hunter8 wrote: ↑Tue Aug 04, 2020 9:05 pm

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

Lockdowns do prevent infection, with small to medium efficiency. They also have a harmful side effect of preventing life.

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.

hunter8 wrote: ↑Tue Aug 04, 2020 9:05 pmThe 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.

aggro wrote: ↑Fri Aug 07, 2020 2:02 pm

hunter8 wrote: ↑Tue Aug 04, 2020 9:05 pmThe 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.

I don't know. I just read a poll in the US that said most people want more restrictions, not less. Check it out.

hunter8 wrote: ↑Fri Aug 07, 2020 2:21 pm

aggro wrote: ↑Fri Aug 07, 2020 2:02 pm

hunter8 wrote: ↑Tue Aug 04, 2020 9:05 pmThe 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.

I don't know. I just read a poll in the US that said most people want more restrictions, not less. Check it out.

Depends who you ask.
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.

Anthony's Weiner wrote: ↑Fri Aug 07, 2020 2:27 pm

hunter8 wrote: ↑Fri Aug 07, 2020 2:21 pm

aggro wrote: ↑Fri Aug 07, 2020 2:02 pm

hunter8 wrote: ↑Tue Aug 04, 2020 9:05 pmThe 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.

I don't know. I just read a poll in the US that said most people want more restrictions, not less. Check it out.

Depends who you ask.
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.

monomial wrote: ↑Fri Aug 07, 2020 1:42 pm

hunter8 wrote: ↑Tue Aug 04, 2020 9:05 pm

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

Lockdowns do prevent infection, with small to medium efficiency. They also have a harmful side effect of preventing life.

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.

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.

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.

chinesetakeaway wrote: ↑Fri Aug 07, 2020 2:33 pm

monomial wrote: ↑Fri Aug 07, 2020 1:42 pm

hunter8 wrote: ↑Tue Aug 04, 2020 9:05 pm

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

Lockdowns do prevent infection, with small to medium efficiency. They also have a harmful side effect of preventing life.

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.

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.

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.

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.asp

Anthony's Weiner wrote: ↑Fri Aug 07, 2020 2:32 pm

Anthony's Weiner wrote: ↑Fri Aug 07, 2020 2:27 pm

hunter8 wrote: ↑Fri Aug 07, 2020 2:21 pm

aggro wrote: ↑Fri Aug 07, 2020 2:02 pm

hunter8 wrote: ↑Tue Aug 04, 2020 9:05 pmThe 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.

I don't know. I just read a poll in the US that said most people want more restrictions, not less. Check it out.

Depends who you ask.
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.

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.

monomial wrote: ↑Fri Aug 07, 2020 2:49 pm

chinesetakeaway wrote: ↑Fri Aug 07, 2020 2:33 pm

monomial wrote: ↑Fri Aug 07, 2020 1:42 pm

hunter8 wrote: ↑Tue Aug 04, 2020 9:05 pm

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

Lockdowns do prevent infection, with small to medium efficiency. They also have a harmful side effect of preventing life.

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.

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.

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.

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.asp

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.

Your apparent intolerance of any opinion that differs from your own says more about you than it does about me.

hunter8 wrote: ↑Fri Aug 07, 2020 2:51 pm

Anthony's Weiner wrote: ↑Fri Aug 07, 2020 2:32 pm

Anthony's Weiner wrote: ↑Fri Aug 07, 2020 2:27 pm

hunter8 wrote: ↑Fri Aug 07, 2020 2:21 pm

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.

Depends who you ask.
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.

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.

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.