Resist The Authoritarian Response To The Coronavirus

[Green Line]

Thank you for posting this, its exactly what we need to hear.  Prepare for people here to call for you to be locked up and/or shot though for not going along with whatever extreme measure pops into their mind.

[Green Line]

[We listen to scientists. PERIOD.

If scientists are urging temporary authoritarian measures, we TEMPORARILY adopt them.

Why are some people hellbent on getting everybody killed over "Muh Freedom"? This isn't everyday politics and rights, we are in a life and death emergency here. The same rules don't apply and as someone else said, your rights do not extend into the lungs of others.

Not sure if this is satire...

Yes, scientists are ALWAYS right.  We should listen to them in all circumstances.  Its not like they've ever endorsed horrible things in the past. 🙄🙄🙄

[Green Line]

I don't usually say things like this, but those of you decrying the "authoritarian" response are nuts.

Give the government control to totally shut down your social life, keep you indoors, etc and good luck ever putting that back into its box.  Our freedoms are a lot more important than a virus with a 2% fataility rate.  Sorry, I said it.  I mean it.

[Green Line]

I really, really, really hate both sides of this "argument".

On one side, you have babies whining and moaning about any minor little inconvenience to their daily lives and acting like it's the end of freedom or something. On the other side you have psychopaths who think any social problem can only be dealt with the subtlety and compassion of a 1920s eugenicist.

It's really not that f**king hard. Exceptional circumstances can warrant temporary restrictions on liberty, as long as those are decided through legal and democratic means, but each such restriction needs to be weighed carefully and never violate fundamental human rights. We can quibble over where to draw the line, but let's at least acknowledge it's not a binary.

Those whining about minor inconveniences, sure, totally agree.  Social distancing, cancelling large events, dispersing crowded bars and restaurants makes sense.

The shelter in place thats in effect for the Bay Area?  No.  How long are people expected to shelter in place?  6 months?  Is Mike DeWine unilaterally postponing Ohio's elections indefinitely in direct defiance of a court order okay?  No!

It's amazing to me that so many people who are clear eyed about Donald Trump's authoritarian nature are suddenly clamoring for him to take the reigns and lock us all down.  He won't necessarily give up whatever power you give him, people.  What have we learned in the last three years?

[Green Line]

... It's amazing to me that so many people who are clear eyed about Donald Trump's authoritarian nature are suddenly clamoring for him to take the reigns and lock us all down.  He won't necessarily give up whatever power you give him, people.  What have we learned in the last three years?

Are you listening to yourself?
It's the doctors, scientists and health specialists that are proposing policies of "locking us all down."
And remember, it's just not donald trump that is taking extreme measures to control the spread of this pandemic. It's governors of states and mayors of cities (of both parties). It's also governments and heads-of-state of most of the other world nations. This isnt some world-wide conspiracy of the nation's leaders to grab somekind of power from the people (and not give it back).

I mean, what do you mean when you say "(trump) won't necessarily give up whatever power you give him." Define exactly what "power" he wont return to us. The power not to go to bars and restaurants any more after this is all over? Cant go to a baseball game, or Broadway musical any more?
Tell me EXACTLY what you fear here; be specific.
Because all this "authoritarian" talk is extreme nonsense.

I'm sorry that you don't think the ability to leave your house and partake in those activities you listed matters.  Many other people in this country would disagree.  You can't give a time period for the this is "all over", of course.  6 months from now?  12 months from now?  When tens of thousands of companies have liquidated because no economic activity is occuring?  The concern of doctors and scientists right now is singularly focused on saving the elderly, admirable.  We elect public officials to balance many competing interests and act in the best interests of everyone.

[Green Line]

... It's amazing to me that so many people who are clear eyed about Donald Trump's authoritarian nature are suddenly clamoring for him to take the reigns and lock us all down.  He won't necessarily give up whatever power you give him, people.  What have we learned in the last three years?

Are you listening to yourself?
It's the doctors, scientists and health specialists that are proposing policies of "locking us all down."
And remember, it's just not donald trump that is taking extreme measures to control the spread of this pandemic. It's governors of states and mayors of cities (of both parties). It's also governments and heads-of-state of most of the other world nations. This isnt some world-wide conspiracy of the nation's leaders to grab somekind of power from the people (and not give it back).

