Board 8 > Politics Containment Topic 349: Rudy Can't Fail

(+) Yeah! (+)

<_<; i don't think many in here are going to disagree with the premise of pay people to stay home. one of those preaching to the choir things.

---

Will take this moment to once again state my most ridiculous extreme stance that the bars should just stay closed permenantly and alcohol should be banned.

---

UshiromiyaEva posted...

Will take this moment to once again state my most ridiculous extreme stance that the bars should just stay closed permenantly and alcohol should be banned.

America tried that already

---

UshiromiyaEva posted...

Will take this moment to once again state my most ridiculous extreme stance that the bars should just stay closed permenantly and alcohol should be banned.

Great idea, it worked so well the first time.
---

Let's give it another shot!

Prohibition 2: Electric Boogaloo

---

You'd have an easier time taking away everyone's guns than taking away their booze.

---

UshiromiyaEva posted...

Will take this moment to once again state my most ridiculous extreme stance that the bars should just stay closed permenantly and alcohol should be banned.

Surprised to learn Im not the only person in the world with this view as I always thought.

the world is such garbage, let people have their dang booze
---

I consider alcohol the same as heroine or cocaine.

Only difference is one is legal. Same goes for cigarettes.

---

LordoftheMorons posted...

The actual services are unnecessary, and children (especially younger ones) have a much harder time learning online than in person. We should be paying people in non-essential industries to stay home.

(the services being the indoor/in person part; just like schools can be held remotely, restaurants can do take out/delivery)

Id say all the people who rely on tips/will be made redundant without in person dining would disagree!

Also for the record, I said people should be getting paid allllllll the way back in April.

It is 100% unreasonable to expect people who already have so little to sacrifice more to stop the spread when their options are work and maybe someone they know gets COVID or dont work and drown in debt.

For the record, Im for a total and complete shutdown of everything, but not until AFTER everyone gets paid for it.


---

Decriminalize all drugs. Oh hey, Oregon did that!

And now something from the conservative classic file

https://www.businessinsider.com/hungarian-mep-resigns-breaking-covid-rules-gay-orgy-brussels-2020-12

---

UshiromiyaEva posted...

I consider alcohol the same as heroine or cocaine.

Only difference is one is legal. Same goes for cigarettes.

even considering cocaine and heroine as equitable is dumb

---

The only thing keeping me off the "fuck alcohol" train is that I know it'll turn out really poorly if done. There's absolutely no reason for it to be treated as loosely as it is when compared to many other things though (primarily but not exclusively marijuana). That's actually kind of insane, regardless of whether you think the solution is to decriminalize more stuff or tighten restrictions on alcohol.

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

For the record, Im for a total and complete shutdown of everything, but not until AFTER everyone gets paid for it.

also yeah this

If we shut it all down for three weeks and ensured all workers got paid as usual over that span we'd be in real good shape

UshiromiyaEva posted...

I consider alcohol the same as heroine or cocaine.

Only difference is one is legal. Same goes for cigarettes.

Lmfao

---

LordoftheMorons posted...

The actual services are unnecessary, and children (especially younger ones) have a much harder time learning online than in person. We should be paying people in non-essential industries to stay home.

(the services being the indoor/in person part; just like schools can be held remotely, restaurants can do take out/delivery)

As someone who has a hard time thinking of a thing I enjoy less than being at a bar, I will say that you have no right to call it unnecessary or say that it is less important than schools.

---

Is anyone going to die (like they might if denied access to food or medical care) or face any long term adverse effects (like an elementary schooler who can't effectively learn over zoom) if they can't go to a bar (keeping in mind that they can, in fact, get alcohol at a store)?

If not, it seems like there's a pretty good reason to classify some things as more essential than bars.

---

red sox 777 posted...

I will say that you have no right to call it unnecessary or say that it is less important than schools.

What a fucking embarrassing statement.

---

(Also bars are basically a perfect environment for superspreading, so even if they were equally important it would make sense to shut them down first).

---

LordoftheMorons posted...

Is anyone going to die (like they might if denied access to food or medical care) or face any long term adverse effects (like an elementary schooler who can't effectively learn over zoom) if they can't go to a bar (keeping in mind that they can, in fact, get alcohol at a store)?

If not, it seems like there's a pretty good reason to classify some things as more essential than bars.

Those are your value judgments. Of course people will have long term adverse effects, like not getting to go to a bar as many times in their lives as they wanted.

Like I said, I hate bars and would rather watch paint dry than go to one. But some people find them essential, and none of us are in a position to tell them it's not.

If you must ban bars, do it with Prohibition Part 2, complete with an amendment repealing Amendment 21 and reinstating Amendment 18.

---

red sox 777 posted...

As someone who has a hard time thinking of a thing I enjoy less than being at a bar, I will say that you have no right to call it unnecessary or say that it is less important than schools.

