The other day police asked us to help find a senior citizen with dementia that was driving unattended.
Fucking Nazis.
Because asking for help to find a lost person is the same as spying on your neighbors and reporting on them to the government. JFC. Have any other false equivalence to offer?
That's odd. Most of the Big 5 companies of Seattle were already shutting down their offices and cancelling conferences well before the government told them to do so.
#abundanceofcaution
That's actually true. EY has been working from remote and shut down travel for weeks.
Exactly.
Look, I hate guvmint just like the rest of you guysm. So fuck off.
But let’s not act like private enterprise hasn’t panicked the shit out of the economy many times w/o government assistance. Look at the 1800s - there was a panic every ten years.
None of which has anything to do with the current situation
100% government and media driven panic
Own it or stop apologizing for it
You bedwetters wanted this. You got it
Their WWIII dream failed. So they are on this like dogs on a bone
Travel, hospitality, etc are YUGE segments of our economy, especially in a city like ours. Basically, every large corporate or association conference in every major market in the US was canceled weeks before any government edicts came into affect. Fortune 500 America shit their pants before Newsome, Inslee, etc told them too.
They would have saved themselves some money too by waiting for said edicts. It’s not covered by force majeure to cancel on Vegas just by being scared. The government has to make it illegal or impossible for you to perform.
The social media pitchforks and torches crowd is powerful. Once the media whips them in a frenzy it’s a tidal wave. Google Tesla for reference.
Gubmint can't tell me fuckall to do on the res. I'll infect as many as I want Big Brother and you can suck it! It's the small victories that make life less miserable.
I guess what we're talking about is how far the police powers can be extended in times of mass public crisis.
There has always been, and will always be, tension between individual liberty and the common good. I understand the Tug Tribe views the latter with great skepticism, but it's not like we've ever had it 100% 'do what you want, when you want.'
What do you do about the mob? When can the police make them disperse? Never? What about the draft? In what circumstances? Not as likely an issue now given that the military is huge and is much less reliant on boots on the ground than it was, say, in WWII, where you just needed a critical mass of bodies that wouldn't have achieved w/o the draft.
Doesn't it usually, really, just come down to whether we agree with the proposed action in some set of exigent circumstances?
I've always been sympathetic to the Libertarian point of view, but I also know that a pure expression of it is impractical, extremely unlikely, and probably not a great idea on the margin.
I guess what we're talking about is how far the police powers are to be extended in times of mass public panic.
There has always been, and will always be, tension between individual liberties and the common good. I understand the Tug Tribe views the latter with great skepticism, but it's not like we've ever had it 100% 'do what you want, when you want.'
What do you do about the mob? When can the police make them disperse? Never? What about the draft? In what circumstances? Not as likely an issue now given that the military is huge and is much less reliant on boots on the ground than it was, say, in WWII, where you just needed a critical mass of bodies that wouldn't have achieved w/o the draft.
Doesn't it usually, really, just come down to whether we agree with the proposed action in some set of exigent circumstances?
When the national guard sets up check points to have Americans show their home address, we've passed the point of giving up a few liberties for the "common good"
Who gets to decide what is the common good? This shit always has major unintended consequences. Always.
I guess what we're talking about is how far the police powers are to be extended in times of mass public panic.
There has always been, and will always be, tension between individual liberties and the common good. I understand the Tug Tribe views the latter with great skepticism, but it's not like we've ever had it 100% 'do what you want, when you want.'
What do you do about the mob? When can the police make them disperse? Never? What about the draft? In what circumstances? Not as likely an issue now given that the military is huge and is much less reliant on boots on the ground than it was, say, in WWII, where you just needed a critical mass of bodies that wouldn't have achieved w/o the draft.
Doesn't it usually, really, just come down to whether we agree with the proposed action in some set of exigent circumstances?
When the national guard sets up check points to have Americans show their home address, we've passed the point of giving up a few liberties for the "common good"
Who gets to decide what is the common good? This shit always has major unintended consequences. Always.
And people who won’t act responsibly because they believe they only have freedoms, no responsibilities, will do more harm to freedom than anyone else.
