Following the Coronavirus (COVID-19) Outbreak - News and Discussion
Re: Following the Coronavirus (COVID-19) Outbreak - News and Discussion
And to be fair, Trump did not even say lockdowns don't prevent infections. He said they don't prevent infections 'in the future' and he is absolutely 100% correct in that statement.hunter8 wrote: ↑Tue Aug 04, 2020 9:05 pmLockdowns do prevent infection, with small to medium efficiency. They also have a harmful side effect of preventing life.clutchcargo wrote: ↑Tue Aug 04, 2020 2:44 pm Looks like Trump has been reading hunter8/Dunderhead's posts on here
Trump claims lockdowns 'do not prevent infection in the future' and undermines Dr. Fauci's push to reconsider shutdowns in certain states
It is a crime against humanity to force everyone to not have a life because of some senior and/or obese citizens who may or may not (and most are not) be at risk.
The enthusiasm for lockdowns quickly diminishes, it seems, after US and Europe both published economic stats end of July that showed a multi-decade setback of economies. The side effect of preventing life is very costly.
Lockdowns are a nuclear response to a mosquito infestation. Yes, a nuclear strike can prevent the spread of dungue, but only at a cost which is so much greater than the original disease. And as soon as the nuclear lockdown response is over, the mosquitoes, or the virus in this case, simply returns.
Lockdowns are bad policy and do nothing to address the actual problem. Flatten the curve was a justifiable reason for a short, keyword short, lockdown. Trying to starve the virus out of existence through lockdowns every time cases flare up is just plain stupid. I wish it was someone other than Trump saying this so that politics didn't get so tangled up in it.
This common sense transcends politics.
Re: Following the Coronavirus (COVID-19) Outbreak - News and Discussion
I don't know. I just read a poll in the US that said most people want more restrictions, not less. Check it out.
Re: Following the Coronavirus (COVID-19) Outbreak - News and Discussion
Depends who you ask.aggro wrote: ↑Fri Aug 07, 2020 2:02 pmI don't know. I just read a poll in the US that said most people want more restrictions, not less. Check it out.
To me this poll shows that the number of taxpayers/businesses/productive members of society is smaller than the number of all sorts of leeching free-riders.
-
- Expatriate
- Posts: 1634
- Joined: Tue Nov 21, 2017 4:00 am
- Reputation: 1076
Re: Following the Coronavirus (COVID-19) Outbreak - News and Discussion
hunter8 wrote: ↑Fri Aug 07, 2020 2:21 pmDepends who you ask.aggro wrote: ↑Fri Aug 07, 2020 2:02 pmI don't know. I just read a poll in the US that said most people want more restrictions, not less. Check it out.
To me this poll shows that the number of taxpayers/businesses/productive members of society is smaller than the number of all sorts of leeching free-riders.
-
- Expatriate
- Posts: 1634
- Joined: Tue Nov 21, 2017 4:00 am
- Reputation: 1076
Re: Following the Coronavirus (COVID-19) Outbreak - News and Discussion
And to me it shows the number of people in America that care about more than only their personal wellbeing is greater than those whocould give a shit about anything other than themslves.Anthony's Weiner wrote: ↑Fri Aug 07, 2020 2:27 pmhunter8 wrote: ↑Fri Aug 07, 2020 2:21 pmDepends who you ask.aggro wrote: ↑Fri Aug 07, 2020 2:02 pmI don't know. I just read a poll in the US that said most people want more restrictions, not less. Check it out.
To me this poll shows that the number of taxpayers/businesses/productive members of society is smaller than the number of all sorts of leeching free-riders.
-
- Expatriate
- Posts: 98
- Joined: Thu May 30, 2019 3:14 pm
- Reputation: 29
Re: Following the Coronavirus (COVID-19) Outbreak - News and Discussion
That settles it! All those years of pandemic research and hundreds of millions of dollars wasted! If only they would have listened to you!? Clearly you have a doctorate in bullshit but maybe narcissism, nihilism, ..? Maybe if we impaled you’d begin to empathize? Anyway there’s a new forum group for you and your friends ...cambodiaexpatsonline.com/forums/iknoweverthing.aspmonomial wrote: ↑Fri Aug 07, 2020 1:42 pmAnd to be fair, Trump did not even say lockdowns don't prevent infections. He said they don't prevent infections 'in the future' and he is absolutely 100% correct in that statement.hunter8 wrote: ↑Tue Aug 04, 2020 9:05 pmLockdowns do prevent infection, with small to medium efficiency. They also have a harmful side effect of preventing life.clutchcargo wrote: ↑Tue Aug 04, 2020 2:44 pm Looks like Trump has been reading hunter8/Dunderhead's posts on here
Trump claims lockdowns 'do not prevent infection in the future' and undermines Dr. Fauci's push to reconsider shutdowns in certain states
It is a crime against humanity to force everyone to not have a life because of some senior and/or obese citizens who may or may not (and most are not) be at risk.
