Welcome to tyranny.

[Bleipriester]

If you're afraid of getting sick, stay home. But you can't tell me what to do.

Life is a risk. Freedom means you get to choose.

Don´t confuse freedom with idiocy.

Don't confuse ignorant cowardice with morality, hon.

It is not about morality but responsibility.

My responsibility to stay at home so your grandma can avoid the risk of getting COVID-19 is zero.

My government has no legitimate authority to tell me I can't work or go to the movies, period.

Yes, they have. They do have laws.

Note that I said "legitimate." Where does the Constitution give government the authority to tell me I can't go to work?

Where does it say you can´t drive on the sidewalk?

I won't get into that because it's a complicated issue. Government owns the roads, so government has to make the rules about how they are used. If government didn't own then roads, then some private owner would make the rules.

However, government doesn't own your job. It doesn't own you.

Still, they "own" the responsibility to take care of the people. And whether a road is privately owned or not, all laws apply.

States’ stay-home orders carry the force of law

Washington Gov. Jay Inslee, who issued some of the earliest social-distancing orders of any governor to combat the sprea

www.politifact.com

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

I merely place a vastly higher value on human life than I do on the solvency of a given company.

False dichotomy.

You're assuming that a company, that the economy as a whole, is something that can be sacrificed to save human lives, and ignorantly disregarding the impact that economic conditions have on human lives.

To sacrifice the economy, you are not saving human lives, you are sacrificing human lives. For what purpose?

Incorrect.

If, by sacrificing the solvency of a non-essential company, we save human lives, through lessened exposure, then it's well-worth the sacrifice.

That is unless you work for the company or have your IRA investments in it.

Yep... sux to be them... but if we can save your loved one's life by keeping that business (and similar others) closed, then the financial loss and hardship are well worth it.

The idea is to salvage both. There is no right or wrong call here because nobody has a crystal ball. I say open up the economy after we have the ability to protect ourselves from the virus like with N-95 masks for everybody, blood donations from those who recovered from it, reliable antibody tests and an ample supply to test anybody and everybody.

Agreed.

But until we reach that optimum state, I hold that human life takes priority over corporate solvency or even the financial well-being of a given company's employees.

You forgot one thing however, and that is huge federal debts piling up on top of our regular huge federal debts. We are spending tons of money on this project while losing a huge tax base at the same time. While we can't take back the spending without causing severe economic harm to get out of this, what we can do is get businesses running again to contribute to our tax base.

 

[lennypartiv]

Freedom means you get to choose.

Another example of tyranny. Police enforcing the illegal stay at home order arrest a woman in Louisville. She did get some revenge on the police.

---Burnett was taken into custody. Officers said while in custody, she kicked out the rear taillight and a door handle.---

Louisville woman arrested at Kroger, accused of violating quarantine order for third time

A woman who tested positive for COVID-19 has been arrested for violating her order to self-quarantine for at least the third time.

www.wlky.com

 

[lennypartiv]

Obviously you either never read or don't understand the Bill Of Rights. No where in there does it say that .gov can shut down your business, close the churches, and force you to stay home.

The elected leaders in Tulsi Gabbards state haven't gotten that message. They are currently harassing tourists.

---Two visitors, a woman from Las Vegas and a man from Australia, were arrested today for violating the mandatory quarantine order during the current emergency, state officials said.---

Hawaii Updates: Two More Deaths; Visitors Arrested In Quarantine Case; Gov: Not Ready For Reopening

Updated: 4/21/2020, 12:09 p.m.Two more coronavirus-related deaths have been reported, one tied to the Maui Memorial Medical Center cluster, the state…

www.hawaiipublicradio.org

 

[Bob Blaylock]

But until we reach that optimum state, I hold that human life takes priority over corporate solvency or even the financial well-being of a given company's employees.

Once again, a person's financial well-being has a direct impact on his ability to survive.

It is self-contradictory nonsense to claim that you care about anyone's life, but at the same time, to not care about his financial well-being. The two are inextricably tied together.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Economic pain is always balanced against human life. We could stop all traffic deaths tomorrow if we established a national speed limit of 5 mph. According to you the fact that we don't means we hold that financial solvency trumps human life. The concept of perfect safety is absurd. The only question is how many deaths are we willing to tolerate, and so far we haven't even come close to what we've tolerated in the past.