What

---

So Redsox

by that logic you agree that Abortion Clinics are just as important as schools

---

LordoftheMorons posted...

Schools do contribute to infections, so you dont want to have them open when things are really bad like they are right now in much of the country. On the other hand, they appear to contribute less than we thought, and having schools closed but bars and indoor dining open is just an insane prioritization.

The difference is that people go to bars and indoor dining by choice, while children don't get to choose whether they go to school. Students and parents may not want the transmission risk, and also not want to fall behind by not attending school. Whereas if you don't want the transmission risk, you can just not go to a bar or restaurant.

---

masterplum posted...

So Redsox

by that logic you agree that Abortion Clinics are just as important as schools

I don't agree with that, but I have no right to impose my beliefs on others.

Or at least, if we are going to go down the road of taking away people's rights, it should be done properly, with a constitutional amendment ratified by 75% of the states.

---

red sox 777 posted...

The difference is that people go to bars and indoor dining by choice, while children don't get to choose whether they go to school. Students and parents may not want the transmission risk, and also not want to fall behind by not attending school. Whereas if you don't want the transmission risk, you can just not go to a bar or restaurant.

Im pretty sure that most proposals to reopen schools leave online attendance as an option. Im all for students who can learn just as well at home continuing to do so. Some kids are really struggling with online learning, however, and giving them the option to learn in person should be a priority in our portfolio of things we strive to keep open.

---

LordoftheMorons posted...

Im pretty sure that most proposals to reopen schools leave online attendance as an option. Im all for students who can learn just as well at home continuing to do so. Some kids are really struggling with online learning, however, and giving them the option to learn in person should be a priority in our portfolio of things we strive to keep open.

I mean I don't disagree with you substantively on that. I just don't like the whole paradigm of arbitrarily calling some things essential and other things not. That's a value judgment and at a minimum, the electorate needs to vote on these things. The People have elevated a certain small number of things to especially protected status in the Bill of Rights: speech, religion, press, protest, guns, fair and speedy trials, etc. But among things not covered, one shouldn't be able to just impose value judgments on others. Not in our republic.


---

mm. i think i get the spirit of what you're asking for at least, though an amendment is a bit much and not applicable as this is a state decision.
it should involve congress. state congress, not federal. there's a notable abdication of duty by the legislature to have the executive arbitrarily decide and there's little consistency. it's also very easy to say something isn't essential but another thing is, even when that declaration is clearly wrong; L.A. story is the latest version of this, outdoor dining isn't allowed but movies are essential so they can have the exact same setup and it's fine. so certainly, it should be less type of business and more activity done. at that point it's uniform, so any business, place of worship, or government structure that has indoor seating limited by capacity. better?

---

People still can't accept that in a pandemic, the economy necessarily goes to shit, disproportionately hurting the service industry and other social kinds of industries. It is all value judgments what to try to keep open or not, but for those judgments to be useful at all, they need to be grounded in reality.

Opening schools doesn't mean kids can choose to do normal school again, it means teachers have to do hybrid classes, which is a disaster at best. Opening bars doesn't mean restaurants and bartenders are saved, they're still at like 25% revenue at best. The only solution to these and the economy in general is to eradicate the virus. Any attempt to stop economic bleeding in the short term that increases long-term longevity of the virus is almost impossible to justify.

---

UshiromiyaEva posted...

I consider alcohol the same as heroine or cocaine.

What the fuck
---

Wanglicious posted...

L.A. story is the latest version of this, outdoor dining isn't allowed but movies are essential so they can have the exact same setup and it's fine

This is false. They might have the same setup but a lot of the requirements are a lot stricter(Testing, etc). you cant just show up to a movie set with a bunch of strangers and eat in those areas.

---

Basically, sure, restaurants can stay open, but they have to provide covid testing for all patrons is what you are stating(Among other things in a long checklist). This would be restaurants having the same setup as filming.

Lets watch all our restaurants go out of business in a day.


---

I dunno if Ushi should call anyones comments dumb anymore after he literally just said he views heroin the same as a fucking cigarette.

---

you're right, cigarettes are way worse.

---

DoomTheGyarados posted...

you're right, cigarettes are way worse.

nope.

---

If you think cigarettes are worse than heroin, I can tell you right now that you have never dealt with anyone that is a heroin addict.

cigarettes are harmful yes but they are not that.

---

seeing a lot of scotus misinformation around here lately. Apparently I didn't smack it down hard enough earlier.

SCOTUS doesn't often get original cases, but by no means must it hear them. In fact, it's rejected nearly half of the motions for leave to file it's gotten since 1960. (That's still a way lower reject rate than under its appellate jurisdiction but it by no means "has" to hear original cases if it doesn't want to, and in fact it often does not.)

https://www.fjc.gov/history/courts/jurisdiction-original-supreme-court

"Since 1960, the Court has received fewer than 140 motions for leave to file original cases, nearly half of which were denied a hearing. The majority of cases filed have been in disputes between two or more states."

