The Coronavirus, not the beer

Japan Covid handout info--My wife and I received 1 mask each from the Japanese govt, the "Abe masks" (small but multi-layered), and we'll each get an initial $1,000 (10,000 yen) if we fill out the paper work. Then, if I can show that I've lost over 50% of my income due to the virus shutdown, I'm supposed to be eligible for an additional $3,000. We both should qualify.
 
sturg33 said:
I dont understand how you can say the government telling me I cant go to my own property isn't tyranny.

What about arresting someone for paddle boarding alone?

What about arresting someone for going to park with their kid?

What about banning the sale of seeds in the wake of a global depression?

What about for quarantining citizens for going to a drive in church service?

All of these are justified? None of it is overreach? If you think this is hunky dory then we can we stop the discussion bc we're too far apart
Click to expand...

Great, you admit you are incapable of understanding how the constitution works. That's the first step.

Next step is learning the smallest measure of reading comprehension, since I gave you a specific example over overreach, and described a process for determining whether actions are overreach or not. You somehow read that as "there is no overreach possible."

I recommend a course at the learning annex, though online is probably your best bet at this point. But until that happens, its good to know that you have chosen the "muh rights" flag-jerkoff method. It's good to know you are only interested in complaining, not what anyone says in response to your "questions."
 
You addressed nothing I asked.

You'll have to forgive me for thinking about "muh rights" when I'm told I cant purchase ****ing vegetable seeds.

I asked earlier and you answered. Tyranny to you is cops pulling the trigger. If you want to add nuance there you can, but thus far you've justified a complete senseless restriction on things that pose no risk to this scary virus spreading.

Fear is powerful. Easy to take control
 
sturg33 said:
I dont understand how you can say the government telling me I cant go to my own property isn't tyranny.

What about arresting someone for paddle boarding alone?

What about arresting someone for going to park with their kid?

What about banning the sale of seeds in the wake of a global depression?

What about for quarantining citizens for going to a drive in church service?

All of these are justified? None of it is overreach? If you think this is hunky dory then we can we stop the discussion bc we're too far apart
Click to expand...

Have you ever been on a sports team, in a club or part of any organized group of any kind? Have you always been so paranoid? Have you ever lived in another country?

Is it not true that Americans enjoy more freedoms than any country on earth. I'm not trying to be snarky, but I think it's relevant that on the freedom vs nanny state graph, America is at the far end of the freedom side. Japan would be pretty deep in the nanny state side of that graph. While there are some annoyances and several rules I might deem unfair, the balance is very comfortable and dependable.
 
Runnin said:
Have you ever been on a sports team, in a club or part of any organized group of any kind? Have you always been so paranoid? Have you ever lived in another country?

Is it not true that Americans enjoy more freedoms than any country on earth. I'm not trying to be snarky, but I think it's relevant that on the freedom vs nanny state graph, America is at the far end of the freedom side. Japan would be pretty deep in the nanny state side of that graph. While there are some annoyances and several rules I might deem unfair, the balance is very comfortable and dependable.
Click to expand...

You telling me that I used to have too much freedom and thus should be fine with less...

Is not a good argument
 
sturg33 said:
You addressed nothing I asked.

You'll have to forgive me for thinking about "muh rights" when I'm told I cant purchase ****ing vegetable seeds.

I asked earlier and you answered. Tyranny to you is cops pulling the trigger. If you want to add nuance there you can, but thus far you've justified a complete senseless restriction on things that pose no risk to this scary virus spreading.

Fear is powerful. Easy to take control
Click to expand...

You are at thethe levels of idiot right now. I directly answered you repeatedly and at length and with examples, and you just repeat yourself and explicitly lie about what I said.

I attempted to answer you in good faith and you've been a dick about it. You aren't asking for a conversation or even pretending to engage with what I wrote. You are just trolling, so I will ignore you now.
 
" We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America."

I mean people hope on that Liberty part, but remember the articles of the confederations failed miserably for a reason. But I don't expect anyone who goes "LIBERTY!"
 
sturg33 said:
Is a governor saying I cant legally go to a property I own, tyranny?
Click to expand...

No, seeing as the Supreme Court says it is not. Why are you still harping on dumb **** when it's been proven that States have police powers during a state of emergency that limits your rights.
 
An interesting look at how economists analyze the externalities inherent in epidemics and how they weigh the tradeoff between lives and income.

[tw]1253402007819476995[/tw]
 
Metaphysicist said:
Great, you admit you are incapable of understanding how the constitution works. That's the first step.

Next step is learning the smallest measure of reading comprehension, since I gave you a specific example over overreach, and described a process for determining whether actions are overreach or not. You somehow read that as "there is no overreach possible."

I recommend a course at the learning annex, though online is probably your best bet at this point. But until that happens, its good to know that you have chosen the "muh rights" flag-jerkoff method. It's good to know you are only interested in complaining, not what anyone says in response to your "questions."
Click to expand...

it's always 1+1 with him

the simplest math equations for a complex problem that needs way more than his "if i can't do this at any time i want, it's tyranny"

his argument is like the underpants gnomes.

COVID19 Pandemic happening

step 1. people dying, can stop or slow spread by staying at home and not going to the bar
step 2.
step 3. see! tyranny, i can't go the bar. how is this not tyranny?


it's seriously reminds me of libertarians in college who argue in a vacuum and never look at mitigating factors (you know, the real world). it's like listening to someone try to explain how communism will work and hasn't worked cause it isn't pure communism
 
Judge rules Michigan stay-at-home order doesn’t infringe on constitutional rights

A Michigan judge on Wednesday found that while Gov. Gretchen Whitmer’s stay-at-home order does “temporary harm” to the constitutional rights of Michigan residents, the harm doesn’t outweigh the public health risk posed by the coronavirus outbreak.

Steve Martinko, owner of an Oakland County landscaping business, and four other Michigan residents filed a lawsuit against the governor and other state officials claiming the stay-at-home order infringes on their constitutional rights and should be declared invalid. The “mandatory quarantine” and in-state travel restrictions violate due process rights, the plaintiffs argued.

Michigan Court of Claims Judge Christopher Murray ruled in favor of Whitmer, Attorney General Dana Nessel and Department of Natural Resources Director Daniel Eichinger on Wednesday, April 29.

“Our fellow residents have an interest to remain unharmed by a highly communicable and deadly virus,” Murray wrote in his opinion. “And since the state entered the Union in 1837, it has had the broad power to act for the public health of the entire state when faced with a public crisis.”

The stay-at-home order was first put in place March 24, suspending activities "not necessary to sustain or protect life." It's been extended through May 15 – with fewer restrictions.

.......


https://www.mlive.com/public-intere...OsnuEhI9LRO_sYT7_PnuVpQI4L7QDlRP9rkOZJRbefAlk
 
Interesting modeling update from Imperial College. They don't have US numbers, but they have a website where you can poke around for a bunch of EU countries. Pretty interesting what they think the effects of various interventions have been; note how little effect school closure apparently has:

Screen-Shot-2020-04-30-at-6.29.03-PM.png


Sweden, for example:

Sweden_rt.svg
Sweden_deaths.svg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top