Like us on Facebook


Follow us on Twitter





Page 146 of 207 FirstFirst ... 4696136144145146147148156196 ... LastLast
Results 2,176 to 2,190 of 3105
  1. #2176
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    21,369
    Quote Originally Posted by SiteWolf View Post
    the entire point of shutting down is NOT just to prevent overwhelming the health care system...holy hell the point of shutting down is to limit spread and save lives...not every covid case even impacts the health care system.....just viewing it from a percentage of ICU capacity is just allowing the spread to increase enough to PUSH that capacity

    You're right tho that raw covid numbers are not the barometer...it may be more than one thing, but one more logical would be as a percentage of tests
    when the shut down happened, the justification for it was to slow the spread enough to prevent the healthcare system from being overwelmed. The idea was to flatten the curve and decrease the speed of cases in a given time frame. The number of cases and deaths underneath that flattened curve is obviously important because they are humans losing their lives..... but that shouldnt be what keeps the shut down going if the hospitals are equipped to handle the inflow

  2. #2177
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Miami Heat
    Posts
    4,100
    Quote Originally Posted by Redrum187 View Post
    What's your point exactly? People still die from accidents, be it avoidable or unavoidable. If the current goal post is to save lives, then why don't we get rid of cars and/or lower the speed limit to 10 mph so we can "save lives"?



    The goal was never to prevent the masses from EVER getting COVID. We knew it was a futile battle. Our original goal was to slow the spread so we don't overwhelm the health care system. If a vaccine isn't created, chances are we will get it. In fact, even if a vaccine is created, the virus could mutate rapidly to the point that the majority of people in the world will get it eventually in their lifetime.



    We agree on a few points: act as if you have the virus when you're outside and don't punish everyone over guns because some people abuse their rights. What I'm confused is how this doesn't apply to your principle. Allow the country to open up but practice safety at all times when around the public. Don't keep cities on stay-at-home orders indefinitely because a few idiots aren't practicing social distancing.
    Are guns contagious? Does one crazy gun owner shooting others mean other gunowners are going to receive this contagious effect and shoot others? No. So you trying to compare these two is already a silly thing to do. Stop it.

  3. #2178
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    3,156
    Quote Originally Posted by mngopher35 View Post
    Lol no I think the one who used an article based on just a headline only to find out it said something against his claim is calling out real sensationalism. You fall for the basic headlines in media which are designed to get attention in that manner which is sensationalism.

    Rather than try and diminish the pandemic and risk some put others in, why not respond on if you agree with breaking the orders and so on for selfish reasons? Is it ok to kill others if you want prom? Why whine that people call out others putting people at risk potentially leading to death?...

    The point is if you don't think people should look at the extremes/outliers to make a point, don't do so yourself. If you can do it then realize the hypocrisy and that people complaining about those going against orders/putting others at risk are getting bashed in the same way you bash this portion of CA as a small outlier of the whole. You do what you complain about just in a different way politically.
    How was the article against my claim? lol

    I didn't know I was diminishing the pandemic. I just stated facts about how some counties/cities/states are combating the virus. You seem to hate that I point to a huge section of California on possibly staying closed for another 3 months. If this was a population of a few thousand, I can see the use of the term "outlier", but when it includes a county which constitutes 1/4 of the entire state of California, statistically, it is not an outlier. Furthermore, why can't we simply have a discussion about areas that are going overboard? You're trying to make this discussion inclusive/representative of the entire country, I'm not... We might be the same country, but we are vastly different when we take into account culture, political ideologies, etc...

    Why do you think areas in California (and even in other parts of the country) are outliers? California and New York have among the most restrictions. While they are only 2 states, they ac cumulatively make up almost 1/5 of the country population wise. Once again, if I used a tiny county that wanted to stay locked down for 3 more months, I could see where you're coming from.

