Latest Reports of Past Actions on COVID

[Unfettered]

To be fair to those who rail about government
wrecking the economy, I've seen dumb decisions.
Our governor made it illegal to buy paint, but
legal to buy booze. Illegal to go to a 2nd home,
but legal to go to a state park. Her agenda
appeared to be less related to public health,
& more to state revenue.

Didn't you hear? Cherry-picking those who don't have to sacrifice is just part of "crisis morality." But don't worry; there will be other pandemics; maybe in the next one you and I will be among the favored few who aren't compelled to be be "moral" because they are selling the right goods, are in favored government positions, or have enough money to buy preferential treatment.

 

[Revoltingest]

Didn't you hear? Cherry-picking those who don't have to sacrifice is just part of "crisis morality." But don't worry; there will be other pandemics; maybe in the next one you and I will be among the favored few who aren't compelled to be be "moral" because they are selling the right goods, are in favored government positions, or have enough money to buy preferential treatment.

I think it's just a mix of corrupt & incompetent government.

 

[Unfettered]

It appeared to be a problem with the left,
ie, not understanding the dire consequences
of economic decline.

This has my vote for "understatement of the century" (so far).

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I'll agree to the Cracker-Jack-Box morality you've presented if you can show in Jesus's teachings or parables (since you're invoking his doctrine) where he advocates that we compel our brother to be his other brother's keeper. A good place to begin your search would be Luke 18:8.

I wasn't alluding to Jesus's teachings. I was comparing you to Cain.

 

[Unfettered]

I wasn't alluding to Jesus's teachings. I was comparing you to Cain.

The problem with a double-standard is that it's impossible to live up to it.

 

[Twilight Hue]

It appeared to be a problem with the left,
ie, not understanding the dire consequences
of economic decline. And we're seeing kids
falling behind because of school limitations.
Costs of protection measures must be
balanced with benefits.

It's not like they were warned. I'm sure an actual smart person would of thought out a way to protect people and keep an economy viable.

Unfortunately there is a severe deficit of smart people in the world that would be willing and able.

It's water over the bridge for the generations involved only itching to be repeated over and over as the elites fly back to their comfy insulated islands away from the carnage they orchestrated.

 

[Unfettered]

9-10ths_Penguin, I apologize for resorting to sarcasm in my responses to you. It's juvenile and none of us should do it. I try not to do it. Sometimes I show my weakness, though. I admit that I don't respond well to COVID-related high-horsery. Two-plus years of being lectured and controlled and gaslighted and lied to—and more—has left many people, myself included, with a very low tolerance for such abuse. When i see or smell more of it, restraint can be difficult.

Now, then, without the sarcasm... I don't agree with the morality you posted. As it both prescribes and employs compulsion, I judge it to be false morality and, therefore, counterproductive to the ideals it purports to champion.

 

[Guitar's Cry]

The economy means everything if one is struggling just to even be able to put food on the table and a roof over ones head for themselves and their families to the point they wish they were dead if they can't or are not allowed to.

This is why (most so during national emergencies) those with more than enough resources need to distribute wisely. If that means taxing the hell out of the immensely rich, so be it. It is preferable to people dying and the system they got rich under falling apart.

 

[Revoltingest]

It's not like they were warned.

I've warned'm.

 

[Koldo]

Setting aside the question of whether or not it's moral to treat people like animals by denying them basic human rights (it isn't moral, in case anyone was wondering) and appealing strictly to logic (or even charity), it makes no sense—as in ZERO (nor is it charitable—as in AT ALL)—to subject 99.x% of the people (those who were always going to survive because the disease was just not a threat to them) to loss of livelihood and/or years of heightened economic distress when those abuses were not going to have a measurable effect on the mortality of those few for whom COVID-19 was gunning from the get-go.

I mean, if we're going to be serious about this and not just let our emotions railroad our neighbors into seeing and doing things our way.

Right?

If I am not supposed to let my emotions drive my decisions then I am not supposed to care about overly dramatic cries of 'loss of livelihood and/or years of economic distress', right?