The enthusiasm for lockdowns quickly diminishes, it seems, after US and Europe both published economic stats end of July that showed a multi-decade setback of economies. The side effect of preventing life is very costly.
Lockdowns are a nuclear response to a mosquito infestation. Yes, a nuclear strike can prevent the spread of dungue, but only at a cost which is so much greater than the original disease. And as soon as the nuclear lockdown response is over, the mosquitoes, or the virus in this case, simply returns.
Lockdowns are bad policy and do nothing to address the actual problem. Flatten the curve was a justifiable reason for a short, keyword short, lockdown. Trying to starve the virus out of existence through lockdowns every time cases flare up is just plain stupid. I wish it was someone other than Trump saying this so that politics didn't get so tangled up in it.
This common sense transcends politics.
Re: Following the Coronavirus (COVID-19) Outbreak - News and Discussion
I am allowed to have an opinion and express my values. They are every bit as correct and deserve the same consideration as any "expert" opinion. Epidemiologists are not gods. The respect they deserve is a consequence of providing genuine, falsifiable science. That is not what these lockdowns are. There is no falsifiable science involved. This is all about personal values and beliefs.chinesetakeaway wrote: ↑Fri Aug 07, 2020 2:33 pmThat settles it! All those years of pandemic research and hundreds of millions of dollars wasted! If only they would have listened to you!? Clearly you have a doctorate in bullshit but maybe narcissism, nihilism, ..? Maybe if we impaled you’d begin to empathize? Anyway there’s a new forum group for you and your friends ...cambodiaexpatsonline.com/forums/iknoweverthing.aspmonomial wrote: ↑Fri Aug 07, 2020 1:42 pmAnd to be fair, Trump did not even say lockdowns don't prevent infections. He said they don't prevent infections 'in the future' and he is absolutely 100% correct in that statement.hunter8 wrote: ↑Tue Aug 04, 2020 9:05 pmLockdowns do prevent infection, with small to medium efficiency. They also have a harmful side effect of preventing life.clutchcargo wrote: ↑Tue Aug 04, 2020 2:44 pm Looks like Trump has been reading hunter8/Dunderhead's posts on here
Trump claims lockdowns 'do not prevent infection in the future' and undermines Dr. Fauci's push to reconsider shutdowns in certain states
It is a crime against humanity to force everyone to not have a life because of some senior and/or obese citizens who may or may not (and most are not) be at risk.
The enthusiasm for lockdowns quickly diminishes, it seems, after US and Europe both published economic stats end of July that showed a multi-decade setback of economies. The side effect of preventing life is very costly.
Lockdowns are a nuclear response to a mosquito infestation. Yes, a nuclear strike can prevent the spread of dungue, but only at a cost which is so much greater than the original disease. And as soon as the nuclear lockdown response is over, the mosquitoes, or the virus in this case, simply returns.
Lockdowns are bad policy and do nothing to address the actual problem. Flatten the curve was a justifiable reason for a short, keyword short, lockdown. Trying to starve the virus out of existence through lockdowns every time cases flare up is just plain stupid. I wish it was someone other than Trump saying this so that politics didn't get so tangled up in it.
This common sense transcends politics.
Your apparent intolerance of any opinion that differs from your own says more about you than it does about me.
Re: Following the Coronavirus (COVID-19) Outbreak - News and Discussion
Huh, so businesses that pay into the national coffers care less than those who leech from those coffers. Caring with deeds is inferior to caring with empty words. I don’t know what twisted logic brought you to this conclusion.Anthony's Weiner wrote: ↑Fri Aug 07, 2020 2:32 pmAnd to me it shows the number of people in America that care about more than only their personal wellbeing is greater than those whocould give a shit about anything other than themslves.Anthony's Weiner wrote: ↑Fri Aug 07, 2020 2:27 pmhunter8 wrote: ↑Fri Aug 07, 2020 2:21 pmDepends who you ask.aggro wrote: ↑Fri Aug 07, 2020 2:02 pmI don't know. I just read a poll in the US that said most people want more restrictions, not less. Check it out.
To me this poll shows that the number of taxpayers/businesses/productive members of society is smaller than the number of all sorts of leeching free-riders.