    You're essentially whining because these ginormous "outliers" don't fit your narrative.
    2015 Bull's Mock Trade Game Championship Team

    San Antonio Spurs

    PG: Chris Paul | Patty Mills | Jose Calderon
    SG: Khris Middleton | J.J. Redick | Iman Shumpert
    SF: DeMarre Carroll | P.J. Tucker | Anthony Morrow
    PF: Tim Duncan | Carlos Boozer | Kyle O'Quinn
    C : Al Horford | Rudy Gobert

  4. #2179
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    3,156
    Quote Originally Posted by Saddletramp View Post
    I like how he totally ignored this post. And then did it again:



    That was a long term republican strong hold before Katie Hill won it two years ago then her democrat replacement candidate was in over her head and not strong enough to win after running on a platform that even Biden isnít ok with. The seat will be up again in November so the Dems decided not to keep throwing in money when itíll all be going again in 6 months. Also, most older rich people already vote by mail (and vote more anyway). This is all in the story but he just looked at the headline.

    It was a simple recipe for a republican win but he made sound like a Covid lockdown attitude was the reason.
    I mean, I'm not going to pretend like I follow California politics. I read a few articles shortly after the election and thought it was interesting. I think the truth is a low turn out in conjunction to people being fed up with local/state government handling the virus contributed to the lopsided victory.

    I didn't post that article to "prove my point". I posted it because it's a plausible theory as to why Republicans overtook the seat. It seems to be objective. It probably upset some Democrats as well as some Republicans.

    Also, if I don't respond to something immediately, I'm not purposely trying to dodge a question or response. I don't live on PSD or even post every day. Somethings, however, are pretty petty and not worth defending/responding as it takes away from the entire flow/point of a discussion.
    Last edited by Redrum187; 05-19-2020 at 01:27 PM.
    2015 Bull's Mock Trade Game Championship Team

    San Antonio Spurs

    PG: Chris Paul | Patty Mills | Jose Calderon
    SG: Khris Middleton | J.J. Redick | Iman Shumpert
    SF: DeMarre Carroll | P.J. Tucker | Anthony Morrow
    PF: Tim Duncan | Carlos Boozer | Kyle O'Quinn
    C : Al Horford | Rudy Gobert

  5. #2180
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    3,156
    Quote Originally Posted by Jamiecballer View Post
    I never really said that people who protest don't care about human lives, only that they care about themselves more than everyone else.

    When I said people simply dont care about whether old people die I was including all of us in that.

    Sent from my SM-A520W using Tapatalk
    I feel you on that. But I think this is true pre-virus and it will be true post-virus.

    It's easy for some people just to think the worst of people. I do that too... and I probably shouldn't. I'm just being lazy when I refuse to think deeper and instead cling to an easy answer which explains or justifies how I emotional feel about it.
    2015 Bull's Mock Trade Game Championship Team

    San Antonio Spurs

    PG: Chris Paul | Patty Mills | Jose Calderon
    SG: Khris Middleton | J.J. Redick | Iman Shumpert
    SF: DeMarre Carroll | P.J. Tucker | Anthony Morrow
    PF: Tim Duncan | Carlos Boozer | Kyle O'Quinn
    C : Al Horford | Rudy Gobert

  6. #2181
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    3,156
    Quote Originally Posted by Saddletramp View Post
    Also, in regards to driving causing accidents, I wonder how many more accidents would happen if we did away with speed limits, stop signs, safety inspections for vehicles and roadways/bridges, etc...... (And a country of 330 million people have had half the deaths in a typical year than weíve had Covid deaths in 3 months......about to triple it actually. Letís worry about the task at hand.)

    People should stay at home as much as possible and wear fresh gloves and safety masks as much as possible. Some of these scenes are just ridiculous and totally not helping.
    But if the goal is to "save lives", wouldn't you argue to do whatever it takes? Why would you be okay with people "needlessly" dying when we could either outlaw cars altogether or at the very least reduce the speed limit to a speed that wouldn't be lethal if there was an accident?