Kondor3 isn't even operating at that level of sanity. He's purporting to want to protect human life, by way of policies that will cost far more human lives than they will save.

A better analogy might to to point to a danger that some food might be spoiled and cause food poisoning, which means that some people might die, and so, to prevent that, we need to make sure that nobody gets any food. In fact, in the long run, this might be very close to a genuinely literal effect of his policies; as people become unable to obtain food, either because they have no money or other wealth with which to buy it, or that it isn't even available due to lack of production and distribution.

This truly must be a case of someone living in his mother's basement, with a refrigerator upstairs that is always stocked with food, which he assumed just magically appears there, completely ignorant about everything that has to happen for that food to exist, and to wind up in that refrigerator. Maybe he understands as much as that his mother has to go shopping to buy that food; but he doesn't understand how his mother obtains the money with which to buy it (or his deadbeat baby-daddy, assuming he has any part in it other than having donated a bit of sperm some decades ago, and then abandoned him), and he certainly doesn't understand how food is farmed, processed, packaged, transported, and sold, nor the impact that the economy has on all of this. He just knows that somehow, the food is always there in his mother's refrigerator, and he has blind faith that it will always be, no matter what happens in The Real World.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

We could stop all traffic deaths tomorrow if we established a national speed limit of 5 mph.

Only slightly relevant, but I spent most of a year working at two different projects in Tracy, the latter of which ending roughly a year ago. The projects were at driving distances of 70 miles and 65 miles from by home.

The nearer of these two projects, if I was limited to 5 MPH, would take me 13½ hours to drive to, and 13½ to drive home again. There wouldn't be enough time in a day for me to make the round trip at that speed, much less to do any work when I was there.

 

[bripat9643]

I merely place a vastly higher value on human life than I do on the solvency of a given company.

False dichotomy.

You're assuming that a company, that the economy as a whole, is something that can be sacrificed to save human lives, and ignorantly disregarding the impact that economic conditions have on human lives.

To sacrifice the economy, you are not saving human lives, you are sacrificing human lives. For what purpose?

Incorrect.

If, by sacrificing the solvency of a non-essential company, we save human lives, through lessened exposure, then it's well-worth the sacrifice.

That is unless you work for the company or have your IRA investments in it.

Yep... sux to be them... but if we can save your loved one's life by keeping that business (and similar others) closed, then the financial loss and hardship are well worth it.

The idea is to salvage both. There is no right or wrong call here because nobody has a crystal ball. I say open up the economy after we have the ability to protect ourselves from the virus like with N-95 masks for everybody, blood donations from those who recovered from it, reliable antibody tests and an ample supply to test anybody and everybody.

Agreed.

But until we reach that optimum state, I hold that human life takes priority over corporate solvency or even the financial well-being of a given company's employees.

I hold that you're a douchebag who probably has a gauranteed source of income. You're free to hold whatever priorities you wish. However, that doesn't give you the right to impose them on us. Frankly, I don't give a flying fuck if your grandma dies because she refused to isolate herself. That's her problem, not mine. I need to work, and my job takes precedence over your grandma. End of story.

 

[bripat9643]

If you're afraid of getting sick, stay home. But you can't tell me what to do.

Life is a risk. Freedom means you get to choose.

Don´t confuse freedom with idiocy.

Don't confuse ignorant cowardice with morality, hon.

It is not about morality but responsibility.

My responsibility to stay at home so your grandma can avoid the risk of getting COVID-19 is zero.

My government has no legitimate authority to tell me I can't work or go to the movies, period.

Yes, they have. They do have laws.

Note that I said "legitimate." Where does the Constitution give government the authority to tell me I can't go to work?

Where does it say you can´t drive on the sidewalk?

I won't get into that because it's a complicated issue. Government owns the roads, so government has to make the rules about how they are used. If government didn't own then roads, then some private owner would make the rules.

However, government doesn't own your job. It doesn't own you.

