Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Still, they "own" the responsibility to take care of the people. And whether a road is privately owned or not, all laws apply.I won't get into that because it's a complicated issue. Government owns the roads, so government has to make the rules about how they are used. If government didn't own then roads, then some private owner would make the rules.Where does it say you can´t drive on the sidewalk?Note that I said "legitimate." Where does the Constitution give government the authority to tell me I can't go to work?Yes, they have. They do have laws.My government has no legitimate authority to tell me I can't work or go to the movies, period.My responsibility to stay at home so your grandma can avoid the risk of getting COVID-19 is zero.It is not about morality but responsibility.Don´t confuse freedom with idiocy.If you're afraid of getting sick, stay home. But you can't tell me what to do.
Life is a risk. Freedom means you get to choose.
Don't confuse ignorant cowardice with morality, hon.
However, government doesn't own your job. It doesn't own you.
www.politifact.com
Agreed.Yep... sux to be them... but if we can save your loved one's life by keeping that business (and similar others) closed, then the financial loss and hardship are well worth it.Incorrect.I merely place a vastly higher value on human life than I do on the solvency of a given company.
False dichotomy.
You're assuming that a company, that the economy as a whole, is something that can be sacrificed to save human lives, and ignorantly disregarding the impact that economic conditions have on human lives.
To sacrifice the economy, you are not saving human lives, you are sacrificing human lives. For what purpose?
If, by sacrificing the solvency of a non-essential company, we save human lives, through lessened exposure, then it's well-worth the sacrifice.
That is unless you work for the company or have your IRA investments in it.
The idea is to salvage both. There is no right or wrong call here because nobody has a crystal ball. I say open up the economy after we have the ability to protect ourselves from the virus like with N-95 masks for everybody, blood donations from those who recovered from it, reliable antibody tests and an ample supply to test anybody and everybody.
But until we reach that optimum state, I hold that human life takes priority over corporate solvency or even the financial well-being of a given company's employees.
Another example of tyranny. Police enforcing the illegal stay at home order arrest a woman in Louisville. She did get some revenge on the police.Freedom means you get to choose.
www.wlky.com
The elected leaders in Tulsi Gabbards state haven't gotten that message. They are currently harassing tourists.Obviously you either never read or don't understand the Bill Of Rights. No where in there does it say that .gov can shut down your business, close the churches, and force you to stay home.
www.hawaiipublicradio.org
But until we reach that optimum state, I hold that human life takes priority over corporate solvency or even the financial well-being of a given company's employees.
Economic pain is always balanced against human life. We could stop all traffic deaths tomorrow if we established a national speed limit of 5 mph. According to you the fact that we don't means we hold that financial solvency trumps human life. The concept of perfect safety is absurd. The only question is how many deaths are we willing to tolerate, and so far we haven't even come close to what we've tolerated in the past.
We could stop all traffic deaths tomorrow if we established a national speed limit of 5 mph.
I hold that you're a douchebag who probably has a gauranteed source of income. You're free to hold whatever priorities you wish. However, that doesn't give you the right to impose them on us. Frankly, I don't give a flying fuck if your grandma dies because she refused to isolate herself. That's her problem, not mine. I need to work, and my job takes precedence over your grandma. End of story.Agreed.Yep... sux to be them... but if we can save your loved one's life by keeping that business (and similar others) closed, then the financial loss and hardship are well worth it.Incorrect.I merely place a vastly higher value on human life than I do on the solvency of a given company.
False dichotomy.
You're assuming that a company, that the economy as a whole, is something that can be sacrificed to save human lives, and ignorantly disregarding the impact that economic conditions have on human lives.
To sacrifice the economy, you are not saving human lives, you are sacrificing human lives. For what purpose?
If, by sacrificing the solvency of a non-essential company, we save human lives, through lessened exposure, then it's well-worth the sacrifice.
That is unless you work for the company or have your IRA investments in it.
The idea is to salvage both. There is no right or wrong call here because nobody has a crystal ball. I say open up the economy after we have the ability to protect ourselves from the virus like with N-95 masks for everybody, blood donations from those who recovered from it, reliable antibody tests and an ample supply to test anybody and everybody.
But until we reach that optimum state, I hold that human life takes priority over corporate solvency or even the financial well-being of a given company's employees.
That doesn't mean anything, moron. The question here is "who makes the laws," not whether they "apply," whatever the fuck that is supposed to mean.Still, they "own" the responsibility to take care of the people. And whether a road is privately owned or not, all laws apply.I won't get into that because it's a complicated issue. Government owns the roads, so government has to make the rules about how they are used. If government didn't own then roads, then some private owner would make the rules.Where does it say you can´t drive on the sidewalk?Note that I said "legitimate." Where does the Constitution give government the authority to tell me I can't go to work?Yes, they have. They do have laws.My government has no legitimate authority to tell me I can't work or go to the movies, period.My responsibility to stay at home so your grandma can avoid the risk of getting COVID-19 is zero.It is not about morality but responsibility.Don´t confuse freedom with idiocy.If you're afraid of getting sick, stay home. But you can't tell me what to do.
Life is a risk. Freedom means you get to choose.
Don't confuse ignorant cowardice with morality, hon.
However, government doesn't own your job. It doesn't own you.
States’ stay-home orders carry the force of law
Washington Gov. Jay Inslee, who issued some of the earliest social-distancing orders of any governor to combat the sprea
I hold that you're a douchebag who probably has a gauranteed [sic] source of income.