    Do you acknowledge that you, personally, are okay with people driving cars, fully knowing that some will die as a result? (this isn't rhetorical)


    BEFORE, when the goal was to slow the spread of the virus, it made 100% sense. But now that it is no longer the goal (we far exceeded that), it's about staying home to "save lives", it COMPLETELY legitimizing the outlawing cars debate as NO ONE can honestly disagree that we would save lives if we outlawed cars and/or reduce the speed limit.
    Last edited by Redrum187; 05-19-2020 at 01:40 PM.
    2015 Bull's Mock Trade Game Championship Team

    San Antonio Spurs

    PG: Chris Paul | Patty Mills | Jose Calderon
    SG: Khris Middleton | J.J. Redick | Iman Shumpert
    SF: DeMarre Carroll | P.J. Tucker | Anthony Morrow
    PF: Tim Duncan | Carlos Boozer | Kyle O'Quinn
    C : Al Horford | Rudy Gobert

  7. #2182
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    10,831
    Quote Originally Posted by Redrum187 View Post
    How was the article against my claim? lol

    I didn't know I was diminishing the pandemic. I just stated facts about how some counties/cities/states are combating the virus. You seem to hate that I point to a huge section of California on possibly staying closed for another 3 months. If this was a population of a few thousand, I can see the use of the term "outlier", but when it includes a county which constitutes 1/4 of the entire state of California, statistically, it is not an outlier. Furthermore, why can't we simply have a discussion about areas that are going overboard? You're trying to make this discussion inclusive/representative of the entire country, I'm not... We might be the same country, but we are vastly different when we take into account culture, political ideologies, etc...

    Why do you think areas in California (and even in other parts of the country) are outliers? California and New York have among the most restrictions. While they are only 2 states, they ac cumulatively make up almost 1/5 of the country population wise. Once again, if I used a tiny county that wanted to stay locked down for 3 more months, I could see where you're coming from.

    You're essentially whining because these ginormous "outliers" don't fit your narrative.
    It said/you quoted the headline of "lock downs can't end until vaccine" or something like that and then it went over study saying to open cautiously/keep guidelines and so on within the actual article. It was talking about needing a balance not actually that the lockdowns couldn't end. That's why they have started because the plan has always been a balance like that was my point and that article you shared said the same, it was only the headline that made it seem otherwise.

    I didn't know I was trying to diminish what certain areas of California were doing lol. all I have done is used your own "logic" back at you with this argument, did you not catch this is what you said to me out of nowhere? Other people can state facts about people being morons/selfish for wanting to open too but you got mad saying it's just the outliers. I am pointing out so is one small portion of this country, it's the outlier in the same way. What is the population of the people under lockdown 3 months and the population that is not in this country, I will wait. It is a small percentage of the country even if that doesn't fit your narrative, just like you are right more people wanting to open probably are thinking economically and so on and don't just wanna kill others, they are the outliers too even if that type of stuff gets covered more in the news.

    I am pointing out the lack of consistency in your argument. One portion of CA doesn't change the overall response our country has taken and each area was always going to be responding differently. When people whined about needing to open they should have been clear they mean one portion of one state, I didn't know the MI/MN and so on protesters all cared so much about this location lol. The obvious point is be consistent in your logic and realize you do the exact same thing you try to call others out for just a different way politically (use the outliers/more extremes to push narratives).

  8. #2183
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Miami Heat
    Posts
    4,100
    Quote Originally Posted by Redrum187 View Post
    But if the goal is to "save lives", wouldn't you argue to do whatever it takes? Why would you be okay with people "needlessly" dying when we could either outlaw cars altogether or at the very least reduce the speed limit to a speed that wouldn't be lethal if there was an accident?