I mean, what do you mean when you say "(trump) won't necessarily give up whatever power you give him." Define exactly what "power" he wont return to us. The power not to go to bars and restaurants any more after this is all over? Cant go to a baseball game, or Broadway musical any more?
Tell me EXACTLY what you fear here; be specific.
Because all this "authoritarian" talk is extreme nonsense.

I'm sorry that you don't think the ability to leave your house and partake in those activities you listed matters.  Many other people in this country would disagree.  You can't give a time period for the this is "all over", of course.  6 months from now?  12 months from now?  When tens of thousands of companies have liquidated because no economic activity is occuring?  The concern of doctors and scientists right now is singularly focused on saving the elderly, admirable.  We elect public officials to balance many competing interests and act in the best interests of everyone.

What he's asking you is this: WHY would the government want to control you in this way? Governments only want to control people if there's a BENEFIT for them in doing so. Kerping you loked in your house crashes the economy and doesn't help them acheive any hypothetical sinister goal. There's no benefit.

There are multiple things going on here.  We just had a primary election illegally cancelled tonight because of virus concerns.  Whatever the motives were, bad actors (Trump or other) can jump on the mass hysteria and use these kinds of precendents for their own gain.  You'd better hope to God there's not some kind of natural disaster/pandemic in November.  Trump may try to postpone or cancel the election.  And what will you say, thats fine?

Second, the "doctors, scientists and health specialists" he referenced calling for total lockdowns of the country are not concerned about our civil liberties.  They are also not concerned about the economic fallout.  They are singularly focused stopping the virus.  I'll ask it again.  What's an acceptable amount of time to shelter in place.  What if they say we need to do it for 6 months?  12 months? 18 months? We have posters on here and people in the media implying just that, and how dare anyone question it.  At some point, you don't just go, "BUT THE DOCTORS SAID WE HAD TO DO IT".  This is why our public officials need to balance multiple interests.  They don't just blindly follow one piece of advice.

[Green Line]

... It's amazing to me that so many people who are clear eyed about Donald Trump's authoritarian nature are suddenly clamoring for him to take the reigns and lock us all down.  He won't necessarily give up whatever power you give him, people.  What have we learned in the last three years?

Are you listening to yourself?
It's the doctors, scientists and health specialists that are proposing policies of "locking us all down."
And remember, it's just not donald trump that is taking extreme measures to control the spread of this pandemic. It's governors of states and mayors of cities (of both parties). It's also governments and heads-of-state of most of the other world nations. This isnt some world-wide conspiracy of the nation's leaders to grab somekind of power from the people (and not give it back).

I mean, what do you mean when you say "(trump) won't necessarily give up whatever power you give him." Define exactly what "power" he wont return to us. The power not to go to bars and restaurants any more after this is all over? Cant go to a baseball game, or Broadway musical any more?
Tell me EXACTLY what you fear here; be specific.
Because all this "authoritarian" talk is extreme nonsense.

I'm sorry that you don't think the ability to leave your house and partake in those activities you listed matters.  Many other people in this country would disagree.  You can't give a time period for the this is "all over", of course.  6 months from now?  12 months from now?  When tens of thousands of companies have liquidated because no economic activity is occuring?  The concern of doctors and scientists right now is singularly focused on saving the elderly, admirable.  We elect public officials to balance many competing interests and act in the best interests of everyone.

What he's asking you is this: WHY would the government want to control you in this way? Governments only want to control people if there's a BENEFIT for them in doing so. Kerping you loked in your house crashes the economy and doesn't help them acheive any hypothetical sinister goal. There's no benefit.

There are multiple things going on here.  We just had a primary election illegally cancelled tonight because of virus concerns.  Whatever the motives were, bad actors (Trump or other) can jump on the mass hysteria and use these kinds of precendents for their own gain.  You'd better hope to God there's not some kind of natural disaster/pandemic in November.  Trump may try to postpone or cancel the election.  And what will you say, thats fine?

