm for football this year - empty stands, who knows if they will play a normal season or finish it, political bullshit plastered everywhere, fourth wall broken and half the players going out of their way to profess their contempt for the fan base ... I mean, what a complete mess.Quote:
Originally Posted by cubanstogie
Memphis Tigers star RB who would be starting his redshirt sophomore season in 2020 opts out due to he has lost 4 family members to Covid-19 and doesn't want to endanger anyone else in his family. Just this one player sorta blows all those mathematical stats out of the water whatever the overall percentages may be, IMO. For him the fatality rate is much higher. I'm sure he's not the only one with similar concerns.
You guys are right. The numbers say this could be a mild to very low inconvenience if we all decided to just go with the herd immunity philosophy. That simply is not the truth for everyone though.
And you guys are right too. Continuing to keep 'non-essential' businesses closed or kept to limited hours will help control the overall rate of Covid-19 spread. This approach simply does not work for many American families that are losing their homes due to no paycheck coming in.
There is no simple solution. No matter what the statistics, percentages, and overall numbers say about the effects of this pandemic, the truth is much muddier than the math. REAL people and real lives are affected in many different ways by this. I think most effects can be overcome eventually and people can begin rebuilding what has been lost on most fronts. Maybe all fronts. Except for death.
There is no need even for "herd immunity." Just like with every other disease, you simply move on with life once it's ascertained that it is not the second coming of the Black Death, which in this case was many months ago. No one waited around for herd immunity for H1N1, or the epidemic of the '50s, or SARS or really anything else. It does what it's going to do and you make your own choices if you're particularly at risk.Quote:
Originally Posted by Born2Steel
Lockdowns don't accomplish anything except get you where you're going anyway, in slow motion - this is well known and it's why it's never done. There is no delicate balance, no subtle nuances, no tough decisions about it. From any point past about April, lockdowns cannot be justified as anything other than a criminal act, period.
First of all, sorry to hear that the young man has had 4 family members pass from Covid19. Secondly, the models of Herd Immunity given a R0 of 2.5 for the virus and a 0.6% death rate put the # of Americans that have to die before Herd Immunity is established is 1.18 Million people.Quote:
Originally Posted by Born2Steel
If you are cool with that, then have at it. To each their own. I personally am still employed, financially secure and intelligent enough to understand enough science, medical research and the concepts of risk mitigation to most likely insulate my family from the herd. Darwinism bitches. Stock up on the hydroxychloroquine and good luck to you all.
I am not 'cool with that'. That's my point. I am not for just letting people die for the sake of 'saving the economy'. I am also not for letting families struggle due to forced closures, etc.. As I said there is no simple solution and all this division is pointless banter and debate. Everyone is right according to their own personal risks and means. The ONLY effect none of us can come back from is the people dying though, so that should be priority #1, IMO, to limit the # of deaths the best we can. ALL of us.Quote:
Originally Posted by El-Gonzo Jackson
I am cool with that, especially since the death rate is nowhere near 0.6%; mathematically this tops out at perhaps 300,000, most of whom were merely "stolen" from other causes of death. That is not a great public danger in any sense.Quote:
Originally Posted by Born2Steel
Regardless, it is not my duty, nor yours, to protect others from the ordinary risks of daily life at great expense to ourselves. You cannot "prevent every death" and it is foolish to try. It should absolutely not be the #1 priority, because then you end up in retarded situations like this.
As I have said before, the worst outcome of this is that you are being conditioned to think that wanting basic freedom and ordinary things is "selfish." Guess what, my freedom 100% is more important than your life. If you are worried about your health, you have been given straightforward options to protect it - do so. You don't get to tell healthy people they're not allowed to go about their lives. That's not what a quarantine is, it is a political move.
Let me put it this way - if I want a Coke, and the government says no, you can't have a Coke, it's for other people's safety, then they have grossly overstepped their boundaries and are no longer legitimate.
It is absolutely your duty to protect the lives of the innocent. This may be the stalemate point in the discussion.Quote:
Originally Posted by steelreserve
It is my duty not to endanger others through overtly reckless actions. It is not my duty to go to extreme and impractical lengths to avoid the mere possibility of endangering anyone.Quote:
Originally Posted by Born2Steel
If I were to go to a sex orgy with 50,000 people, experienced severe respiratory symptoms, tested positive for COVID, then walked around an old folks' home and lied about it - that would be reckless behavior infringing on my duty to protect others. Anything up until the very last part would not. It is not reckless to go to a bar or a restaurant. It is not my duty to avoid amusement parks and movie theaters. I do not have a duty to you to avoid getting sick.
The entire basis of your argument, and of the COVID cult as a whole, is to classify even the most routine daily activities as reckless. That is unacceptable and crosses lines that are not allowed to be crossed. Fuck any lockdowns of any kind, and fuck their "new normal" dogshit quality of life.