Will they hear this one? I dunno. If you forced me to answer I'd say I don't think so because this is 100% performance art and not a serious legal argument but who knows it's still 2020.

---

UshiromiyaEva posted...

I consider alcohol the same as heroine or cocaine.

Only difference is one is legal. Same goes for cigarettes.

This is legitimately offensive and also comes off as what a 13 year old would think is deep.

red13n posted...

If you think cigarettes are worse than heroin, I can tell you right now that you have never dealt with anyone that is a heroin addict.

^

---

xp1337 posted...

Will they hear this one? I dunno. If you forced me to answer I'd say I don't think so because this is 100% performance art and not a serious legal argument but who knows it's still 2020.

performance art or not, you've got almost 20 states lined up on case only they can say anything to involving the presidential election.
they honestly do have to say something here. too many states, too high a position.

this isn't normal and won't follow their normal procedure (e.g., special rep to determine whether they're taking a case) because there simply isn't any time to it. how much they determine in it, probably all mechanical stuff.

---

Alcohol being the same as heroin is not only dumb from impact perspective, its also dumb from a logistics perspective.

you can make alcohol by leaving juice out too long. Theres no such thing as Oops, I made heroin

---

By the way I was being meta about the cigarette industry being horrible.

---

red sox 777 posted...

But some people find them essential, and none of us are in a position to tell them it's not.

what's "essential" isn't a matter of opinion. if you can survive without going to a bar, bars are evidently not essential to you. (and this is coming from someone who went to bars almost every weekend before covid.)

---

what's "essential" is absolutely a matter of opinion.
that's something made painfully clear with the way different states have different rules or the way different countries have different rules. there's no universal doctrine of essential or not, the most you've got is basically food and water as something everyone agreed on but after that it's a crapshoot. some of those "essential" aspects are purely economical because states are broke too.

---

Wanglicious posted...

the most you've got is basically food and water as something everyone agreed on

that's the thing, we don't say food and drink are essential because "everyone agrees they are," we say so because they objectively are.

like, this isn't a "most people agree that the beatles are the best band ever" kind of thing. we can objectively prove that food and drink are essential for staying alive because without them, you stop living.

---

Oh hey, guess what! The president's personal lawyer was one of 108 people special enough to receive an exclusive dose of the monoclonal antibody cocktail.

https://twitter.com/michelleinbklyn/status/1337031146664824832?s=19

---

Peace___Frog posted...

Oh hey, guess what! The president's personal lawyer was one of 108 people special enough to receive an exclusive dose of the monoclonal antibody cocktail.

https://twitter.com/michelleinbklyn/status/1337031146664824832?s=19

This is such a non-story lmao

Shocker, a president and his staff/friends have the highest standard of care in a country. "Wow."

---

Oh, it's certainly not surprising any of us that President Trump is using his power to benefit himself and his loyalists. But the President is supposed to be a public servant, not a monarch. Don't forget that.
---

Peace___Frog posted...

Oh hey, guess what! The president's personal lawyer was one of 108 people special enough to receive an exclusive dose of the monoclonal antibody cocktail.

https://twitter.com/michelleinbklyn/status/1337031146664824832?s=19

well... yeah

he's the president

this would have happened no matter what president in history was in charge

---

This reminds me of that weird plotline in House of Cards where nobody would let the president jump in line for a new organ after he got shot.
Somehow I doubt it works like that
---

htaeD posted...

This reminds me of that weird plotline in House of Cards where nobody would let the president jump in line for a new organ after he got shot.
Somehow I doubt it works like that

We know what organ he was really after

^_^

---

Couple things about my stance.

First, I'm completely aware it's an absolutely ridiculous and absurd stance regarding drugs and alcohol. I'm not pretending it's some woke reality. I'm absolutely fucking crazy, and people are in the right to shit on me for it.

Two, my direct comparison of them all being just as bad is directly tied into availability and acceptance. If it was en even playing field, of course alcohol would not be as extreme or devastating as something like heroin. But it ISN'T an even playing field, because alcohol is wildly accepted and abused by millions in the nation. By pure numbers, not ratio, how many peoples lives are ruined by alcohol in this country versus heroin? It's not even remotely close.

I know it's an argument full of holes and one that influenced by personal experience that in itself comes from a place of privilege from my lot in life, but it's not something I can shake. Would rather admit that then backpedal.

---

MalcolmMasher posted...

Oh, it's certainly not surprising any of us that President Trump is using his power to benefit himself and his loyalists. But the President is supposed to be a public servant, not a monarch. Don't forget that.

Dude. The office itself is going to get the highest possible standard of care, because of course it is. Don't be dumb. These people drive around in bulletproof cars with litres of their own blood on ice just in case.

---