Second, the "doctors, scientists and health specialists" he referenced calling for total lockdowns of the country are not concerned about our civil liberties.  They are also not concerned about the economic fallout.  They are singularly focused stopping the virus.  I'll ask it again.  What's an acceptable amount of time to shelter in place.  What if they say we need to do it for 6 months?  12 months? 18 months? We have posters on here and people in the media implying just that, and how dare anyone question it.  At some point, you don't just go, "BUT THE DOCTORS SAID WE HAD TO DO IT".  This is why our public officials need to balance multiple interests.  They don't just blindly follow one piece of advice.

Pelosi and the Supreme Court will not allow Trump to cancel the election. Delay the election slightly? If the circumstances actually call for that and Pelosi and Supreme Court agree, then sure why not.

We will lockdown for 18 months if necessary, and as soon as we realize that tjat is the reality, we'll have people coming up with new strategies to help the economy and social lives improve. Skype may become WAY more popular. Some sportd MAY start up again like MMA with empty crowds but broadcast to TV watchers. Online casinos will get more popular. Some new animated movies might get green-lit where voice actors and animators can self-isolate while they make the movie, and they can go straight to VOD or Netflix. We'll find a way.

Ah, yes.  We will learn to love our state enforced 18+ month isolation.  I'm sure.  You people are -insane-, and its frightening.

[Green Line]

These are the types of enlightened individuals who would claim “FDR is a fascist” or “Lincoln is destroying our Democracy”.
This is a war, full stop.
Certain liberties need to be suspended.

I've had it with your insane Chickenschit Little dreck. Onto ignore you go and bad riddance.

Bodies are piling up in Northern Italy as we speak, hospitals are overwhelmed to the brink, and thousands are dying in a few days!!!
You are the real schithead (watch this post get deleted for using the exact same word as you) if you think this isnt a national emergency. America isn’t special, we will all suffer greatly from this apathy and “muh freedom even when people are dying”.

Lol.

Over 1,500 Americans die every day of heart disease.  
Over 1,500 Americans die every day of cancer.

Also, just to clarify your misinformation: 2,503 have died in Italy from the virus since the first confirmed case on January 31, 2020.  Please stop trying rile people up by posting misinformation.

[Green Line]

You're really a bunch of brainwashed cucks aren't you?

Do you really accept being locked up at home for 18 months?

My God, this is how totaltarianism starts

PTemporary partial totalitarianism is NORMAL is a NATIONAL EMERGENCY situation.

“Temporary partial totalitarianism”. 😂😂😂😂😂

Keep telling yourself that, you poor naive child.

[Green Line]

Nobody is seriously talking about a 18-month lockdown. That would obviously be unenforceable as well as being, yes, more economically ruinous than our society can reasonably afford.

The virus will probably stay with us for 18 months or longer, but what we're trying to do here is get through the peak of the infection, and do so gradually enough that hospitals aren't overwhelmed. There are many estimates of how long that will take, but to my knowledge it shouldn't be more than a couple months.

However, for it to actually work, we need to go on lockdown right now. This means people need to quit being babies or LARPing as brave rebels, suck it up, and stay home for a few months. It also means the state should provide immediate economic relief to everyone who needs it. If we're actually serious enough to do this thing, we'll be able to go back to our daily lives soon and minimize deaths as much as possible. If not, then whatever happens next is something we'll have brought onto ourselves.

“Stay home for a few months”.

Really, really privileged quote there Anthony.  People CANNOT stay home for a few months.  They will die,  in far far greater numbers than you can ever imagine.  We will have mass starvation and civil unrest.  You may be able to stay home for a few months, and good for you.  By all means do so if you feel it necessary.

And btw we have a bill of rights, including freedom of religion. Good luck trying to stop people from attending services for months on end.  It won’t happen.  I will be back in the Church soon, as will many others.

[Green Line]

I don't usually say things like this, but those of you decrying the "authoritarian" response are nuts.

Give the government control to totally shut down your social life, keep you indoors, etc and good luck ever putting that back into its box.  Our freedoms are a lot more important than a virus with a 2% fataility rate.  Sorry, I said it.  I mean it.