Still, they "own" the responsibility to take care of the people. And whether a road is privately owned or not, all laws apply.

States’ stay-home orders carry the force of law

Washington Gov. Jay Inslee, who issued some of the earliest social-distancing orders of any governor to combat the sprea

www.politifact.com

That doesn't mean anything, moron. The question here is "who makes the laws," not whether they "apply," whatever the fuck that is supposed to mean.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

I hold that you're a douchebag who probably has a gauranteed [sic] source of income.

More likely, Kondor3 is ignorant and oblivious to the threat that an economic collapse would have to his source of food, housing, and whatever else he is being provided with. His living is not guaranteed, I think; just that he doesn't grasp that he can wind up starving and homeless just as easily as everyone else.

I take issue with you calling him a “douchebag”. A douchebag gets to come into close contact with a woman's exposed intimate areas. What would make you suppose that this is a privilege which ever has been or ever will be accorded to him?

 

[Bleipriester]

If you're afraid of getting sick, stay home. But you can't tell me what to do.

Life is a risk. Freedom means you get to choose.

Don´t confuse freedom with idiocy.

Don't confuse ignorant cowardice with morality, hon.

It is not about morality but responsibility.

My responsibility to stay at home so your grandma can avoid the risk of getting COVID-19 is zero.

My government has no legitimate authority to tell me I can't work or go to the movies, period.

Yes, they have. They do have laws.

Note that I said "legitimate." Where does the Constitution give government the authority to tell me I can't go to work?

Where does it say you can´t drive on the sidewalk?

I won't get into that because it's a complicated issue. Government owns the roads, so government has to make the rules about how they are used. If government didn't own then roads, then some private owner would make the rules.

However, government doesn't own your job. It doesn't own you.

Still, they "own" the responsibility to take care of the people. And whether a road is privately owned or not, all laws apply.

States’ stay-home orders carry the force of law

Washington Gov. Jay Inslee, who issued some of the earliest social-distancing orders of any governor to combat the sprea

www.politifact.com

That doesn't mean anything, moron. The question here is "who makes the laws," not whether they "apply," whatever the fuck that is supposed to mean.

Apparently it is those you elected, blitz bulb.

 

[JoeB131]

It's not about what I would do or you would do. It's about them taking jobs from Americans that do want to do those jobs, or are otherwise greatly lowering their pay scale.

If you are worried about pay scales, then you should support unionization.

You can't have it both ways.

It's irrelevant who murdered who. The fact is blacks commit much more crime per capita than any other group of people in our country. That's why more of them are in prison.

You made a claim that you are more likely to be murdered by a black person... when in fact, 84% of whites are murdered by other whites, often people they live with.

For much of the country, the economy is going to partially open up in a few days, and in another few weeks or months, open up even more. Recessions and depressions happen when nobody has access to money. Thanks to Trump, some people are going to have more money than they did working.

You keep telling yourself that.. but not really. The economy is gonna suck for a long time.

 

[JoeB131]

Once again, a person's financial well-being has a direct impact on his ability to survive.

It is self-contradictory nonsense to claim that you care about anyone's life, but at the same time, to not care about his financial well-being. The two are inextricably tied together.

Again, Mormon Bob thinks that the ability of the rich to exploit working people is more important than their safety.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Again, Mormon Bob thinks that the ability of the rich to exploit working people is more important than their safety.

If we destroy our economy, then it's not just the wealthy who will suffer. A hundred times more non-wealthy people will suffer even more than the wealthy.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

If you are worried about pay scales, then you should support unionization.

You can't have it both ways.

Let's look at that: You want more people coming into our country, taking our jobs, and lowering our pay scales, but then want more unions to bring wages back up???? Talk about not being able to have it both ways.

How about this: Keep immigrants out of our country, then wages will naturally increase with no unions, and both of our concerns will be addressed.

You made a claim that you are more likely to be murdered by a black person... when in fact, 84% of whites are murdered by other whites, often people they live with.

Oh, so you have no black people living where you live? Why not Joe? You are a self-hating white. You should be living in an area where less than 20% are of your own kind if you pray what you preach. Those places are really not that hard to find.