I guess what we're talking about is how far the police powers are to be extended in times of mass public panic.
There has always been, and will always be, tension between individual liberties and the common good. I understand the Tug Tribe views the latter with great skepticism, but it's not like we've ever had it 100% 'do what you want, when you want.'
What do you do about the mob? When can the police make them disperse? Never? What about the draft? In what circumstances? Not as likely an issue now given that the military is huge and is much less reliant on boots on the ground than it was, say, in WWII, where you just needed a critical mass of bodies that wouldn't have achieved w/o the draft.
Doesn't it usually, really, just come down to whether we agree with the proposed action in some set of exigent circumstances?
When the national guard sets up check points to have Americans show their home address, we've passed the point of giving up a few liberties for the "common good"
Who gets to decide what is the common good? This shit always has major unintended consequences. Always.
And people who won’t act responsibly because they believe they only have freedoms, no responsibilities, will do more harm to freedom than anyone else.
North Korea has few covid cases and no mass shootings.
Make sure and call the police if you see your neighbor having people over or if you see any New Yorkers.
I guess what we're talking about is how far the police powers are to be extended in times of mass public panic.
There has always been, and will always be, tension between individual liberties and the common good. I understand the Tug Tribe views the latter with great skepticism, but it's not like we've ever had it 100% 'do what you want, when you want.'
What do you do about the mob? When can the police make them disperse? Never? What about the draft? In what circumstances? Not as likely an issue now given that the military is huge and is much less reliant on boots on the ground than it was, say, in WWII, where you just needed a critical mass of bodies that wouldn't have achieved w/o the draft.
Doesn't it usually, really, just come down to whether we agree with the proposed action in some set of exigent circumstances?
When the national guard sets up check points to have Americans show their home address, we've passed the point of giving up a few liberties for the "common good"
Who gets to decide what is the common good? This shit always has major unintended consequences. Always.
I really don't know. Who? Moreover, who gets to decide whether it's panic or legitimate concern?
Somebody? Nobody? Sometimes? Never?
I don't know. Does anyone really know where to draw the line? Were we threatened in WWII? Why did we intervene? On what basis did we compel (which is exactly what it was) 100s of thousands of US citizens to grab a gun and go oversees and die? Was a victorious Nazi Germany every really going to threaten US soil?
I'm not an epidemiologist nor a med. I haven't the qualifications to second-guess protocol in these situations. I also need some evidence to believe that the experts are conspiring with the enemy within for some ulterior motive.
I guess what we're talking about is how far the police powers are to be extended in times of mass public panic.
There has always been, and will always be, tension between individual liberties and the common good. I understand the Tug Tribe views the latter with great skepticism, but it's not like we've ever had it 100% 'do what you want, when you want.'
What do you do about the mob? When can the police make them disperse? Never? What about the draft? In what circumstances? Not as likely an issue now given that the military is huge and is much less reliant on boots on the ground than it was, say, in WWII, where you just needed a critical mass of bodies that wouldn't have achieved w/o the draft.
Doesn't it usually, really, just come down to whether we agree with the proposed action in some set of exigent circumstances?
When the national guard sets up check points to have Americans show their home address, we've passed the point of giving up a few liberties for the "common good"
Who gets to decide what is the common good? This shit always has major unintended consequences. Always.
I really don't know. Who? Moreover, who gets to decide whether it's panic or legitimate concern?
Somebody? Nobody? Sometimes? Never?
I don't know. Does anyone really know where to draw the line? Were we threatened in WWII? Why did we intervene? On what basis did we compel (which is exactly what it was) 100s of thousands of US citizens to grab a gun and go oversees and die? Was a victorious Nazi Germany every really going to threaten US soil?
I'm not an epidemiologist nor a med. I haven't the qualifications to second-guess protocol in these situations. I also need some evidence to believe that the experts are conspiring with the enemy within for some ulterior motive.
The experts aren’t conspiring, but the experts don’t see the whole picture and don’t think about unintended consequences. They have a very narrow focus.
The media sees it as an opportunity. They have a vested interest in fueling the fire. Even yelling fire in a crowded theater. Whether it be ratings, relevance, or trump bashing spin, they benefit from inciting the panic.