Would you support doing this for something as deadly as smallpox (>20% fatality rate, overwhelming majority of population likely to be infected if no action taken)?  For something like the 1300's Black Death (>50% total fatality rate, 30-60% for more common bubonic type, >90% for less common pneumonic type, also likely to spread throughout the population)?  Or not at all?

I would like to see a serious answer to this question from those who think it is their god-given right to infect everyone else.

Because this is a serious question.

If it is actually a matter of principle, then they would hold the same opinion if it were smallpox, the plague, or worse.

And if it is not a matter of principle, then they must recognize that real question is one of degree - and the question we should be debating is actually how severe a disease should be in order for society to respond with a lockdown/significant measures to try to contain/eliminate the disease.

I think that is the real question here, and Skill and Chance's hypothetical cuts to the core of the matter.

Ive already said multiple times, the risk of this virus is nowhere proportionate to the economic destruction we are inflicting upon ourselves.  Its not remotely comparable to smallpox  or the black death.  Its a ridiculous question to even entertain.

[Green Line]

Nobody is seriously talking about a 18-month lockdown. That would obviously be unenforceable as well as being, yes, more economically ruinous than our society can reasonably afford.

The virus will probably stay with us for 18 months or longer, but what we're trying to do here is get through the peak of the infection, and do so gradually enough that hospitals aren't overwhelmed. There are many estimates of how long that will take, but to my knowledge it shouldn't be more than a couple months.

However, for it to actually work, we need to go on lockdown right now. This means people need to quit being babies or LARPing as brave rebels, suck it up, and stay home for a few months. It also means the state should provide immediate economic relief to everyone who needs it. If we're actually serious enough to do this thing, we'll be able to go back to our daily lives soon and minimize deaths as much as possible. If not, then whatever happens next is something we'll have brought onto ourselves.

“Stay home for a few months”.

Really, really privileged quote there Anthony.  People CANNOT stay home for a few months.  They will die,  in far far greater numbers than you can ever imagine.  We will have mass starvation and civil unrest.  You may be able to stay home for a few months, and good for you.  By all means do so if you feel it necessary.

It takes a whole new level of intellectual dishonesty to quote a sentence verbatim while ignoring the sentence that came immediately after. You must be very proud of yourself. You sure showed me! Any rational person will obviously see through your little parlor trick, but I'm sure it won't stop your coterie of rebel LARPers to applaud you.

That aside, you're probably right that Americans lack the basic self-discipline to follow the common sense measures needed to avoid making the situation a lot worse. Even Europeans, who are generally more down-to-earth, don't seem to be doing a good job of it. And yes, the lack of economic relief coming from the US government will probably mean that many people will be forced to keep going to work (even when a humane society would be helping them to stay home). This, of course, will all make life worse for everyone in the end. But I guess there's no other way when the country is full of people like you.

Your next sentence doesn’t even nearly cover it, sorry.  The state can’t cover for that kind of economic fallout.  That’s why I didn’t address it, it was nonsensical.  Try harder to think of a way to save the American worker, instead of just talking down to them.  We need to come together.

[Green Line]

I would like to see a serious answer to this question from those who think it is their god-given right to infect everyone else.

Because this is a serious question.

If it is actually a matter of principle, then they would hold the same opinion if it were smallpox, the plague, or worse.

And if it is not a matter of principle, then they must recognize that real question is one of degree - and the question we should be debating is actually how severe a disease should be in order for society to respond with a lockdown/significant measures to try to contain/eliminate the disease.

I think that is the real question here, and Skill and Chance's hypothetical cuts to the core of the matter.

Ive already said multiple times, the risk of this virus is nowhere proportionate to the economic destruction we are inflicting upon ourselves.  Its not remotely comparable to smallpox  or the black death.  Its a ridiculous question to even entertain.

That is a reasonable response. So, the natural follow up question is how high would the losses have to go before you would change your opinion and not consider the American casualties to be acceptable losses?

5 million dead? 10 million? 20? Doesn't have to be an exact #, but at what point would we be better off with lockdowns/vigorous containment as opposed to just letting a virus burn through the population?

If he refuses to answer, his argument holds ZERO water.

Nice try, but I won’t play your “gotcha” game.  There is a clear difference between THE BLACK DEATH which was cited above, and the Coronavirus.  Play amongst yourselves and speculate.  Idgaf.

[Green Line]

Nobody is seriously talking about a 18-month lockdown. That would obviously be unenforceable as well as being, yes, more economically ruinous than our society can reasonably afford.

The virus will probably stay with us for 18 months or longer, but what we're trying to do here is get through the peak of the infection, and do so gradually enough that hospitals aren't overwhelmed. There are many estimates of how long that will take, but to my knowledge it shouldn't be more than a couple months.

However, for it to actually work, we need to go on lockdown right now. This means people need to quit being babies or LARPing as brave rebels, suck it up, and stay home for a few months. It also means the state should provide immediate economic relief to everyone who needs it. If we're actually serious enough to do this thing, we'll be able to go back to our daily lives soon and minimize deaths as much as possible. If not, then whatever happens next is something we'll have brought onto ourselves.

“Stay home for a few months”.

Really, really privileged quote there Anthony.  People CANNOT stay home for a few months.  They will die,  in far far greater numbers than you can ever imagine.  We will have mass starvation and civil unrest.  You may be able to stay home for a few months, and good for you.  By all means do so if you feel it necessary.

It takes a whole new level of intellectual dishonesty to quote a sentence verbatim while ignoring the sentence that came immediately after. You must be very proud of yourself. You sure showed me! Any rational person will obviously see through your little parlor trick, but I'm sure it won't stop your coterie of rebel LARPers to applaud you.

That aside, you're probably right that Americans lack the basic self-discipline to follow the common sense measures needed to avoid making the situation a lot worse. Even Europeans, who are generally more down-to-earth, don't seem to be doing a good job of it. And yes, the lack of economic relief coming from the US government will probably mean that many people will be forced to keep going to work (even when a humane society would be helping them to stay home). This, of course, will all make life worse for everyone in the end. But I guess there's no other way when the country is full of people like you.

Your next sentence doesn’t even nearly cover it, sorry.  The state can’t cover for that kind of economic fallout.  That’s why I didn’t address it, it was nonsensical.  Try harder to think of a way to save the American worker, instead of just talking down to them.  We need to come together.

The state can absolutely cover 2-3 months of wage loss for workers who need it. It's really not rocket science. Worse come to worse, it blows up the deficit. Big deal. You can always make it up by raising taxes after the recovery, or better yet, just print money, since inflation is going to be anemic anyway.

Most small businesses can’t close down for 2-3 months.  There won’t be jobs to come back to when its over.  I think you just see an opportunity to turn this into your socialist playground.  I don’t blame you.  I would do the same if I could.

But I digress, hopefully we won’t have to take these steps.

[Green Line]

Nobody is seriously talking about a 18-month lockdown. That would obviously be unenforceable as well as being, yes, more economically ruinous than our society can reasonably afford.

The virus will probably stay with us for 18 months or longer, but what we're trying to do here is get through the peak of the infection, and do so gradually enough that hospitals aren't overwhelmed. There are many estimates of how long that will take, but to my knowledge it shouldn't be more than a couple months.

However, for it to actually work, we need to go on lockdown right now. This means people need to quit being babies or LARPing as brave rebels, suck it up, and stay home for a few months. It also means the state should provide immediate economic relief to everyone who needs it. If we're actually serious enough to do this thing, we'll be able to go back to our daily lives soon and minimize deaths as much as possible. If not, then whatever happens next is something we'll have brought onto ourselves.

“Stay home for a few months”.

Really, really privileged quote there Anthony.  People CANNOT stay home for a few months.  They will die,  in far far greater numbers than you can ever imagine.  We will have mass starvation and civil unrest.  You may be able to stay home for a few months, and good for you.  By all means do so if you feel it necessary.

It takes a whole new level of intellectual dishonesty to quote a sentence verbatim while ignoring the sentence that came immediately after. You must be very proud of yourself. You sure showed me! Any rational person will obviously see through your little parlor trick, but I'm sure it won't stop your coterie of rebel LARPers to applaud you.

That aside, you're probably right that Americans lack the basic self-discipline to follow the common sense measures needed to avoid making the situation a lot worse. Even Europeans, who are generally more down-to-earth, don't seem to be doing a good job of it. And yes, the lack of economic relief coming from the US government will probably mean that many people will be forced to keep going to work (even when a humane society would be helping them to stay home). This, of course, will all make life worse for everyone in the end. But I guess there's no other way when the country is full of people like you.

Your next sentence doesn’t even nearly cover it, sorry.  The state can’t cover for that kind of economic fallout.  That’s why I didn’t address it, it was nonsensical.  Try harder to think of a way to save the American worker, instead of just talking down to them.  We need to come together.

The state can absolutely cover 2-3 months of wage loss for workers who need it. It's really not rocket science. Worse come to worse, it blows up the deficit. Big deal. You can always make it up by raising taxes after the recovery, or better yet, just print money, since inflation is going to be anemic anyway.

Most small businesses can’t close down for 2-3 months.  There won’t be jobs to come back to when its over.  I think you just see an opportunity to turn this into your socialist playground.  I don’t blame you.  I would do the same if I could.

But I digress, hopefully we won’t have to take these steps.

Guess what, genius, those small businesses can be bailed out exactly the same way workers can. I know you're one of those neoliberal fanatics who has a principled stance against using government money to help people, but most real people don't want to let your bullsh*t ideology get in the way of their livelihoods.

Whats with the attitude Im getting.

Can we at least have elections before the government takes over the whole economy?  Or does that not fit into the plan to seize everything.

[Green Line]

you just switch to insults randomly then?

He just thinks he’s being cute, Dead0.  I’ve seen his kind before.  Let the kid have his fun.

[Green Line]

Coronavirus: California prepared to enact martial law if its a 'necessity', governor says

California has prepared for worst case scenarios as the coronavirus pandemic heightens, including the possibility of enacting martial law.

Governor Gavin Newsom said during a press conference on Tuesday he would consider implementing martial law if it was necessary to curb the novel virus.

“We have the ability to do martial law ... if we feel the necessity,” he said.

Issuing martial law would be an unprecedented move rarely used by officials in US history. If enacted, it would temporarily replace civil rule with military authority.

The precedent for martial law in the US states “certain civil liberties may be suspended, such as the right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures, freedom of association, and freedom of movement,” according to a legal journal.

[...]

“If you want to establish a framework of martial law, which is ultimate authority and enforcement, we have the capacity to do that, but we are not feeling at this moment that is a necessity,” Mr Newsom said.

[...]

“So we had a very candid and a sober if not sobering conversation about where we may be and where we need to go together,” Mr Newsom said after the meeting with hospital officials. ”The good news is none of it surprised any of us. We as a state, working with our system, anticipated much of these needs and have been running plans to address them,” he added.

The fact that this is even being discussed is a huge red flag, and it's disheartening to see so-called "liberals" who are willing to go along with it.  You can force businesses to shut down, you can make reasonable restrictions for the sake of the public health, but civil liberties and due process don't stop at pandemics, and each passing day it looks like our response to this virus has been an overreaction.

Considering the big picture, how mild the symptoms of coronavirus are, how likely even a high-risk person is to die of it compared to almost anything else, and how effectively other countries have been able to "flatten the curve" through mostly voluntary measures, I am convinced that Americans by and large should take the attitude that quarantine is a temporary measure and not a long-term one.  If, on the other hand, you are willing to live under martial law during the reign of the most corrupt administration since Nixon, then you're not merely licking the boot - you are deepthroating it.

The last time Americans were this paranoid and complacent, we got the Patriot Act.  Worry about that as much as you worry about this virus.

Scott, did you not get the memo?  Why do you want to kill millions of people?

[Green Line]

Nobody is seriously talking about a 18-month lockdown. That would obviously be unenforceable as well as being, yes, more economically ruinous than our society can reasonably afford.

The virus will probably stay with us for 18 months or longer, but what we're trying to do here is get through the peak of the infection, and do so gradually enough that hospitals aren't overwhelmed. There are many estimates of how long that will take, but to my knowledge it shouldn't be more than a couple months.

However, for it to actually work, we need to go on lockdown right now. This means people need to quit being babies or LARPing as brave rebels, suck it up, and stay home for a few months. It also means the state should provide immediate economic relief to everyone who needs it. If we're actually serious enough to do this thing, we'll be able to go back to our daily lives soon and minimize deaths as much as possible. If not, then whatever happens next is something we'll have brought onto ourselves.

“Stay home for a few months”.

Really, really privileged quote there Anthony.  People CANNOT stay home for a few months.  They will die,  in far far greater numbers than you can ever imagine.  We will have mass starvation and civil unrest.  You may be able to stay home for a few months, and good for you.  By all means do so if you feel it necessary.

It takes a whole new level of intellectual dishonesty to quote a sentence verbatim while ignoring the sentence that came immediately after. You must be very proud of yourself. You sure showed me! Any rational person will obviously see through your little parlor trick, but I'm sure it won't stop your coterie of rebel LARPers to applaud you.

That aside, you're probably right that Americans lack the basic self-discipline to follow the common sense measures needed to avoid making the situation a lot worse. Even Europeans, who are generally more down-to-earth, don't seem to be doing a good job of it. And yes, the lack of economic relief coming from the US government will probably mean that many people will be forced to keep going to work (even when a humane society would be helping them to stay home). This, of course, will all make life worse for everyone in the end. But I guess there's no other way when the country is full of people like you.

Your next sentence doesn’t even nearly cover it, sorry.  The state can’t cover for that kind of economic fallout.  That’s why I didn’t address it, it was nonsensical.  Try harder to think of a way to save the American worker, instead of just talking down to them.  We need to come together.

The state can absolutely cover 2-3 months of wage loss for workers who need it. It's really not rocket science. Worse come to worse, it blows up the deficit. Big deal. You can always make it up by raising taxes after the recovery, or better yet, just print money, since inflation is going to be anemic anyway.

Most small businesses can’t close down for 2-3 months.  There won’t be jobs to come back to when its over.  I think you just see an opportunity to turn this into your socialist playground.  I don’t blame you.  I would do the same if I could.

But I digress, hopefully we won’t have to take these steps.

Guess what, genius, those small businesses can be bailed out exactly the same way workers can. I know you're one of those neoliberal fanatics who has a principled stance against using government money to help people, but most real people don't want to let your bullsh*t ideology get in the way of their livelihoods.

Whats with the attitude Im getting.

Can we at least have elections before the government takes over the whole economy?  Or does that not fit into the plan to seize everything.

Thanks for showing your true colors as an ideologue who'd happily sacrifice other people's lives because something something muh soshulizm. Clearly there's no point in arguing with you anymore since we simply have different moral priorities.

Hopefully you were just drunk last night with all the horrible personal attacks.

So you propose an action that will create a global depression, and then in response to the depression you want to cause, you just say basically say “the government can print more money, who cares, and if you disagree with me you hate workers.”  This is why your idealogy is discredited and can’t win elections in this country.  Laughable.

[Green Line]

This thread is such a colossal failure.  Of course we don't want millions to die. I don't want anyone to die. And I think I'm speaking for everyone here. I just believe that there are better ways to deal with this situation than economic suicide and restricting the rights and freedoms of individuals. I am all for temporarily closing schools and stopping large gatherings to "flatten the curve" so our health care system isn't overwhelmed, I think we all are, and I believe the government has done a good job at doing that. What I am not for is the mass hysteria we are seeing, like what is being portrayed in the media, and locking down cities like they have in Spain and Italy. It is debatable if these measures are even working, but even if they were, it would be unconstitutional to implement them in the United States.

People are starting to flip out, and I understand why. You can't turn on the radio or TV without being blasted with it. It's wall to wall coverage that you can't escape. I can't turn on the radio, watch TV, or even hold a conversation with someone without constantly hearing about it. I think we all need to take a step back, calm down, take a deep breath, and start behaving like adults. Society has survived many pandemics. Our grandparents lived with rampant disease outbreaks like polio and tuberculosis. Society never melted down like what we are seeing today. It's unbelievable! And frankly, I think a lot of us have had enough of this s***.

Hear hear.

[Green Line]

No one will EVER prevent me from attending mass obligations for any reason. If Pennsylvania instituted this, I will flee to New Jersey or Virginia. If all churches complied and locked their doors, I will livestream from outside the church. If anyone tried to stop me and others from fulfilling that obligation as best I can, I will have to start exercising my other rights.
...

Does this sound like a serious comment of yours?
You describe your commitment to your religion, and then end it by saying that you may need to possibly shoot people.
WTF is that? What level of morality is in your soul?
I didnt even know you were religious. Or is this just another (poor) troll attempt from you?
And if you are religious (Christian I assume), shame on you for wanting to "exercise your other rights," just because you cant go to mass.

I have never missed mass and never intend to. No one will infringe on that right. It seems the churches are closed up and down the east coast. Standing outside and streaming it is.

And you may need to shoot people over this?
ARE YOU LISTENING TO YOURSELF !!

Its not something you could ever understand.  Stop harassing people who dare to live their faith.

[Green Line]

No one will EVER prevent me from attending mass obligations for any reason. If Pennsylvania instituted this, I will flee to New Jersey or Virginia. If all churches complied and locked their doors, I will livestream from outside the church. If anyone tried to stop me and others from fulfilling that obligation as best I can, I will have to start exercising my other rights.
...

Does this sound like a serious comment of yours?
You describe your commitment to your religion, and then end it by saying that you may need to possibly shoot people.
WTF is that? What level of morality is in your soul?
I didnt even know you were religious. Or is this just another (poor) troll attempt from you?
And if you are religious (Christian I assume), shame on you for wanting to "exercise your other rights," just because you cant go to mass.

I have never missed mass and never intend to. No one will infringe on that right. It seems the churches are closed up and down the east coast. Standing outside and streaming it is.

And you may need to shoot people over this?
ARE YOU LISTENING TO YOURSELF !!

Its not something you could ever understand.  Stop harassing people who dare to live their faith.

Shooting people is not "living your faith".

Sprouts Farmers Market is absolutely not saying that, its slander.

[Green Line]

Disturbing stories starting to come in.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/maine-residents-try-force-quarantine-out-towners-cutting-down-tree-n1171596

Vigilantes in Maine cut down a tree in an attempt to quarantine two individuals they suspected of being infected.  They had no symptoms, they were simply from out of state.

https://news.sky.com/story/coronavirus-police-turning-parts-of-uk-into-dystopia-after-prosecuting-people-driving-due-to-boredom-and-shoppers-11965903

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-derbyshire-52095857

Police in the UK have been citing people for offenses such as, "out for a drive due to boredom", and "multiple people from the same household going to the shops for non-essential items".  In other areas, they've used drones to film people outside on walks and dyed a lagoon black.

[Green Line]

Lori Lightfoot: Do as I say, not as I do.  Hey, we're all in this together, remember that 🙄🙄🙄

https://chicago.suntimes.com/city-hall/2020/4/6/21211314/getting-roots-done-not-essential-getting-hair-cut-mayor-lightfoot

Even though the state has shut down all salons and barbers as "non-essential" and Lori is threatening people in Chicago with misdemeanors for leaving their homes, apparently the rules don't apply to her.  She needed a haircut.

“I’m in the public every day. And candidly, my hair was not looking the way it did. I thought maybe I’d do it myself, but I knew that would be disaster,”

"I take my personal hygiene very seriously. I felt like I needed to have a haircut. I’m not able to do that myself. So, I got a haircut. Want to talk more about that?”

Shockingly out of touch.

[Green Line]

Hey, at least she was held accountable.  More than we can say for Chicago.

[Green Line]

There are... quite a few poorly aged takes in this thread.

And on the other hand, some have aged like fine wine.

Green Line was right.