Meanwhile, in Ohio...
-
wrote on 22 Apr 2020, 03:06 last edited by
Sometimes when you call bullshit, you get the horns. Sad.
-
wrote on 22 Apr 2020, 03:35 last edited by
He said the madness had to stop. Looks like it did for him. Sad for his family.
-
wrote on 22 Apr 2020, 11:30 last edited by
“Does anybody have the guts to say this COVID-19 is a political ploy? Asking for a friend. Prove me wrong,”
The mother-of-all ‘this didn’t age well’ posts.
-
wrote on 22 Apr 2020, 11:35 last edited by
If one could argue from the afterlife I suspect he would stick to his guns. Lots of barge talk going around. New World Order and all that.
-
wrote on 22 Apr 2020, 11:42 last edited by Loki
Did we know him before he died? Best be careful what you tweet or Facebook because someone will pick over your bones.
-
wrote on 22 Apr 2020, 12:18 last edited by
Condolences to the deceased family and loved ones.
I hope he has not pass the virus along to other people. -
Condolences to the deceased family and loved ones.
I hope he has not pass the virus along to other people.wrote on 22 Apr 2020, 13:35 last edited by@Axtremus said in Meanwhile, in Ohio...:
Condolences to the deceased family and loved ones.
I hope he has not pass the virus along to other people.What percent of the planet do you think will get CV?
-
“Does anybody have the guts to say this COVID-19 is a political ploy? Asking for a friend. Prove me wrong,”
The mother-of-all ‘this didn’t age well’ posts.
wrote on 22 Apr 2020, 15:18 last edited by@jon-nyc said in Meanwhile, in Ohio...:
“Does anybody have the guts to say this COVID-19 is a political ploy?
Was it's origin a political ploy?
No, doubtful at best
Has it's use over the last 2 months and forevermore become a political weapon?
Yes, although its status as a killer remains
-
@jon-nyc said in Meanwhile, in Ohio...:
“Does anybody have the guts to say this COVID-19 is a political ploy?
Was it's origin a political ploy?
No, doubtful at best
Has it's use over the last 2 months and forevermore become a political weapon?
Yes, although its status as a killer remains
wrote on 22 Apr 2020, 15:36 last edited by@Copper said in Meanwhile, in Ohio...:
@jon-nyc said in Meanwhile, in Ohio...:
“Does anybody have the guts to say this COVID-19 is a political ploy?
Was it's origin a political ploy?
No, doubtful at best
Has it's use over the last 2 months and forevermore become a political weapon?
Yes, although its status as a killer remains
The family is being victimized by this but I guess they need to reframe in their minds that this is for the greater good?
-
wrote on 22 Apr 2020, 15:48 last edited by
Hopefully every last person in Sweden will die. It's the only way mankind will learn. And let's face it, the irony would be delicious.
#DieSwedes
-
Hopefully every last person in Sweden will die. It's the only way mankind will learn. And let's face it, the irony would be delicious.
#DieSwedes
wrote on 22 Apr 2020, 15:56 last edited by@Horace said in Meanwhile, in Ohio...:
Hopefully every last person in Sweden will die. It's the only way mankind will learn. And let's face it, the irony would be delicious.
#DieSwedes
Except the girls from ABBA, of course.
-
wrote on 22 Apr 2020, 16:25 last edited by
I think you are remembering them as they were.
-
wrote on 22 Apr 2020, 17:08 last edited by
The reality is the country is going to open up again and people are going to die.
What the acceptable level of death is, seems to be the only real question. The easiest way to cut down on the number of points of view I suppose is to have one for each tribe.
-
wrote on 22 Apr 2020, 18:51 last edited by
I wish the folks who talk about "life is precious is nonsense" and "acceptable level of death" would actually get specific on what's acceptable for them personally, and how comfortable they are throwing themselves and their loved ones into the lottery. Because it sounds like they're using the fact that there are going to be many more casualties as an excuse not to really care all that much, because economy.
-
I wish the folks who talk about "life is precious is nonsense" and "acceptable level of death" would actually get specific on what's acceptable for them personally, and how comfortable they are throwing themselves and their loved ones into the lottery. Because it sounds like they're using the fact that there are going to be many more casualties as an excuse not to really care all that much, because economy.
wrote on 22 Apr 2020, 19:18 last edited by@Aqua-Letifer said in Meanwhile, in Ohio...:
I wish the folks who talk about "life is precious is nonsense" and "acceptable level of death" would actually get specific on what's acceptable for them personally, and how comfortable they are throwing themselves and their loved ones into the lottery. Because it sounds like they're using the fact that there are going to be many more casualties as an excuse not to really care all that much, because economy.
Well you might have 300 million personal statements and if you pick the most extreme one we hide until a vaccine comes out. Otherwise people go out and then you will have death by definition...so it’s just a matter of how careful we build into the process. Inevitably we will hear no matter what when someone dies it was wrong.
-
@Aqua-Letifer said in Meanwhile, in Ohio...:
I wish the folks who talk about "life is precious is nonsense" and "acceptable level of death" would actually get specific on what's acceptable for them personally, and how comfortable they are throwing themselves and their loved ones into the lottery. Because it sounds like they're using the fact that there are going to be many more casualties as an excuse not to really care all that much, because economy.