No...but you do have a duty to not be reckless in certain situations. For instance, it's rainy or icy conditions, slow down so you're not a danger to everyone else on the road. Even though statistically it will be impossible to wreck everyone, it is still your duty to not be the asshole that kills somebody by driving recklessly.
Old folks, diabetics, sickle cell patients, cancer patients, asthmatics, plus many other common underlying conditions greatly increase the danger of Covid being fatal. Things are not locked down around me. I can go to theaters, church, restaurants, live music, etc. Wear a mask in public, half capacity for most businesses, and closing bars and restaurants at 10/11pm. I don't have to do without. It can be done.
Clearly you live in a place that is more reasonable about it than many. I do not mind taking sensible measures, or blame anyone if they choose not to participate in things. I will even go out of my way to avoid coming in contact with old or sick people.Quote:
Originally Posted by Born2Steel
But when all of the things you listed above are closed by government decree, and schools are closed and playgrounds are padlocked, and they even come up with restrictions such as you are not allowed to have cheese on your nachos because it is too dangerous ... and the standard by which they justify all of this is that 1 person per 10,000 being sick puts you in the Code Red Emergency full lockdown ... well then it is not about safety, is it? It is about control, and about how far they can push their grab for permanent unlimited power.
First, who are they? Second, I have only been talking about safety for those at high risk. I mentioned before I am not for people losing their income, leading to losing homes and other personal financial disasters. But economic loss can be regained. Lives cannot. Our playgrounds are still closed as well, but people can jog in the park and the fall baseball leagues are literally in full swing. No it doesn't always make sense but the goal is always in focus. Protect those weaker and try to help those truly in need.Quote:
Originally Posted by steelreserve
I am mainly speaking from experience about what is going on in California, but my understanding is that it is similar in many other (mostly blue politically) states.Quote:
Originally Posted by Born2Steel
Safety for those at high risk falls first and foremost upon those people and the people around them. This is where the overblown, hand-wringing response has gone completely off the rails. They have decided that the responsibility should be shifted two and three degrees further out than is reasonable.
To use your driving example, it would be like saying road conditions are dangerous, so it is the responsibility of all the gas stations not to sell any gas during the winter, so that the people who might drive dangerously don't have the opportunity to run over an old lady. And that it is my duty also not to buy any gas. And that because these are clearly not reasonable restrictions that anyone would follow voluntarily, we'll enact them by force. Like I said, if it was a real emergency, you wouldn't need to force people to stay home.
Similarly, if I own a restaurant, and some guy decides it is worth the risk of coming in to eat a burger, and then they go home where their 85-year-old grandma lives - is it my fault if the guy gets his grandma sick, or his fault? Is it my duty to close the restaurant and go bankrupt in order to protect against every possible theoretical case like this? No, it certainly is not. I cannot run over people with my restaurant, everyone always has a choice about how they will act. The government can make suggestions, but its role ends there. You cannot enforce the worst case on everyone everywhere, the results are irrational and crippling, and in this case also pointless.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. In this case, an unprecedented emergency was declared without evidence - just incomplete data and scientific models that turned out to be wrong by full orders of magnitude. Yet people defend the response by saying "We HAD to do it - it was the best evidence available at the time, we didn't know!" No, that's exactly backwards. This is a perfect case study in why it is irresponsible to act without complete information. People should hang for this.
I get your argument and Like a lot of ideas they sound good in theory, problem is it puts too much responsibility and assumes people are conscientious of others. I have zero faith in others to be that responsible. It amazes me how many dont wash their hands after using bathroom. Look at looters and arsonists, zero regard for others. Now a large amount of people want to defund police so they can rape and pillage without consequence. Do you expect these people to give a crap if they give another Chinese virus? Most aren’t willing to make sacrifices anymore when Pelosi getting hair done, and criminals are out stealing and setting fires while we where masks and stay at home. Unfortunately its survival of the fittest. I still wear mask and wipe groceries and packages down to protect myself and family, but certainly don’t count on others to protect myself and loved ones.Quote:
Originally Posted by Born2Steel
That is the fundamental issue here. If you are concerned about this virus, the logical response is, assume everyone else could have it, and YOU act accordingly.Quote:
Originally Posted by cubanstogie
Not, try to make everyone else act as if they all have the virus and/or it is dangerous to all of them. Besides the fact that you will piss a lot of people off that way and they will ignore you out of resentment, the first way is infinitely less disruptive to society, and also more effective at protecting you and your loved ones if you deem it necessary.
In fact, if you are personally concerned about it and are taking precautions, then everyone else running around infecting each other at restaurants and Disneyland is exactly what you want. Then they all die or get over it, and it is safe for you sooner.
