Protests show 'two Americas' — those who lost their jobs and those still getting paid

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

On 4/22/2020 at 2:54 PM, yuna628 said:

Suicide and substance abuse are choices people make. Maybe they should not make those choices.

Going to work USED to be a choice many people were able to make. Not so much today, eh?

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

I'll also add that yes, some of us are more likely to die from covid than others.  And some of us are more likely to die from the flu, as well as a cold, or a bacterial infection.   In fact, some of us are more likely to die in an auto accident than others. (Some use public transportation exclusively).

 

So if you happen to be in a higher-risk category, stay at home.  Nothing says YOU have to go shopping, or get within 20 feet of a stranger.  But for the rest of us who dont feel that level of risk/danger, it has been shown that going out isn't all that bad.  I went to work with a neighbor today to help him out.  After the job was done (we got close to other people), we went to the market and bought groceries.  

 

I dont watch the news.  Other than VJ and FB (which I have been staying off of more than normal lately), I get no news of how terrible my life should be due to the virus. I go to the stores when I need something. I buy gas before my tank gets to the 3/4 level (used to be 1/2).  I talk to my neighbors more in the past two months than I did in the 6 months prior.  I haven't gotten sick.  My life is pretty normal,  minus the fact that I may lose my job, and will have to deal with that reality. 

 

No one I know has died yet, thankfully.  And the few people I know who have caught the covid have recovered with mild symptoms, except one obese person.  He recovered, but he suffered pretty badly.  To put these things into perspective, I've known hundreds of friends and family who have caught the flu and lived.  Not one who died.

 

Life is good.  The future is not as bright as it was 4 months ago.  But I believe we will get thru this, and life will go on.

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

As one famous VJ poster once said: "Whatever."

 

 

[OriZ 3,157]

4 hours ago, Burnt Reynolds said:

"Throwing the constitution around anytime someone blatantly breaks the law"

 

Was this intended humor? The Constitution not only is law, it is THE law. Not only that, but the Constitution is not what grants rights, it (in the Bill of Rights) is merely a contractual obligation codifying rights we already have by explicitly stating the government's limits, as in what level of government intrusion we're willing to accept. We do not need government permission to exist or have freedoms. So the idea that government can just create and erase them all at will effectively deifies government. If you want to worship government, fine by me, but that's incompatible with the United States and the reason it was founded. 

Nope, not humor. 

[Burnt Reynolds 5,058]

53 minutes ago, OriZ said:

Nope, not humor. 

intended*

 

But humor nonetheless. I guess the Constitution is going to stay a thorn in your side.

[Dashinka 24,740]

10 hours ago, OriZ said:

No, it's not a better comparison, because the culture is very different. Swedes(and most Scandinavians for that matter) listen much better without the need to force it down their throat, Americans don't, it's as simple as that.

 

Also, we have plenty of evidence it has reduced deaths. Plenty.

Kind of broad brushing things.  So if Americans in general don’t listen or follow orders, I guess we need a bigger nanny state.  We should have shut down absolutely everything including all banks and financial markets.

Edited April 24, 2020 by Dashinka

[Dashinka 24,740]

9 hours ago, TBoneTX said:

There's a little thang called the Constitution and Due Process.

Really, I thought that was used for toilet paper a long time ago.

[OriZ 3,157]

3 hours ago, Dashinka said:

Kind of broad brushing things.  So if Americans in general don’t listen or follow orders, I guess we need a bigger nanny state.  We should have shut down absolutely everything including all banks and financial markets.

Gotta find a balance in everything, no one is trying to stop this completely.

Btw, this isn't a snide against Americans, it's more that Swedes are the exception to the rule. I already pointed out the difference between their discipline vs lack of in Israel, France and Italy as well, in that other thread with the professor.

Edited April 24, 2020 by OriZ

[OriZ 3,157]

7 hours ago, Burnt Reynolds said:

intended*

 

But humor nonetheless. I guess the Constitution is going to stay a thorn in your side.

Sorry, but the constitution doesn't say anywhere that you have the right to have such disregard to the lives of others around you.

[Dashinka 24,740]

33 minutes ago, OriZ said:

Gotta find a balance in everything, no one is trying to stop this completely.