Well you might have 300 million personal statements and if you pick the most extreme one we hide until a vaccine comes out. Otherwise people go out and then you will have death by definition...so it’s just a matter of how careful we build into the process. Inevitably we will hear no matter what when someone dies it was wrong.
wrote on 22 Apr 2020, 19:29 last edited by@Loki said in Meanwhile, in Ohio...:
@Aqua-Letifer said in Meanwhile, in Ohio...:
I wish the folks who talk about "life is precious is nonsense" and "acceptable level of death" would actually get specific on what's acceptable for them personally, and how comfortable they are throwing themselves and their loved ones into the lottery. Because it sounds like they're using the fact that there are going to be many more casualties as an excuse not to really care all that much, because economy.
Well you might have 300 million personal statements and if you pick the most extreme one we hide until a vaccine comes out. Otherwise people go out and then you will have death by definition...so it’s just a matter of how careful we build into the process. Inevitably we will hear no matter what when someone dies it was wrong.
Let's start with pie in the sky stuff: If everyone wore a mask, and I mean everyone, the R0 would be so far under 1 there'd be no problem at all with opening up tomorrow.
Here are the hangups with that plan: (1) folks who can't wear a mask due to the physical logistics of their job, health reasons perhaps, etc., and (2) fuckasses who refuse.
There are still a lot of things we can do for the folks in group #1 to keep them safe at work and in public. There's no excuse for group #2 but the problem is, they put everyone they meet at risk with their dumbfuckery.
So I say drop executive hammers down on #2--because it's either that or prolonged and indefinite quarantine, choose your tyranny to whine about, assholes--and let's open the country back up.
-
wrote on 22 Apr 2020, 19:31 last edited by
In the imaginary world where we exactly knew the risk, why wouldn't the people who advocate for accepting the risk have blood on their hands when someone died, regardless of what that risk was? At what point does this rhetorical stuff about "real people dying, maybe someone you love, maybe you", actually stop being convincing? Accepting known exact risk is an impossible ideal for both sides of this discussion.
-
In the imaginary world where we exactly knew the risk, why wouldn't the people who advocate for accepting the risk have blood on their hands when someone died, regardless of what that risk was? At what point does this rhetorical stuff about "real people dying, maybe someone you love, maybe you", actually stop being convincing? Accepting known exact risk is an impossible ideal for both sides of this discussion.
wrote on 22 Apr 2020, 19:33 last edited by@Horace said in Meanwhile, in Ohio...:
"real people dying, maybe someone you love, maybe you", actually stop being convincing?
I don't know what you mean by that. "Convincing" in terms of how helpful it is making policy, or "convincing" in terms of you actually don't care?
-
@Loki said in Meanwhile, in Ohio...:
@Aqua-Letifer said in Meanwhile, in Ohio...:
I wish the folks who talk about "life is precious is nonsense" and "acceptable level of death" would actually get specific on what's acceptable for them personally, and how comfortable they are throwing themselves and their loved ones into the lottery. Because it sounds like they're using the fact that there are going to be many more casualties as an excuse not to really care all that much, because economy.
Well you might have 300 million personal statements and if you pick the most extreme one we hide until a vaccine comes out. Otherwise people go out and then you will have death by definition...so it’s just a matter of how careful we build into the process. Inevitably we will hear no matter what when someone dies it was wrong.
Let's start with pie in the sky stuff: If everyone wore a mask, and I mean everyone, the R0 would be so far under 1 there'd be no problem at all with opening up tomorrow.
Here are the hangups with that plan: (1) folks who can't wear a mask due to the physical logistics of their job, health reasons perhaps, etc., and (2) fuckasses who refuse.
There are still a lot of things we can do for the folks in group #1 to keep them safe at work and in public. There's no excuse for group #2 but the problem is, they put everyone they meet at risk with their dumbfuckery.
So I say drop executive hammers down on #2--because it's either that or prolonged and indefinite quarantine, choose your tyranny to whine about, assholes--and let's open the country back up.
wrote on 22 Apr 2020, 19:36 last edited by@Aqua-Letifer said in Meanwhile, in Ohio...:
@Loki said in Meanwhile, in Ohio...:
@Aqua-Letifer said in Meanwhile, in Ohio...:
I wish the folks who talk about "life is precious is nonsense" and "acceptable level of death" would actually get specific on what's acceptable for them personally, and how comfortable they are throwing themselves and their loved ones into the lottery. Because it sounds like they're using the fact that there are going to be many more casualties as an excuse not to really care all that much, because economy.
Well you might have 300 million personal statements and if you pick the most extreme one we hide until a vaccine comes out. Otherwise people go out and then you will have death by definition...so it’s just a matter of how careful we build into the process. Inevitably we will hear no matter what when someone dies it was wrong.
Let's start with pie in the sky stuff: If everyone wore a mask, and I mean everyone, the R0 would be so far under 1 there'd be no problem at all with opening up tomorrow.
Here are the hangups with that plan: (1) folks who can't wear a mask due to the physical logistics of their job, health reasons perhaps, etc., and (2) fuckasses who refuse.
There are still a lot of things we can do for the folks in group #1 to keep them safe at work and in public. There's no excuse for group #2 but the problem is, they put everyone they meet at risk with their dumbfuckery.
So I say drop executive hammers down on #2--because it's either that or prolonged and indefinite quarantine, choose your tyranny to whine about, assholes--and let's open the country back up.
That sounds like a good plan to me. Everybody wears masks, shaming and other more official punishments for those who don't. But that's still more risky than quarantining, and more people will die. It's just that the number of people using the "life is priceless" rhetoric will decrease. they will quietly choose to stop saying it, using internal calculations they probably couldn't put numbers to even if they wanted to.