    Do you acknowledge that you, personally, are okay with people driving cars, fully knowing that some will die as a result? (this isn't rhetorical)


    BEFORE, when the goal was to slow the spread of the virus, it made 100% sense. But now that it is no longer the goal (we far exceeded that), it's about staying home to "save lives", it COMPLETELY legitimizing the outlawing cars debate as NO ONE can honestly disagree that we would save lives if we outlawed cars and/or reduce the speed limit.
    Because the risk-reward for cars isn't the same as a virus that can potentially kill millions. One car accident from Texas doesn't affect an individual from New York. It's an isolated incident. Furthermore, the risk-reward for opening up the country isn't at that point where it makes sense, yet. Eventually it will open up. I always hate when people try to create an analogy and then stick to that analogy until they die. Not all analogies, despite sharing some similarities, are comparable. You can be the safest driver in the world and still die in a car accident. There's no way for you to be exposed to millions of people and know for a fact you won't get the virus. All it takes is one. Millions of people didn't contract the virus from one source. One person contracted it from another and it spread like a wildfire. I really don't understand your analogy.

  9. #2184
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    3,156
    Quote Originally Posted by mngopher35 View Post
    It said/you quoted the headline of "lock downs can't end until vaccine" or something like that and then it went over study saying to open cautiously/keep guidelines and so on within the actual article. It was talking about needing a balance not actually that the lockdowns couldn't end. That's why they have started because the plan has always been a balance like that was my point and that article you shared said the same, it was only the headline that made it seem otherwise.

    I didn't know I was trying to diminish what certain areas of California were doing lol. all I have done is used your own "logic" back at you with this argument, did you not catch this is what you said to me out of nowhere? Other people can state facts about people being morons/selfish for wanting to open too but you got mad saying it's just the outliers. I am pointing out so is one small portion of this country, it's the outlier in the same way. What is the population of the people under lockdown 3 months and the population that is not in this country, I will wait. It is a small percentage of the country even if that doesn't fit your narrative, just like you are right more people wanting to open probably are thinking economically and so on and don't just wanna kill others, they are the outliers too even if that type of stuff gets covered more in the news.

    I am pointing out the lack of consistency in your argument. One portion of CA doesn't change the overall response our country has taken and each area was always going to be responding differently. When people whined about needing to open they should have been clear they mean one portion of one state, I didn't know the MI/MN and so on protesters all cared so much about this location lol. The obvious point is be consistent in your logic and realize you do the exact same thing you try to call others out for just a different way politically (use the outliers/more extremes to push narratives).
    My apologies, I thought you were talking about the latest article I posted. The article you're talking about didn't discredit my claim anyways. The title did support what I was saying, and you are right, it supported a balanced approach. Nevertheless, it quoted people who argued for a vaccine to be put in place before opening up. That was my point. This wasn't a phantom point of view you accused me of making up, it was around before my commenting in this thread back in March.

    It's not an inconsistency to specifically isolate area(s) of the country that are doing a completely different strategy than the mainstream approach. In fact, you're making my argument for me. The goal is to get these "outlier" (they aren't even statistically outliers either) counties/cities/states to match those counties/cities/states which have success post-lockdown. Of course we have to account for population/density of cities. One city's plan could be incompatible with anothers.

    I think you missed my entire point though. You're trying to make me talk about the entire country as a whole, when I'm talking about a huge portion (albeit minority in comparison to the rest of the country) of California that refuses to let go of the stay-at-home orders and are possibly going to prolong it another 3 months. By the way, just because something is in the minority, doesn't make it an "outlier" .
    2015 Bull's Mock Trade Game Championship Team

    San Antonio Spurs

    PG: Chris Paul | Patty Mills | Jose Calderon
    SG: Khris Middleton | J.J. Redick | Iman Shumpert
    SF: DeMarre Carroll | P.J. Tucker | Anthony Morrow
    PF: Tim Duncan | Carlos Boozer | Kyle O'Quinn
    C : Al Horford | Rudy Gobert

  10. #2185
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    10,831
    Quote Originally Posted by Redrum187 View Post
    My apologies, I thought you were talking about the latest article I posted. The article you're talking about didn't discredit my claim anyways. The title did support what I was saying, and you are right, it supported a balanced approach. Nevertheless, it quoted people who argued for a vaccine to be put in place before opening up. That was my point. This wasn't a phantom point of view you accused me of making up, it was around before my commenting in this thread back in March.