 

[bripat9643]

If you're afraid of getting sick, stay home. But you can't tell me what to do.

Life is a risk. Freedom means you get to choose.

Don´t confuse freedom with idiocy.

Don't confuse ignorant cowardice with morality, hon.

It is not about morality but responsibility.

My responsibility to stay at home so your grandma can avoid the risk of getting COVID-19 is zero.

My government has no legitimate authority to tell me I can't work or go to the movies, period.

Yes, they have. They do have laws.

Note that I said "legitimate." Where does the Constitution give government the authority to tell me I can't go to work?

Where does it say you can´t drive on the sidewalk?

I won't get into that because it's a complicated issue. Government owns the roads, so government has to make the rules about how they are used. If government didn't own then roads, then some private owner would make the rules.

However, government doesn't own your job. It doesn't own you.

Still, they "own" the responsibility to take care of the people. And whether a road is privately owned or not, all laws apply.

States’ stay-home orders carry the force of law

Washington Gov. Jay Inslee, who issued some of the earliest social-distancing orders of any governor to combat the sprea

www.politifact.com

That doesn't mean anything, moron. The question here is "who makes the laws," not whether they "apply," whatever the fuck that is supposed to mean.

Apparently it is those you elected, blitz bulb.

I didn't elect any of them, moron.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Again, Mormon Bob thinks that the ability of the rich to exploit working people is more important than their safety.

If we destroy our economy, then it's not just the wealthy who will suffer. A hundred times more non-wealthy people will suffer even more than the wealthy.

Indeed, the wealthy are in a much better place to prepare to weather any economic disaster. They can easily afford to do, and would do if they are wise, to stockpile food and fuel and other essentials, so that they can survive an extended time no matter what the economy does. Not so easy for those farther down the economic scale, who are struggling as it is just to meet their daily needs, with little left over to store for the future.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Again, Mormon Bob thinks that the ability of the rich to exploit working people is more important than their safety.

If we destroy our economy, then it's not just the wealthy who will suffer. A hundred times more non-wealthy people will suffer even more than the wealthy.

Indeed, the wealthy are in a much better place to prepare to weather any economic disaster. They can easily afford to do, and would do if they are wise, to stockpile food and fuel and other essentials, so that they can survive an extended time no matter what the economy does. Not so easy for those farther down the economic scale, who are struggling as it is just to meet their daily needs, with little left over to store for the future.

You know how leftist are. When Republicans do something, in their mind, it's not because it's the right thing to do. It's to take care of their buddies, which I'm sure over half are Democrats like Gates, Buffet and Zuckerberg.

 

[bendog]

Who do these leftists think they are? I have a right to smoke my cigar in any bar I choose.

 

[Seawytch]

I merely place a vastly higher value on human life than I do on the solvency of a given company.

False dichotomy.

You're assuming that a company, that the economy as a whole, is something that can be sacrificed to save human lives, and ignorantly disregarding the impact that economic conditions have on human lives.

To sacrifice the economy, you are not saving human lives, you are sacrificing human lives. For what purpose?

Incorrect.

If, by sacrificing the solvency of a non-essential company, we save human lives, through lessened exposure, then it's well-worth the sacrifice.

That is unless you work for the company or have your IRA investments in it.

Yep... sux to be them... but if we can save your loved one's life by keeping that business (and similar others) closed, then the financial loss and hardship are well worth it.

The idea is to salvage both. There is no right or wrong call here because nobody has a crystal ball. I say open up the economy after we have the ability to protect ourselves from the virus like with N-95 masks for everybody, blood donations from those who recovered from it, reliable antibody tests and an ample supply to test anybody and everybody.

Agreed.

But until we reach that optimum state, I hold that human life takes priority over corporate solvency or even the financial well-being of a given company's employees.

I hold that you're a douchebag who probably has a gauranteed source of income. You're free to hold whatever priorities you wish. However, that doesn't give you the right to impose them on us. Frankly, I don't give a flying fuck if your grandma dies because she refused to isolate herself. That's her problem, not mine. I need to work, and my job takes precedence over your grandma. End of story.

You should be pressuring the Federal government to produce more tests then. It's the only way you're going to safely return to work.