I could not care less whether or not I catch this stupid disease, and the only people I know who are at risk have isolated themselves anyway. No reason why we shouldn't be allowed to make our own choices and get on with our lives.
Its funny because im sure you recall like myself when Trump said lockdowns and quarantines will end up being worse than virus and libs along with media ridiculed him , yet it appears to be coming to fruition. There will always be a few sad stories, just like from flu and drunk drivers killing people, but we don’t lockdown during flu season. This is setting bad precedent as far as governments having too much power. Its not like we ever get rights back that we concede to them, then we end up with communism which is what AOC and her followers would love.Quote:
Originally Posted by steelreserve
A lot of it is way too similar to setting the stage for socialism. Eliminate half of the private sector and have much of the rest concentrated in the hands of big companies easily directed by the government. Removing most independent thought from business and industry ... Heavy dependence on the government for daily sustenance ... The government telling us who is allowed to work and what jobs they are allowed to do, and in what numbers ... Being conditioned to believe that your previous, more comfortable and generally better life is not coming back, and that this is a sacrifice you are expected to make for the greater good ... That any of the "non-essential" facets of a free society - from entertainment and luxuries to simple everyday pleasures - are just a silly little trifle that is ok to be discarded, and it is selfish to put them ahead of the greater good ... That the government experts should never be questioned no matter how excessive the intrusion on your life, and that it is ok to trample any who object ... And most of all, for Americans to learn how to shut up and fall in line, and that any amount of government control over any aspect of your life can be justified. After all, a government-controlled economy doesn't work without government control over many other areas of life.Quote:
Originally Posted by cubanstogie
Remember, it's for your own good.
Quote:
Originally Posted by steelreserve
Wow man, this guy is really out there.
https://athenae25.files.wordpress.co...d5_n.jpg?w=320
Sometimes I really wonder what this guy gets out of this.
That would be a big boost for domestic aluminum industry. Tremendous product. A real "game-changer".Quote:
Originally Posted by tom444
The last few threads used the words "duty" and "responsibility". I think those are values that were prevalent in society some 30+ years ago. Nowadays everybody talks about what their "rights" are and what they are "entitled" to do or have. In many ways I think that is what creates different opinions on topic....and that its become politicized.Quote:
Originally Posted by cubanstogie
If you can brush aside the politics of it, some people think they have a responsibility to do the right thing for their fellow man, while others feel they have the right to do whatever they want and feel compelled to exercise that right.
There you are again, pontificating on the morality of shutting up and doing what you're told, because that's what you've decided to do. A typical strategy for promoting liberal political causes. When it's become clear that your plan is terrible and your argument is based on completely incorrect assumptions and bad reasoning - smugly lecture everyone on morality.Quote:
Originally Posted by El-Gonzo Jackson
This is not "duty and responsibility" and it is not "doing the right thing for your fellow man," it is a foolish and incredibly destructive political gambit. You cannot put the politics of it aside, because that's all it is.
But no, that's not it. Just unilaterally wrecking the country with an arm-swipe over nothing - that's no biggie. It's just that we're bad people.
I wasn't trying to make stance either way, but rather point out that there are different values that likely are driving the two main sides of Herd vs no-Herd immunity. "No matter how thin you slice it, there are always 2 sides". somebody once wrote.Quote:
Originally Posted by steelreserve
But if you feel this defensive and polarized by my observations...it likely tells you( and a lot of other people here) something about yourself. ("The lady doth protest too much, methinks")
There he goes again.Quote:
Originally Posted by steelreserve
https://athenae25.files.wordpress.co...d5_n.jpg?w=320
So tell me, how much is it ok to "protest," according to you? This is one of the worst mistakes made in the history of the human race. It has had an immediate negative impact on my life, and an even worse impact on others. It has turned from "It will be a minor inconvenience for two weeks" into "Actually, we meant six months and it might as well be permanent, and also we meant major negative changes to many aspects of your life, not minor inconveniences, and also now you don't have a face." All based on lies. It is a criminal act, nothing less.Quote:
Originally Posted by El-Gonzo Jackson
Please, tell me more about how rejecting this massive crime against humanity reveals something about my own morality. I would say it reaffirms many very positive things, and that it reveals terrible moral flaws in those who have accepted it. Frankly, I don't know how they can live with themselves. By haranguing those who are on the correct side of the moral divide, that's how. So I stand corrected on that.
Sex during COVID:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UJMpDJO7tb4
Good news for steelreserve. The doctor notes that the safest sex to have is with yourself.
Is this what you're doing while you're supposed to be in virtual learning? Someone's going to tell your teacher.Quote:
Originally Posted by tom444
I hope thinks work out for you and I hope you find peace from the fear, anger, misery and anxiety that you appear to be experiencing.Quote:
Originally Posted by steelreserve