    It's not an inconsistency to specifically isolate area(s) of the country that are doing a completely different strategy than the mainstream approach. In fact, you're making my argument for me. The goal is to get these "outlier" (they aren't even statistically outliers either) counties/cities/states to match those counties/cities/states which have success post-lockdown. Of course we have to account for population/density of cities. One city's plan could be incompatible with anothers.

    I think you missed my entire point though. You're trying to make me talk about the entire country as a whole, when I'm talking about a huge portion (albeit minority in comparison to the rest of the country) of California that refuses to let go of the stay-at-home orders and are possibly going to prolong it another 3 months. By the way, just because something is in the minority, doesn't make it an "outlier" .
    In media, not in the actual study/science lol. Of course the media is going to sensationalize this topic and some have said things like that headline, that is obvious and what people have tried pointing out to you (this is media 101). The same thing trying to make that hairdresser out as a victim when she clearly was going out of her way to break orders in a specific manner/politically. It is a point of view pushed by the extremes is the point, it is pushed by media sensationalizing for clicks and so on. I never denied that, I just pointed out the reality is science and so on haven't been saying that in reality it is just those sensationalizing in the manner like that article did (you provided a great example).

    If others can't do the same thing and isolate groups like the protesters and so on then it is. That is what people are doing, isolating the extremes and attacking them which is what you want to do with this area now. Each county is going to have different numbers and so on, their constituents may feel different than others in the country and so on. I agree plans could be incompatible, that's part of the issue with no federal guidance throughout much of this and leaving it up to the states but that's how we often do things.

    I am talking about the pandemic as a whole just like I have been this whole time. You want to narrow it to this little section now to point and say "look guys look" in the same way some can point to morons/selfish protesters and say "look guys look" based off some extremes. Are you saying their approach is not an outlier in this country and if so please show me who else is matching it?

  11. #2186
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    3,156
    Quote Originally Posted by OceanSpray View Post
    Because the risk-reward for cars isn't the same as a virus that can potentially kill millions.
    Says who? How do you quantify the risk-reward of cars? Isn't this subjective? You and I might agree, but to someone else, they could fundamentally disagree. Nevertheless, can you answer the question? Because you subjectively put a risk-reward value system in place, you're okay with people "needlessly" dying [by allowing people to drive cars]? "That's selfish!!"

    Quote Originally Posted by OceanSpray View Post
    One car accident from Texas doesn't affect an individual from New York. It's an isolated incident.
    If a Texan drives in New York and has an accident there, it 100% affects them. Furthermore, it's not even about interstate driving... there are INTRAstate driving accidents which result in loss of life. I don't think you're thinking your arguments out very well. It's okay to just answer my question by saying "I think the risk-reward for allowing people to drive justifies the unfortunate casualties that will inevitable happen as a result." It doesn't make you a selfish prick (only woke people will say that to you).

    Quote Originally Posted by OceanSpray View Post
    Furthermore, the risk-reward for opening up the country isn't at that point where it makes sense, yet. Eventually it will open up. I always hate when people try to create an analogy and then stick to that analogy until they die. Not all analogies, despite sharing some similarities, are comparable. You can be the safest driver in the world and still die in a car accident. There's no way for you to be exposed to millions of people and know for a fact you won't get the virus. All it takes is one. Millions of people didn't contract the virus from one source. One person contracted it from another and it spread like a wildfire. I really don't understand your analogy.
    It depends on which "experts" you talk to. Many will agree with you. Many do disagree with you and is the reason why the country is starting to open back up.
    2015 Bull's Mock Trade Game Championship Team

    San Antonio Spurs

    PG: Chris Paul | Patty Mills | Jose Calderon
    SG: Khris Middleton | J.J. Redick | Iman Shumpert
    SF: DeMarre Carroll | P.J. Tucker | Anthony Morrow
    PF: Tim Duncan | Carlos Boozer | Kyle O'Quinn
    C : Al Horford | Rudy Gobert

  12. #2187
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Miami Heat
    Posts
    4,100
    Quote Originally Posted by Redrum187 View Post
    Says who? How do you quantify the risk-reward of cars? Isn't this subjective? You and I might agree, but to someone else, they could fundamentally disagree. Nevertheless, can you answer the question? Because you subjectively put a risk-reward value system in place, you're okay with people "needlessly" dying [by allowing people to drive cars]? "That's selfish!!"