 

[Koldo]

The economy means everything if one is struggling just to even be able to put food on the table and a roof over ones head for themselves and their families to the point they wish they were dead if they can't or are not allowed to.

The dead are not even granted the privilege of having a choice between living in misery (for a while) or not living at all.

 

[Koldo]

To be fair to those who rail about government
wrecking the economy, I've seen dumb decisions.
Our governor made it illegal to buy paint, but
legal to buy booze. Illegal to go to a 2nd home,
but legal to go to a state park. Letting cops
write tickets for unapproved travel. Her agenda
appeared to be less related to public health,
& more to state revenue.

I have also seen stupid choices being made by the government here. But those are generally not what is heavily criticized. That's the annoying part.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

9-10ths_Penguin, I apologize for resorting to sarcasm in my responses to you. It's juvenile and none of us should do it. I try not to do it. Sometimes I show my weakness, though. I admit that I don't respond well to COVID-related high-horsery. Two-plus years of being lectured and controlled and gaslighted and lied to—and more—has left many people, myself included, with a very low tolerance for such abuse. When i see or smell more of it, restraint can be difficult.

Interesting fauxpology.

Your opener in this thread was a load of gaslighting nonsense itself, but then you try to excuse yourself by complaining about how the less-than-the-bare-minimum public health measures you went through and people asking you to have consideration for others was "abuse" that makes restraint "difficult"?

The attitude you've expressed cost uncountably many needless deaths. If having a mirror held up to it makes you uncomfortable... good. It should. The mistake you make is directing your anger outward.

Now, then, without the sarcasm... I don't agree with the morality you posted. As it both prescribes and employs compulsion, I judge it to be false morality and, therefore, counterproductive to the ideals it purports to champion.

Since your posts in this thread have shown that your judgement is completely out of whack, I don't give a damn what you think.

 

[Unfettered]

Interesting fauxpology.

Accepted or not, it was a sincere apology.

I don't give a damn what you think.

OK. I'll address a general audience then, or others in the thread.

 

[Unfettered]

If I am not supposed to let my emotions drive my decisions then I am not supposed to care about overly dramatic cries of 'loss of livelihood and/or years of economic distress', right?

You don't have to care about my cries. And you can use any metric you like to dismiss them on any grounds you like. I cannot be injured because you have an opinion about me or my cries. And I'll not find fault with you for having a different opinion.

But if you are willing to see your rights substantively elevated above mine (or anyone else's), it is an inverted morality indeed to find fault with me for raising a cry about that.

 

[Unfettered]

I'm sure an actual smart person would of thought out a way to protect people and keep an economy viable.

A lot of smart people did offer such solutions—and they were shouted down, censored, mocked, fired from their jobs, sued, etc., etc., etc. For what? For saying that everyone mattered, as opposed to just a few.

How do you work with such abject ignorance? And when that ignorance is wrapped in a flag of morality? Just pray at that point that the worst they'll do is talk poorly about you, because the moral horse they're sitting on is so tall and their thinking so high in the sky above yours, they'll advocate for, or outright call for, your death—and believe they're doing society a service thereby. We saw these thing happen. These are remembrances, not hypotheticals.

It's so incomprehensibly backward.

 

[Koldo]

You don't have to care about my cries. And you can use any metric you like to dismiss them on any grounds you like. I cannot be injured because you have an opinion about me or my cries. And I'll not find fault with you for having a different opinion.

But if you are willing to see your rights substantively elevated above mine (or anyone else's), it is an inverted morality indeed to find fault with me for raising a cry about that.

It is not about my rights. It is about what set of rights takes precedence when they all clash on these situations.

 

[wellwisher]

I haven't looked at the report, but it was put out by these guys according to the article:

About - Unleash Prosperity

Our Mission The mission of the Committee to Unleash Prosperity is to educate policy makers and the public about government policies that have been proven,…

committeetounleashprosperity.com

"The mission of the Committee to Unleash Prosperity is to educate policy makers and the public about government policies that have been proven, in practice, to maximize economic growth and equitable prosperity in America and around the world.

Supply-Side is not, as defamed by its detractors, “trickle-down,” enacting big economic advantages, such as tax cuts, for the rich while workers get scraps."