-
- Expatriate
- Posts: 98
- Joined: Thu May 30, 2019 3:14 pm
- Reputation: 29
Re: Following the Coronavirus (COVID-19) Outbreak - News and Discussion
Did you click the link to find your friends? Alternatively, tattoo on your forehead COVID DO NOT TREAT! Also get your family to do likewise. I’ll then grovel on here that I respect your opinion! Alternatively, go and get hit by a car, lie on the operating table and start a discussion with the surgeon on whether he know better than you? Again I’ll grovel. Pls post pics!!!monomial wrote: ↑Fri Aug 07, 2020 2:49 pmI am allowed to have an opinion and express my values. They are every bit as correct and deserve the same consideration as any "expert" opinion. Epidemiologists are not gods. The respect they deserve is a consequence of providing genuine, falsifiable science. That is not what these lockdowns are. There is no falsifiable science involved. This is all about personal values and beliefs.chinesetakeaway wrote: ↑Fri Aug 07, 2020 2:33 pmThat settles it! All those years of pandemic research and hundreds of millions of dollars wasted! If only they would have listened to you!? Clearly you have a doctorate in bullshit but maybe narcissism, nihilism, ..? Maybe if we impaled you’d begin to empathize? Anyway there’s a new forum group for you and your friends ...cambodiaexpatsonline.com/forums/iknoweverthing.aspmonomial wrote: ↑Fri Aug 07, 2020 1:42 pmAnd to be fair, Trump did not even say lockdowns don't prevent infections. He said they don't prevent infections 'in the future' and he is absolutely 100% correct in that statement.hunter8 wrote: ↑Tue Aug 04, 2020 9:05 pmLockdowns do prevent infection, with small to medium efficiency. They also have a harmful side effect of preventing life.clutchcargo wrote: ↑Tue Aug 04, 2020 2:44 pm Looks like Trump has been reading hunter8/Dunderhead's posts on here
Trump claims lockdowns 'do not prevent infection in the future' and undermines Dr. Fauci's push to reconsider shutdowns in certain states
It is a crime against humanity to force everyone to not have a life because of some senior and/or obese citizens who may or may not (and most are not) be at risk.
The enthusiasm for lockdowns quickly diminishes, it seems, after US and Europe both published economic stats end of July that showed a multi-decade setback of economies. The side effect of preventing life is very costly.
Lockdowns are a nuclear response to a mosquito infestation. Yes, a nuclear strike can prevent the spread of dungue, but only at a cost which is so much greater than the original disease. And as soon as the nuclear lockdown response is over, the mosquitoes, or the virus in this case, simply returns.
Lockdowns are bad policy and do nothing to address the actual problem. Flatten the curve was a justifiable reason for a short, keyword short, lockdown. Trying to starve the virus out of existence through lockdowns every time cases flare up is just plain stupid. I wish it was someone other than Trump saying this so that politics didn't get so tangled up in it.
This common sense transcends politics.
Your apparent intolerance of any opinion that differs from your own says more about you than it does about me.
-
- Expatriate
- Posts: 554
- Joined: Wed Dec 18, 2019 9:34 am
- Reputation: 384
Re: Following the Coronavirus (COVID-19) Outbreak - News and Discussion
They pay less now due to tax cuts and some nothing due to loop holes. Businesses can be bigger leeches than welfare programs, just look at who the bailout/stimulus went to. I’m not going to say all of it was squandered and that businesses aren’t worth preserving for the good of the overall economy short and long term, but you can certainly find some gems who received money. America arguably is more of a nanny state for wealthy individuals and corporations than for ordinary citizens.hunter8 wrote: ↑Fri Aug 07, 2020 2:51 pmHuh, so businesses that pay into the national coffers care less than those who leech from those coffers. Caring with deeds is inferior to caring with empty words. I don’t know what twisted logic brought you to this conclusion.Anthony's Weiner wrote: ↑Fri Aug 07, 2020 2:32 pmAnd to me it shows the number of people in America that care about more than only their personal wellbeing is greater than those whocould give a shit about anything other than themslves.Anthony's Weiner wrote: ↑Fri Aug 07, 2020 2:27 pmhunter8 wrote: ↑Fri Aug 07, 2020 2:21 pmDepends who you ask.aggro wrote: ↑Fri Aug 07, 2020 2:02 pm
I don't know. I just read a poll in the US that said most people want more restrictions, not less. Check it out.
To me this poll shows that the number of taxpayers/businesses/productive members of society is smaller than the number of all sorts of leeching free-riders.
What is with this Reaganite/Conservative fantasy of the welfare queen living her best life anyway?
-
- Similar Topics
- Replies
- Views
- Last post
-
- 202 Replies
- 49895 Views
-
Last post by CEOCambodiaNews
-
- 0 Replies
- 3144 Views
-
Last post by AndyKK
-
- 227 Replies
- 45112 Views
-
Last post by KTabi
-
- 2 Replies
- 3107 Views
-
Last post by Jerry Atrick
-
- 0 Replies
- 2439 Views
-
Last post by CEOCambodiaNews
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Clutch Cargo, Deefer, John Bingham, Little_Vicious, lurcio, Spigzy and 564 guests