Whats going on with all these people ready to give up their rights?

In short I question all arguments from the right and the left until the officials have and share useful data.. You should too...

I think many .. especially the foreign troll contingent here are jumping to unfounded conclusions about Americans.

Until you actually have good data and analysis... you can't make conclusions.

1. We do not know how many americans have been exposed.
(check out the thread about our numbers are almost meaningless right now. Stanford professors explain that without knowing who has been infected we don't have a enough data on exposed people to draw any useful conclusions.

2. This virus apparently slaughters those with lung issues. And many immigrants (legal and non legal) from countries south of the US border have TB related issues and latent TB. For instance this came out a few years ago during and outbreak of TB in San Diego.

I saw an article explaining that is one of Italy's biggest issues in its northern cities.. Immigrants with latent TB were getting very sick and dying along with the old people.

Now.. do we know that about NYC... well maybe not... but

I think Cuomo hinted at that issue when he tried to explain why NY was being hit so hard.... he said New York welcoming all people was New York strength.


---

In short I question all ripping on Americans... until we have some facts.
I think we are overall a great people. Right and left. I already see our generosity and caring.
The people working in markets and businesses still serving the public are going out of their way to be great and risking their health consciously to serve.
 
Last edited:
dsglyg383.png
 
You shouldn't be allowed to drive because it puts me at risk from being run over by you.
You shouldn't be allowed to sell me soda and hamburgers because it puts me at risk for obesity.
You shouldn't be allowed to smoke because it puts me at risk for lung cancer.

you are allowed to drive within the defined rules and regulations. they close the roads due to hazards and storm-related issues but you still can drive. so fuck off on this one.
I never heard of anyone being banned from selling hamburgers and with soda what Bloomberg did in NY was challenged and was bullshit. again fuck off on this made-up shit.
smoking and secondhand smoking are harmless to others. you wanna smoke sit in your home or go somewhere that it doesn't bother other people. fuck the lung cancer aspect of it. I just don't like the smell of it. no one has banned you from smoking, they rightly banned you from smoking in public places. same as if you choose to shit on your couch you can but you cannot do it in your doctor's office.

that is the price of living in a society, you don't like it keep living and staying in your mom's basement.
 
You don't seem to realize that each point you mentioned defeats your argument.

Yes I should not be driving if I am not well trained and passed a driving exam. It would put you at risk.

Yes I should not be allowed to sell food and drinks without a proper license that attests that I understand the importance of food safety and kitchen cleanliness.

Yes I should not be allowed to smoke in a public place if you were in the same room.

You perfectly made my point. And you should not be allowed to let lose on other human beings without any proper protection given that in this current environment you might infect others who might as a result face death.

Bill Maher made a perfect point a while ago. Some conservatives seem to always prioritize their own freedoms and constitutional rights as long as their irresponsible actions don't hit home. Once someone else does to them what they do to others they suddenly sing a very different tune.

Your problems and fears shouldn't be someone elses problems. I can use your argument for anything.

You shouldn't be allowed to drive because it puts me at risk from being run over by you.
You shouldn't be allowed to sell me soda and hamburgers because it puts me at risk for obesity.
You shouldn't be allowed to smoke because it puts me at risk for lung cancer.

Why are these thing socially acceptable?

If you don't want to get infected, YOU stay home.

That said, I do practice social distancing and even go so far as to wear gloves and a face mask when I go out which I'll tell you is a lot more than most of the people are doing. I'm absolutely for everyone staying home until this is over, but I draw the line at jailing people who don't.
 
Dr Tao, yet that is exactly what Healthcare professionals who have years of pandemic experience are saying. Isolation is the absolute best approach to overcome this pandemic alongside proper hygiene and face mask protection. Works in most countries where people trust their pandemic experts. But then there always some who seem to know it better. I bet if things get worse (which it seems it will) martial law will be enacted and those who still think they know better incarcerated and later fined and sued for endangering the public.

Every nation that deals with this has done something differently. You can't just say "this nation did a national lockdown, that's why they were so successful". Nor can you say that the one and only reason the virus spread was because irresponsible people went out and partied. There are many states not under a lockdown in the US right now. They don't seem to have brush fires. They don't seem to have medical facilities as "war zones".

There's a complex model that has to be done here. It's not just saying "everyone needs to stay home", the economy be damned.
 
Last edited:
Neither side of this argument is right or wrong at this point. Only the courts can decide whether or not the constitutional right suppression we're seeing right now is legally justified. I absolutely support most of the measures we're taking, but I have serious doubts that they'll hold up in court if challenged.
 
It's not just the number deaths. It's that the economy will anyway be completely crippled for many months if not over a year if infections will reach the majority in employment. Not everyone will get infected in the same 2 weeks. It will spread out over a long period of time and even if you let infected people work... their productivity would be so severely limited that it would have a much worse effect on the economy than shutting it down completely to bring the number of total infections down to manageable levels

I saw the numbers from NYC. It's true.

Dude, your numbers are garbage. Look at NYC. How many deaths? A few thousand with underlying conditions? Out of a city with what? 3 million ppl with underlying conditions? Do the math. Figure out what ur denominator is first. Only a fraction of those sick ppl who contract WuFlu will die from it.

Just because nearly all Wu-Flu deaths are people with pre-existing illness, doesn't mean EVERY PERSON WITH PRE-EXISTING ILLNESS WILL DIE OF WU-FLU. In fact, going by NYC numbers, its totally opposite !!
 
Not in normal times but this is not normal times. How pathetic a person it must be who in this situation even considers suing because his personal rights and freedoms were violated.

Neither side of this argument is right or wrong at this point. Only the courts can decide whether or not the constitutional right suppression we're seeing right now is legally justified. I absolutely support most of the measures we're taking, but I have serious doubts that they'll hold up in court if challenged.
 
its just that an idea that we are helping the economy in the long run by shutting down now for a period of time. We don't know what is an optimal time of shutdown... its a guess.

until you know how many Americans were infected and building antibodies, you don't know how effective the ramp is even the shape of the curves.

its highly unlikely shutting down the whole state of CA at once would have been as optimal as shutting down parts at a time....

its clearly causing an under utilization of capacity in a big city like San Diego right now? Was the full shutdown beneficial... how do you measure it.
how are you weighting the variables in the model?

How do we know anything is a good thing without knowing how many have already been exposed.

depending on infection ratios the ramp might just be stretching this out too long.

It might be great it might be overdone... in many areas.... we just don't have the data.

If you think you know... you don't understand.
I don't understand how any is arguing stridently about any of this..

its all models based on a lack of data because we have no experience.



It's not just the number deaths. It's that the economy will anyway be completely crippled for many months if not over a year if infections will reach the majority in employment. Not everyone will get infected in the same 2 weeks. It will spread out over a long period of time and even if you let infected people work their productivity would be so severely limited that it would have a much worse effect on the economy than shutting it down completely to bring the number of total infections down to manageable levels
 
Last edited:
Back
Top