Barring a reading of their report, why should I trust them versus health experts?

The wild card is the impact of the Swamp and lead Democrat Party con artists. These experts are afraid to be targeted, demoted ands fired. It also has to do with the nature of Government Bureaucracy. Government is more about politics than merit. If it was about merit, we would not have a huge growing national debt. All that debt reflects knuckleheads in power, who can trump, common sense and merit; DEI. It is more about saying the "right" thing to get promoted; yes men to the knuckleheads. This is how the COVID disaster and all debt disasters work.

No free market company could sustain such debt and survive, unless the knuckleheads caused their problem and then have to bail them out to hide those who created the problem, adding to the debt. The knuckleheads caused the Housing Crisis inherited by Obama, by interfering in the free market loan processes; too many dead beat loans. It created the student loan debacle by allowing predatory lending by Liberal run Colleges, who were then not even at the negotiating table to help the students. It created persistent inflation due to the aftermath of shutting down half the economy, for political purposes, during COVID. This caused supply side pinch points, everywhere. The knuckleheads then added to the inflation by over spending; green energy, and printing money.

Each disaster has the DNC knuckleheads trying to manipulate the free market and/or run political scams to buy votes with tax payer money. The tax payers was supposed to pay for the predatory colleges. Luckily this did not happen. The free market wrote a report to hold the knucklehead accountable, so they are less able to repeat their crooked knucklehead tactics in the future. One of the changes recommended was term limits on the head of the CDC. Fauci was given too much power, as cover for the knuckleheads; Fauci was a puppet dictator as their fall guy. Biden is a similar puppet since he is not at his best, but would need unelected knucklehead puppet masters to run the show; sign here.

When Trump is elected he should make an executive order to help parents, with have children harmed by the knucklehead shut down of schools, to sue all the knuckleheads who caused irreparable harm, to their children, and extra expense for the parents, during COVID. He could also signed an order to allow students with debt to sue colleges, who have their money. The knuckleheads told everyone to follow the science, while ignoring how science works; masks had no real hard data. DEI is part of the problem; the knuckleheads of the knuckleheads are not chosen based on merit. We can see that in display on the corrupt DEI prosecutors and elected officials not qualified for the jobs; knucklehead juniors think they are above the law due to their swamp chosen status.

This site had an entire topic connected first to the COVID coverup. As COVID passed, it morphed to a gradual discussion and now to its truth. Some of us are still saying the same things, since day one, since truth does not change. I have a sixth sense for the action of knuckleheads. The only thing that changes are knucklehead lies and scams.

We should not follow the knucklehead lead for climate change remediation. This will be their master piece of disaster, unless we purge their leaders and start with fresh faces who can see all the science.

 

[Revoltingest]

I have also seen stupid choices being made by the government here. But those are generally not what is heavily criticized. That's the annoying part.

Just tossing'm an olive branch.

 

[Unfettered]

It is not about my rights. It is about what set of rights takes precedence when they all clash on these situations.

I'm familiar with the argument; heaven knows I've heard it over and over again in the last four years. But it doesn't make moral or logical sense even on paper, to say nothing of in the real world. No one who has championed it has ever been able to provide a just or moral or logical or rational basis from which to tell one person, in the interest of the abstract "public health," that he can't work until he's told again that he can, while telling another person he can keep working without obstruction. Yeah, that makes a lot of sense. We can easily see the morality on display there.

My personal favorite, though largely allegorical as it pertains to human rights, was the one where you you had to wear a mask in the restaurant while walking from the front door to your seat, literally 15 feet away, but once you were seated you could eat, talk, laugh, sneeze, cough—whatever—with all the other presumably asymptomatic spreaders…without a mask. It was, and remains the perfect metaphor for the logic and moral rationale for the COVID-era "rights precedence" public-health argument. It is simply ridiculous, using the word intentionally (meaning, the rationale is worthy of ridicule).

If you think I've misunderstood what you're saying, please expound. Or, if you think I've chosen poor examples with which to measure the morality and sense of your position, please present the real-world scenario (as in, the scenario actually happened during the COVID era) that BEST exposes the morality and reasonableness of your point.