That’s how we get to the position that stopping all economic activity is worth it if saves 1 life. After all, what If that life was a loved one of yours....
No one is conspiring, but many are seizing an opportunity to push an agenda.
I guess what we're talking about is how far the police powers are to be extended in times of mass public panic.
There has always been, and will always be, tension between individual liberties and the common good. I understand the Tug Tribe views the latter with great skepticism, but it's not like we've ever had it 100% 'do what you want, when you want.'
What do you do about the mob? When can the police make them disperse? Never? What about the draft? In what circumstances? Not as likely an issue now given that the military is huge and is much less reliant on boots on the ground than it was, say, in WWII, where you just needed a critical mass of bodies that wouldn't have achieved w/o the draft.
Doesn't it usually, really, just come down to whether we agree with the proposed action in some set of exigent circumstances?
When the national guard sets up check points to have Americans show their home address, we've passed the point of giving up a few liberties for the "common good"
Who gets to decide what is the common good? This shit always has major unintended consequences. Always.
I really don't know. Who? Moreover, who gets to decide whether it's panic or legitimate concern?
Somebody? Nobody? Sometimes? Never?
I don't know. Does anyone really know where to draw the line? Were we threatened in WWII? Why did we intervene? On what basis did we compel (which is exactly what it was) 100s of thousands of US citizens to grab a gun and go oversees and die? Was a victorious Nazi Germany every really going to threaten US soil?
I'm not an epidemiologist nor a med. I haven't the qualifications to second-guess protocol in these situations. I also need some evidence to believe that the experts are conspiring with the enemy within for some ulterior motive.
The experts aren’t conspiring, but the experts don’t see the whole picture and don’t think about unintended consequences. They have a very narrow focus.
The media sees it as an opportunity. They have a vested interest in fueling the fire. Even yelling fire in a crowded theater. Whether it be ratings, relevance, or trump bashing spin, they benefit from inciting the panic.
That’s how we get to the position that stopping all economic activity is worth it if saves 1 life. After all, what If that life was a loved one of yours....
No one is conspiring, but many are seizing an opportunity to push an agenda.
Comments
That's actually true. EY has been working from remote and shut down travel for weeks.
Whinney never would have went for that shit.
Whinney never would have went for that shit.
Bert Cooper used to have problems with that whippersnapper Roger all the time, too.
There has always been, and will always be, tension between individual liberty and the common good. I understand the Tug Tribe views the latter with great skepticism, but it's not like we've ever had it 100% 'do what you want, when you want.'
What do you do about the mob? When can the police make them disperse? Never? What about the draft? In what circumstances? Not as likely an issue now given that the military is huge and is much less reliant on boots on the ground than it was, say, in WWII, where you just needed a critical mass of bodies that wouldn't have achieved w/o the draft.
Doesn't it usually, really, just come down to whether we agree with the proposed action in some set of exigent circumstances?
I've always been sympathetic to the Libertarian point of view, but I also know that a pure expression of it is impractical, extremely unlikely, and probably not a great idea on the margin.
Who gets to decide what is the common good? This shit always has major unintended consequences. Always.
Make sure and call the police if you see your neighbor having people over or if you see any New Yorkers.
Somebody? Nobody? Sometimes? Never?
I don't know. Does anyone really know where to draw the line? Were we threatened in WWII? Why did we intervene? On what basis did we compel (which is exactly what it was) 100s of thousands of US citizens to grab a gun and go oversees and die? Was a victorious Nazi Germany every really going to threaten US soil?
I'm not an epidemiologist nor a med. I haven't the qualifications to second-guess protocol in these situations. I also need some evidence to believe that the experts are conspiring with the enemy within for some ulterior motive.
The media sees it as an opportunity. They have a vested interest in fueling the fire. Even yelling fire in a crowded theater. Whether it be ratings, relevance, or trump bashing spin, they benefit from inciting the panic.
That’s how we get to the position that stopping all economic activity is worth it if saves 1 life. After all, what If that life was a loved one of yours....
No one is conspiring, but many are seizing an opportunity to push an agenda.
Questions we want answers to!