    If a Texan drives in New York and has an accident there, it 100% affects them. Furthermore, it's not even about interstate driving... there are INTRAstate driving accidents which result in loss of life. I don't think you're thinking your arguments out very well. It's okay to just answer my question by saying "I think the risk-reward for allowing people to drive justifies the unfortunate casualties that will inevitable happen as a result." It doesn't make you a selfish prick (only woke people will say that to you).



    It depends on which "experts" you talk to. Many will agree with you. Many do disagree with you and is the reason why the country is starting to open back up.
    Ohhhhhhh, I'm not the one thinking about it enough but the guy who compares the coronavirus to gunowners is certainly making the logical argument.

    Here's why the risk-reward of cars makes sense. Are you ready? Because you need your car to work, go to school, etc., The economy runs on transportation for many things. It's a risk-reward that simply makes sense. 36,000 deaths may seem like a lot until you realize that billions of car interactions occur in America every single year. BILLIONS. No **** accidents that cause death will happen. Stop trying to go for the silly analogies and just drop it. It doesn't work.


    I don't think you learned how to read appropriately. I never said anything about a Texan driving in NY. I said an ACCIDENT in Texas doesn't affect someone living in NY meaning, the coronavirus COULD affect someone from intrastate boundaries since someone can travel from Texas to New York. These are state issues that have to be addressed. You can't open up one state, allow travel to other states that are following their own protocols, and risk being further exposed.

    The country isn't starting to open back up because of your crappy gun or car analogies. It's starting to open back up because the deaths and exposed individuals are decreasing due to RESTRICTIONS. All of this is about risk-and-reward and some areas may have already hit that number while some, like NYC, is clearly not ready. If anything else, quit using stupid analogies. It's cringy how far you are willing to go to defend it as if you're connecting the dots on some secret code.

  13. #2188
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    3,156
    Quote Originally Posted by mngopher35 View Post
    In media, not in the actual study/science lol. Of course the media is going to sensationalize this topic and some have said things like that headline, that is obvious and what people have tried pointing out to you (this is media 101). The same thing trying to make that hairdresser out as a victim when she clearly was going out of her way to break orders in a specific manner/politically. It is a point of view pushed by the extremes is the point, it is pushed by media sensationalizing for clicks and so on. I never denied that, I just pointed out the reality is science and so on haven't been saying that in reality it is just those sensationalizing in the manner like that article did (you provided a great example).

    If others can't do the same thing and isolate groups like the protesters and so on then it is. That is what people are doing, isolating the extremes and attacking them which is what you want to do with this area now. Each county is going to have different numbers and so on, their constituents may feel different than others in the country and so on. I agree plans could be incompatible, that's part of the issue with no federal guidance throughout much of this and leaving it up to the states but that's how we often do things.

    I am talking about the pandemic as a whole just like I have been this whole time. You want to narrow it to this little section now to point and say "look guys look" in the same way some can point to morons/selfish protesters and say "look guys look" based off some extremes. Are you saying their approach is not an outlier in this country and if so please show me who else is matching it?
    There is federal guidance. I just think you disagree with their guidance. I don't even have a problem with you disagreeing with it. The federal government is allowing states and local authorities to orchestrate the reopening of the country. This is a classical liberal viewpoint, one in which, our founding fathers (who admittedly weren't the greatest group of men) specifically aimed for. If the state/local government is doing something detrimental, then the federal government will step in.