Apparently it is those you elected, blitz bulb.That doesn't mean anything, moron. The question here is "who makes the laws," not whether they "apply," whatever the fuck that is supposed to mean.Still, they "own" the responsibility to take care of the people. And whether a road is privately owned or not, all laws apply.I won't get into that because it's a complicated issue. Government owns the roads, so government has to make the rules about how they are used. If government didn't own then roads, then some private owner would make the rules.Where does it say you can´t drive on the sidewalk?Note that I said "legitimate." Where does the Constitution give government the authority to tell me I can't go to work?Yes, they have. They do have laws.My government has no legitimate authority to tell me I can't work or go to the movies, period.My responsibility to stay at home so your grandma can avoid the risk of getting COVID-19 is zero.It is not about morality but responsibility.Don´t confuse freedom with idiocy.If you're afraid of getting sick, stay home. But you can't tell me what to do.
Life is a risk. Freedom means you get to choose.
Don't confuse ignorant cowardice with morality, hon.
However, government doesn't own your job. It doesn't own you.
States’ stay-home orders carry the force of law
Washington Gov. Jay Inslee, who issued some of the earliest social-distancing orders of any governor to combat the sprea
It's not about what I would do or you would do. It's about them taking jobs from Americans that do want to do those jobs, or are otherwise greatly lowering their pay scale.
It's irrelevant who murdered who. The fact is blacks commit much more crime per capita than any other group of people in our country. That's why more of them are in prison.
For much of the country, the economy is going to partially open up in a few days, and in another few weeks or months, open up even more. Recessions and depressions happen when nobody has access to money. Thanks to Trump, some people are going to have more money than they did working.
Once again, a person's financial well-being has a direct impact on his ability to survive.
It is self-contradictory nonsense to claim that you care about anyone's life, but at the same time, to not care about his financial well-being. The two are inextricably tied together.
Again, Mormon Bob thinks that the ability of the rich to exploit working people is more important than their safety.
If you are worried about pay scales, then you should support unionization.
You can't have it both ways.
You made a claim that you are more likely to be murdered by a black person... when in fact, 84% of whites are murdered by other whites, often people they live with.
I didn't elect any of them, moron.Apparently it is those you elected, blitz bulb.That doesn't mean anything, moron. The question here is "who makes the laws," not whether they "apply," whatever the fuck that is supposed to mean.Still, they "own" the responsibility to take care of the people. And whether a road is privately owned or not, all laws apply.I won't get into that because it's a complicated issue. Government owns the roads, so government has to make the rules about how they are used. If government didn't own then roads, then some private owner would make the rules.Where does it say you can´t drive on the sidewalk?Note that I said "legitimate." Where does the Constitution give government the authority to tell me I can't go to work?Yes, they have. They do have laws.My government has no legitimate authority to tell me I can't work or go to the movies, period.My responsibility to stay at home so your grandma can avoid the risk of getting COVID-19 is zero.It is not about morality but responsibility.Don´t confuse freedom with idiocy.If you're afraid of getting sick, stay home. But you can't tell me what to do.
Life is a risk. Freedom means you get to choose.
Don't confuse ignorant cowardice with morality, hon.
However, government doesn't own your job. It doesn't own you.
States’ stay-home orders carry the force of law
Washington Gov. Jay Inslee, who issued some of the earliest social-distancing orders of any governor to combat the sprea
Again, Mormon Bob thinks that the ability of the rich to exploit working people is more important than their safety.
If we destroy our economy, then it's not just the wealthy who will suffer. A hundred times more non-wealthy people will suffer even more than the wealthy.
Again, Mormon Bob thinks that the ability of the rich to exploit working people is more important than their safety.
If we destroy our economy, then it's not just the wealthy who will suffer. A hundred times more non-wealthy people will suffer even more than the wealthy.
Indeed, the wealthy are in a much better place to prepare to weather any economic disaster. They can easily afford to do, and would do if they are wise, to stockpile food and fuel and other essentials, so that they can survive an extended time no matter what the economy does. Not so easy for those farther down the economic scale, who are struggling as it is just to meet their daily needs, with little left over to store for the future.
I hold that you're a douchebag who probably has a gauranteed source of income. You're free to hold whatever priorities you wish. However, that doesn't give you the right to impose them on us. Frankly, I don't give a flying fuck if your grandma dies because she refused to isolate herself. That's her problem, not mine. I need to work, and my job takes precedence over your grandma. End of story.Agreed.Yep... sux to be them... but if we can save your loved one's life by keeping that business (and similar others) closed, then the financial loss and hardship are well worth it.Incorrect.I merely place a vastly higher value on human life than I do on the solvency of a given company.
False dichotomy.
You're assuming that a company, that the economy as a whole, is something that can be sacrificed to save human lives, and ignorantly disregarding the impact that economic conditions have on human lives.
To sacrifice the economy, you are not saving human lives, you are sacrificing human lives. For what purpose?
If, by sacrificing the solvency of a non-essential company, we save human lives, through lessened exposure, then it's well-worth the sacrifice.
That is unless you work for the company or have your IRA investments in it.
The idea is to salvage both. There is no right or wrong call here because nobody has a crystal ball. I say open up the economy after we have the ability to protect ourselves from the virus like with N-95 masks for everybody, blood donations from those who recovered from it, reliable antibody tests and an ample supply to test anybody and everybody.
But until we reach that optimum state, I hold that human life takes priority over corporate solvency or even the financial well-being of a given company's employees.