Btw, this isn't a snide against Americans, it's more that Swedes are the exception to the rule. I already pointed out the difference between their discipline vs lack of in Israel, France and Italy as well, in that other thread with the professor.

My point of the comparison between Michigan and Sweden is related to the numbers.  Trying to factor in anything else would be almost impossible.  The simple fact is Sweden is still open for business, but Michigan is not.  Both have similar demographics, similar population densities, etc.  I know from my observations when I do go out, people in MI are observing social distancing, so I don’t think culture differences can be the only explanation for the differences.

[yuna628 9,700]

1 hour ago, OriZ said:

Sorry, but the constitution doesn't say anywhere that you have the right to have such disregard to the lives of others around you.

Right to life liberty and happiness does not mean you have the right to strip life liberty and happiness from others because your tin foil hat club thinks it's not real. SCOTUS has been quite clear through years (even approving of the most historical and egregious human rights violations in the past) that state governments have broad rights when it comes to emergencies and authorities have the right to detain and quarantine you by force if necessary. Our founders had no issue with that either. Pandemics and physical disasters have consequences. Both for the health and safety of others and economically. It is not easy choices that our leaders makes. What do you think they want to contribute to the economic collapse of the states? A strange cynical position we are taking as a people if we think this. If we have suddenly forgotten the historical context of what states rights can do.

[TBoneTX 45,961]

5 hours ago, Dashinka said:

Really, I thought that was used for toilet paper a long time ago.

[Dashinka 24,740]

42 minutes ago, yuna628 said:

Right to life liberty and happiness does not mean you have the right to strip life liberty and happiness from others because your tin foil hat club thinks it's not real. SCOTUS has been quite clear through years (even approving of the most historical and egregious human rights violations in the past) that state governments have broad rights when it comes to emergencies and authorities have the right to detain and quarantine you by force if necessary. Our founders had no issue with that either. Pandemics and physical disasters have consequences. Both for the health and safety of others and economically. It is not easy choices that our leaders makes. What do you think they want to contribute to the economic collapse of the states? A strange cynical position we are taking as a people if we think this. If we have suddenly forgotten the historical context of what states rights can do.

Bigger government, I get it.  By the way, the right to life liberty and happiness is not actually in the Constitution.  Beyond that, the argument is how do we balance the situation to not drive up the deaths of despair.  These deaths are not all suicides by the way, but they will be there, so to use your argument, how does the government impose restrictions on some leading to their deaths while justifying they are keeping others alive.  Seems more like a political decision by our leaders rather than for public health especially for a virus with a mortality rate in the seasonal flu ballpark.

Edited April 24, 2020 by Dashinka

[OriZ 3,157]

11 hours ago, yuna628 said:

Right to life liberty and happiness does not mean you have the right to strip life liberty and happiness from others because your tin foil hat club thinks it's not real. SCOTUS has been quite clear through years (even approving of the most historical and egregious human rights violations in the past) that state governments have broad rights when it comes to emergencies and authorities have the right to detain and quarantine you by force if necessary. Our founders had no issue with that either. Pandemics and physical disasters have consequences. Both for the health and safety of others and economically. It is not easy choices that our leaders makes. What do you think they want to contribute to the economic collapse of the states? A strange cynical position we are taking as a people if we think this. If we have suddenly forgotten the historical context of what states rights can do.

I am not sure if your comment is meant to be an elaborative agreement, or if you somehow thought I took the opposite position. I agree, the constitution does not give people the right to risk other people's lives by going against what their state has ordered them to do. States not only have the right, but the duty, to fine and prosecute those people for putting others' lives in danger via their cluelessness and stupidity. And if making sure they're quarantined for 14 days means putting them in a cell, then I'm all for that.

[Voice of Reason 10,298]

22 minutes ago, OriZ said:

I am not sure if your comment is meant to be an elaborative agreement, or if you somehow thought I took the opposite position. I agree, the constitution does not give people the right to risk other people's lives by going against what their state has ordered them to do. States not only have the right, but the duty, to fine and prosecute those people for putting others' lives in danger via their cluelessness and stupidity. And if making sure they're quarantined for 14 days means putting them in a cell, then I'm all for that.

But what if what the state orders them to do DOESN'T risk others' lives?