    We probably agree that governor Cuomo of New York is an absolute moron for allowing covid-19 patients into nursing homes which obliterated thousands of elderly people. Perhaps if Trump took charge of New York he could have saved lives... not even Trump is stupid enough to mandate that New York nursing homes have to accept covid-19 patients. Nevertheless, I feel THIS is a true "outlier" of a state's incompetence. Most states, especially the less liberal ones, have done a pretty decent job fighting this virus. Hindsight is always 20/20, and there were mistakes, but I'd argue the federal government is even LESS efficient than local/state governments.

    What is confusing to me is how people crap on Trump and his administration, yet they want him to be in charge of what their state is suppose to do.... If Trump is so bad orchestrating the fight against the virus, you should be in 100% support of your state leading the charge, no?
    2015 Bull's Mock Trade Game Championship Team

    San Antonio Spurs

    PG: Chris Paul | Patty Mills | Jose Calderon
    SG: Khris Middleton | J.J. Redick | Iman Shumpert
    SF: DeMarre Carroll | P.J. Tucker | Anthony Morrow
    PF: Tim Duncan | Carlos Boozer | Kyle O'Quinn
    C : Al Horford | Rudy Gobert

  14. #2189
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    LA
    Posts
    47,597
    Quote Originally Posted by SiteWolf View Post
    and that mindset really does make you the *******....it's yet another ism based on one's own bias

    every case has its differences in how someone finds themselves overweight...you yourself are claiming to be 30 lbs overweight......so we don't feel sorry for you either. in my case, I ran regularly into my late 30s when knee troubles caused me to change to more hiking...I had never exercised just to exercise, my exercise was just what I enjoyed. then I moved to the plains where hiking was just walking and before I realized I needed to adjust again, I started taking more and more care of my aging mother..highly necessary but greatly sedentary...and each of those changes added pounds, pounds that get harder and harder to deal with as I age.. and my knee doesn't help. so....am I just sloppy and not worthy of your concern then butt breath?
    lol every case. bs, the vast majority are fat cuz they're sloppy. me being 30lbs overweight doesn't get me to ****ing absurdly obese, borderline diabetic type.

    if ur obese then put the KFC down, do non weight bearing exercises. if ur old af then so be it, I'm talking about the vast majority of fatties who got there due to a lack of discipline. if that ain't u then I'm not talking about u but don't peddle ur bs excuses for everyone

  15. #2190
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Miami Heat
    Posts
    4,100
    Quote Originally Posted by Redrum187 View Post
    There is federal guidance. I just think you disagree with their guidance. I don't even have a problem with you disagreeing with it. The federal government is allowing states and local authorities to orchestrate the reopening of the country. This is a classical liberal viewpoint, one in which, our founding fathers (who admittedly weren't the greatest group of men) specifically aimed for. If the state/local government is doing something detrimental, then the federal government will step in.

    We probably agree that governor Cuomo of New York is an absolute moron for allowing covid-19 patients into nursing homes which obliterated thousands of elderly people. Perhaps if Trump took charge of New York he could have saved lives... not even Trump is stupid enough to mandate that New York nursing homes have to accept covid-19 patients. Nevertheless, I feel THIS is a true "outlier" of a state's incompetence. Most states, especially the less liberal ones, have done a pretty decent job fighting this virus. Hindsight is always 20/20, and there were mistakes, but I'd argue the federal government is even LESS efficient than local/state governments.

    What is confusing to me is how people crap on Trump and his administration, yet they want him to be in charge of what their state is suppose to do.... If Trump is so bad orchestrating the fight against the virus, you should be in 100% support of your state leading the charge, no?
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_o...lation_density

    I like Trump but his first mistake was trusting China and in the early stages of the virus, continuously stated that in April, it would magically go away. Sorry, but Trump, initially, chose to ignore the severity of this. They don't want Trump to be in charge of what their state is supposed to do. Our founding fathers created the state vs federal structure not knowing of the world that would come today. Right now, all the states are so interconnected with one another that many issues are becoming more of a federal issue than state.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •