quote Originally posted by maryjane: Putting a price tag or monetary value on lives lost again (still) I see. Dead people aren't losing anything on their investments, aren't carried on unemployment rolls, they have no need for 'life savings'. Jobs will return...the dead will not walk again on this planet.

No, I am putting a monetary value on the living. True, dead people aren't losing anything on their investments or 'life savings'. Their next of kin are though. Not all jobs will return, many won't. It's more than jobs, whole industries are suffering greatly. I would not want to be in commercial real estate nor own any.

You are the one putting a monetary value on lives lost, and the ones which still exist. Using other people's money, ? I get it Don. God bless. You are trying to save lives and end this panic demic as fast as possible. Giving good facts and sound reasoning. I have been putting a monetary value on the living.

quote Originally posted by maryjane: I've been wearing a mask since early March, as unlike many, I understood very early on that the primary function of a mask was/is to prevent ME from infecting someone else. The failure of this nation to have a national mask requirement has caused the deaths of thousands, and Texas didn't have a statewide policy on it until July 2, four months after the US declared a pandemic.

Was it this thread or another, that we had this 'maskdebation' ? I agree, wearing a mask can possibly help saving the life of another. I believe you said it does nothing for a wearer who was not infected, offering no protection at all.

As I said, I have been diligent wearing a mask. Believing I was protected. I had no idea that when I got home and took it off, kissed the wife, conversed with the wife, slept with the wife, that I should have been wearing the mask 24/7/365. I could have killed the most loved one in my life. You ? Did you wear your mask at all times while at home with Jane ? Even when y'all had dinner ?

quote Originally posted by maryjane: A 100% completely false assumption. Many people have the virus on or in their bodies but are not infected themselves. No one is infected until or unless the virus actually hijacks cells to replicate more virus and no infection shows up in a diagnostic test until antibodies begin to start acting. In that case, a different (molecular) test would be done, to look for the actual virus or protein from the virus.

100% is quite the bar.

quote Originally posted by maryjane: The Spanish flu killed more healthy young people than old weak people.

I never insinuated that the young or old were the weak ones. It stands to reason, for some reasons, some were weaker than others.

NYC Councilman Paul Vallone, a Democrat, told the New York Post that he took hydroxychloroquine, a drug known for treating malaria, while he fell ill with COVID-19 in March. He claimed that the drug saved his life and thanked President Trump for raising awareness about the medication.

quote “I guess all those doctors who are prescribing it are right. This drug is already on the market, and the patent is up, so it’s cheap. A new drug won’t be. So, big money does not want this drug to be used. Always follow the money," Vallone said. "[It] saved my life."

National Institute of Health - A cluster randomised trial of cloth masks compared with medical masks in healthcare workers
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.go...YqHPu0Txr6hqzZ631yXs


Direct Quote:

"Penetration of cloth masks by particles was almost 97% and medical masks 44%."


I take back my previous comment where I said masks were a 10% solution. Apparently, it's only a 3% solution.

About that report from 82-T/A,

These are the single use or disposable surgical-style masks ("robin egg blues", figuratively speaking) that so many people are using.



I scrolled through that study, and I think these would not be categorized as the "cloth masks" that were described as almost completely ineffective, in the language of that study. In the language of that study, these are "medical masks" and were reported as having a particle filtration rate of 56% (I inverted the 44% particle transmission or permeability figure that's given.)

Since the pandemic started, there have been new studies and laboratory-style experiments that support the "Wear a Mask" messaging from U.S. Surgeon General Jerome Adams (et al.)


"Here's Jerry"

[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 08-16-2020).]

When this first started affecting people in large numbers he recommended not wearing a mask. I kind of lost my respect for him at that moment.

quote Originally posted by Hudini: When this first started affecting people in large numbers he recommended not wearing a mask. I kind of lost my respect for him at that moment.

There was some concern early on about the availability of PPE like N95 respirators and even (I think) these common disposable surgical-style masks for front line responders and hospital workers. I think that was part of what was behind Dr Fauci and the Surgeon General actually discouraging the general public from seeking out these face masks.

I have been endorsing this "Viral" 60-second hack that makes your [cheap'o disposable] face mask fit so much better"
https://bgr.com/2020/08/10/...ce-masks-fit-better/

It's a 60-second video that you would have to scroll to the end of the article to get too.

Unless you have a particularly broad lower face, I think it will make your surgical-style mask fit more snugly, reduce any tendency for your breath to condense and fog up your eyeglass lenses (as that applies) and help safeguard the elastic string ear loops from failing. Because tying the knot relieves strain on the points of attachment.

quote Originally posted by rinselberg: About that report from 82-T/A, These are the single use or disposable surgical-style masks ("robin egg blues", figuratively speaking) that so many people are using. I scrolled through that study, and I think these would not be categorized as the "cloth masks" that were described as almost completely ineffective, in the language of that study. In the language of that study, these are "medical masks" and were reported as having a particle filtration rate of 56% (I inverted the 44% particle transmission or permeability figure that's given.)

So, the medical masks were defined in the article as N95 masks. Meaning that cloth masks pretty much made up the ones you're showing above. Those are the ones I wear incidentally... because I have a huge box of them from Harbor Freight that I would use when working in the attic (electrical, HVAC, etc), and because it's mandated by law. Otherwise, I would not be wearing a mask.

Trying to be respectful here, but I truly believe like with a lot of other things, this is yet again another thing the left has unilaterally picked up as something to beat people with day in and day out as a means for asserting power. Did you see “tape girl?” Long story short, this (obviously Democrat) girl brings with her a measuring tape to the beach to measure social distancing guidelines. She completely loses it.




With Biden coming out and saying... “we need a national mask mandate,” Democrats went wild, they loved it. WHY did they love it? Because it was like a hammer with which to beat people with, or because they loved the Government asserting its authority? Or because they TRULY believed it made a difference and they somehow care deeply? Respectfully, I think it's the first two I mentioned.

I’m not trying to be a jerk about this, but it feels like they want / desire someone very authoritative (Government) to tell them what to do every minute of every day. The left latch onto things that don’t really have any sound logic, and then go all-in. The whole mask thing is a perfect example. When all of this started happening, I’ve honestly been shocked at how fragile everyone is (emotionally). I really do think Trump has been reassuring to those who need it, but the media hasn’t allowed it to be portrayed in such a way. The way Democrats manipulate their constituency and their base is absolutely perverse to me... and I mean that with absolute sincerity.

quote Originally posted by 82-T/A [At Work]: So, the medical masks were defined in the article as N95 masks. Meaning that cloth masks pretty much made up the ones you're showing above. Those are the ones I wear incidentally... because I have a huge box of them from Harbor Freight that I would use when working in the attic (electrical, HVAC, etc), and because it's mandated by law. Otherwise, I would not be wearing a mask.

Everything else aside, I still think that in the context of that report, the term "medical" masks actually refers to the inexpensive single use surgical-style masks that I am talking about, and the term "cloth" masks does NOT refer to these:

Breathable 3-Layer Non-Woven Mouth Masks, Safety Masks for Outdoor Home Office - Blue (Amazon).


The study divides the "face mask world" Into N95 masks, medical masks of the kind that I am talking about and have been using, and cloth masks.

quote Disposable medical/surgical masks (referred to here after as ‘medical masks’) . . .

quote Masks used in the study were locally manufactured medical (three layer, made of non-woven material) or cloth masks (two layer, made of cotton) commonly used in Vietnamese hospitals.

quote The 3M 9320 N95 and 3M Vflex 9105 N95 were used to compare against the cloth and medical masks.

quote Penetration of cloth masks by particles was almost 97% and medical masks 44%.

[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 08-16-2020).]

quote Originally posted by cliffw: I never insinuated that the young or old were the weak ones. It stands to reason, for some reasons, some were weaker than others.

'Some"
Care to put some facts with that...you know....like some science to back up that extremely vague and hyperbole ridden statement?
A proven percent perhaps..some real numbers?
Anything?

I thought not.

quote As I said, I have been diligent wearing a mask. Believing I was protected. I had no idea that when I got home and took it off, kissed the wife, conversed with the wife, slept with the wife, that I should have been wearing the mask 24/7/365. I could have killed the most loved one in my life.

Why, in the world, would you believe YOU were protected?
It has been stated over and over and over again, for MONTHS, that the masks decrease the risks of transmitting infection TO OTHERS!
It's why surgeons wear masks..to prevent or at least decrease the risk of infecting the person they are operating on.


No, Jane and I are around each other every day and night so we don't wear masks at home, but one of my daughter-in-laws does...she is ill right now and once again awaiting test results.

Anytime anyone places a higher importance on economics than life itself, they are placing a monetary value on other people's lives. You can shade it and/or try to rationalize it any way you wish, but you can't escape that fact.
I have never met a next-of-kin that would not trade back an inheritance they received from their deceased loved one in trade to get them back alive.

My health insurance provider sent me some masks without request and free of charge. I don't know how good they are, but they keep me out of trouble.

quote Originally posted by maryjane: 'Some" Care to put some facts with that...you know....like some science to back up that extremely vague and hyperbole ridden statement? A proven percent perhaps..some real numbers? Anything? I thought not.

Perhaps I was wrong. Perhaps "some" stronger people died. Would you have me believe zero weaker died of the Spanish flu ?

quote Originally posted by maryjane: ]Why, in the world, would you believe YOU were protected? It has been stated over and over and over again, for MONTHS, that the masks decrease the risks of transmitting infection TO OTHERS! It's why surgeons wear masks..to prevent or at least decrease the risk of infecting the person they are operating on.

Gee, I don't know Perhaps it was because I was hospitalized this year with infectious respiratory disease. I never had to wear a mask yet all my care providers did.

quote Originally posted by maryjane: No, Jane and I are around each other every day and night so we don't wear masks at home, ...

Yet you wear a mask when you go out (Jane also I am sure), you don't believe it protects you. Do you want to protect her or not ?

quote Originally posted by maryjane: Anytime anyone places a higher importance on economics than life itself, they are placing a monetary value on other people's lives. You can shade it and/or try to rationalize it any way you wish, but you can't escape that fact. I have never met a next-of-kin that would not trade back an inheritance they received from their deceased loved one in trade to get them back alive.

You can shade it any way you want. It also is a false statement that I place a higher importance on economics than life. I am placing a higher importance on life.

quote Originally posted by maryjane: Anytime anyone places a higher importance on economics than life itself, they are placing a monetary value on other people's lives. You can shade it and/or try to rationalize it any way you wish, but you can't escape that fact.

Chicago's McCormick Place hospital’s cost to taxpayers? $1.7 million per patient.

quote Taxpayers, 75% federal money, spent nearly $66 million fashioning McCormick Place into an emergency coronavirus hospital with 2,750 beds this past spring amid fears that COVID-19 patients would overwhelm hospitals in the Chicago area. Those fears turned out to be unfounded. Just 38 patients were transferred to the sprawling convention center — meaning taxpayers’ cost for the makeshift hospital turned out to be more than $1.7 million per patient, on average.

Michigan Governor Reverses COVID-19 Ban Treatments Touted by Trump

quote Originally posted by cliffw: Michigan Governor Reverses COVID-19 Ban Treatments Touted by Trump

That "news" is a bit over 4 months old but the basic point of it still lost on a lot of people.

The goobermint has ZERO legitimate business inserting itself into the doctor-patient relationship, especially where it comes to choice of treatment regimens.

Moreover, sheer ignorance has also caused too many people to completely misunderstand what OFF LABEL prescribing actually means.

It would also come as a complete surprise to many people that have become "internet physicians" over the past few months that there are several pharmaceuticals, other than HCQ, that are also being prescribed OFF LABEL as a prophylactic, and acute treatment, for the China virus......but don't tell the politicians.

quote Originally posted by randye: That "news" is a bit over 4 months old but the basic point of it still lost on a lot of people.

Yes Sir. I had just heard about it and noticed the date. I was surprised not to have heard it here. Shame on you rinselberg, .[/quote]

Much good info in the linked article.

quote Originally posted by randye: The goobermint has ZERO legitimate business inserting itself into the doctor-patient relationship, especially where it comes to choice of treatment regimens.

Absolutely.

quote Originally posted by randye: Moreover, sheer ignorance has also caused too many people to completely misunderstand what OFF LABEL prescribing actually means.

True.

quote Originally posted by randye: It would also come as a complete surprise to many people that have become "internet physicians" over the past few months that there are several pharmaceuticals, other than HCQ, that are also being prescribed OFF LABEL as a prophylactic, and acute treatment, for the China virus......but don't tell the politicians.

It is a shame, .

quote Originally posted by cliffw: Chicago's McCormick Place hospital’s cost to taxpayers? $1.7 million per patient. Taxpayers, 75% federal money, spent nearly $66 million fashioning McCormick Place into an emergency coronavirus hospital with 2,750 beds this past spring amid fears that COVID-19 patients would overwhelm hospitals in the Chicago area. Those fears turned out to be unfounded. Just 38 patients were transferred to the sprawling convention center — meaning taxpayers’ cost for the makeshift hospital turned out to be more than $1.7 million per patient, on average.

Yet they are not implying that the cost is more than what the patient's life is worth.
Many on the internet are inferring that, tho I suspect all that stops right at the limit of their own loved ones' door.

[This message has been edited by maryjane (edited 08-21-2020).]

Which would be worse? Hospital beds without patients (as this case that's being discussed here, from Chicago) or patients without hospital beds?

quote Taxpayers spent nearly $66 million fashioning McCormick Place into an emergency coronavirus hospital with 2,750 beds this past spring amid fears that COVID-19 patients would overwhelm hospitals in the Chicago area. Those fears turned out to be unfounded. Just 38 patients were transferred to the sprawling convention center — meaning taxpayers’ cost for the makeshift hospital turned out to be more than $1.7 million per patient, on average.

quote At the time, New York City hospitals were filling, and there were fears that, if Chicago didn’t act quickly, it would “have looked like New York or worse,” says Dr. Nick Turkal, who was executive director of what was formally called the alternate care facility at McCormick Place — one of four in the Chicago region intended to house noncritical coronavirus patients in an effort to keep beds available in hospitals for people more severely ill with the virus.

quote ... the medical equipment is being stored and can be redeployed if needed.

quote Originally posted by maryjane: Yet they are not inferring that the cost is more than what the patient's life is worth. Many on the internet are, tho I suspect all that stops right at the limit of there own loved ones' door.

, you edited your post. I had an internet connectivity issue (area wide). I tried to respond. I did write my thoughts in Word, to cut and paste later. Here they are.

You had painted me as putting a price on the lives of ... 1.7 million dollars a patient.

Am I ? Or was I placing a price on, what did you tell me was missing from the covid response, ah yes, leadership ? What is the price of inept leadership ?

Again, you are placing a price on people’s lives. 1.7 million is acceptable to you ? How ‘bout 66 million dollars a life ? 660 million ? 666 trillion ?

Remember, its “other people’s money”. You and I paid for 75%. Did we ? We are borrowing it. That 66 million is really ‘mo money, after interest. Chicago and Illinois, have the same ability and powers to borrow money. Are you a socialist ?

Do I want to gift money to Chicago who is considering defunding the police ? There is the 66 million dollars right there. Do I want to gift money to a community which will not even protect the business owners who have been looted / burned out of existence ? Chicago is a wealthy city. They have enough ‘other people’s money’ within Chicago. If Chicago wasn't underfunded on city pensions perhaps they would not having to beg America.

Now you have me reexamining my empathy. Free college, housing for all, health care for all ? I am good with toys for kids at Christmas because their parents bought big boy toys.

You mentioned a mask mandate ? I will let you be the one to tell williegoat he has to shave. I have taken mask fitness tests. His peach fuzz will fail him. A mask mandate ? Not all masks are created equal.

[This message has been edited by cliffw (edited 08-19-2020).]

quote Originally posted by rinselberg: Which would be worse? Hospital beds without patients (as this case that's being discussed here, from Chicago) or patients without hospital beds? ... the medical equipment is being stored and can be redeployed if needed.

Hospital beds without patients is not good, for hospitals. Because they are not charity. They are not a public service. They are not a human right.

There was never a shortage of ventilators. The ones which could be redeployed, couldn't.

CliffW:
The multitude of meaningless questions that you deluge each of your 'replys' with is a ploy to keep from answering difficult questions yourself.
I will say it again.
Anytime one places a higher importance on economics than keeping people alive is placing a value on other people's lives.

You began this deluge of questioning a few years ago, and for awhile, many of us went to a lot of trouble parsing out the quotes and answering each one individually. It quickly became tiresome and now we just ignore it, realizing what it really is.
When you (and others) complain that the lockdowns "are wrecking the economy", they are placing the economic costs of saving lives over the lives themselves.
Try as you may, you can't get around that.

Sweden...
It only works if the comparison is made in relation to a few cherry picked nations; nations with a higher population density and higher population in general and those with big metropolitan areas, and to the nations where the pandemic first hit in Europe. Remember, it first really took off in Europe in Italy, then spread to neighboring Spain, France and Belguim.

quote The repeated juxtaposition of the absence of a lockdown and the seemingly better epidemiological outcome in Sweden misleadingly suggests to the reader that lockdowns have not been useful or effective in curbing the spread of the disease. While the figures supporting the claim are accurate, a lack of context as well as the cherry-picking of countries used in the comparison is blurring the take-home message and leading to biased conclusions. Firstly, the article compared countries’ death rates, which are defined as the number of COVID-19-related deaths per 100,000 inhabitants. Based on data collected by Johns Hopkins University, the Swedish death rate is approximately 56 deaths per 100,000 inhabitants. This number is lower than the rates in Spain, Italy, Belgium, and the U.K., all countries which implemented lockdowns to some extent. Although the number is accurate, the article does not explain why it selected these specific countries for comparison and not others.

When compared to nations of similar size/population/density, and to nations that had the luxury of a few weeks or months with which to gauge how to deal with the outbreak, the comparison looks much different, and is much more accurate.

quote Originally posted by maryjane: When compared to nations of similar size/population/density, and to nations that had the luxury of a few weeks or months with which to gauge how to deal with the outbreak, the comparison looks much different, and is much more accurate.

Nope, this chart is 100% a lie. Unless you have the United States at the end with 2x the death rate of the next worst country, it's just fake. It also needs to have a disclaimer at the bottom blaming Trump.

quote Originally posted by maryjane: Anytime one places a higher importance on economics than keeping people alive is placing a value on other people's lives.

Be that it may, it does not exonerate them from doing the very same thing.

quote Originally posted by maryjane: The multitude of meaningless questions that you deluge each of your 'replys' with is a ploy to keep from answering difficult questions yourself. ... now we just ignore it, realizing what it really is.

We ? Do you have a mouse in your pocket ? You don't question what you think ? You don't raise thoughts to ponder for those that disagree with what you think ? I don't tell people how to think, I get them to think about it, hopefully.

I do not need to ask questions to avoid answering difficult questions for myself.

quote Originally posted by cliffw: I should add that I am not the one trying to social shame anyone into practicing my values.

Sure you are. You just do it from a financial/economics standpoint and point of view where I do it from a life saving point of view.

quote Originally posted by cliffw: Covid has claimed 3.34% deaths per infection. .047 percent of the entire US population. Yet 8.57% of Americans do not have jobs as a result of the shut down. Businesses are disappearing. Landlords can not evict or collect rent but still have to pay back loans. What has the government spent to mitigate the economic damage ? At least three trillion. Borrowed money. ............................................................ People's grandparents, uncles, brothers, sister, wives, husbands, fellow employees, friends and neighbors ... unemployed. Children not going to school, business shut down, many not to reopen. Life savings, lost. Commercial real estate, plumeting. Violations of Constitutional rights. Borrowing massive amounts of money from our children and grandchildren, born or not.

Todd does it as well, predominantly from a political standpoint. We all do it in one form or another.

Politics is almost always about values.."ours" vs "theirs".

[This message has been edited by maryjane (edited 08-23-2020).]

quote Originally posted by maryjane: Sure you are. You just do it from a financial/economics standpoint and point of view where I do it from a life saving point of view.

No, I am not. I just voiced my opinion in contrast to you placing your life value of persons. I have never said my value should be the gold standard. You seem to think I am the scourge. I merely stated reason for my beliefs. You have not.

Or, either you or I have Old Heimers disease, .

Life saving point of view ? No price is too high ? What about ISIS ? Let's put a 66 million dollar hospital over there for them. Chicago ? Why would I want to pay 75% to help a liberal bastion who has no interest in being united with conservative USA ? A liberal bastion who has within it, 66 million extra dollars of other people's money. A liberal bastion who wants to de-fund the police.

A liberal bastion whose Mayor Lori Lightfoot (D) banned hair salons, then got hers done anyway. Her reasoning ? She was in the public eye and needed to look good. She doesn't need a hair dresser. She needs a magician, .

The same mayor who let ti looters and rioter wreak havoc in the city, even in the ? High Mile ? district with all the swanky shops. Yet, She banned peaceful protests in front of her house.

quote Originally posted by cliffw: No, I am not. I just voiced my opinion in contrast to you placing your life value of persons. I have never said my value should be the gold standard. You seem to think I am the scourge. I merely stated reason for my beliefs. You have not.

I would have thought my reasons for wanting to save lives over saving $$ would be self evident.
No?
Those were your words I quoted, not mine. Noticeably missing in those quotes, is anything about saving anyone's lives.

quote Originally posted by maryjane: I would have thought my reasons for wanting to save lives over saving $$ would be self evident. No?

No. $$ ? How much money are you talking about ? There is such a thing as a cost benefit analysis. My reasons are not just $$, not at all. True $$ has merit for thought, yet I am concerned with something more valuable. Freedom. That 50 different despot dictators decide to choose my fate does not sit well with me. I can go to a liquor store, a pot dispensary, but not a church ? I can shop forever at a Home Depot but I can not buy paint or seeds ? Big box grocery stores can sell food but not a Mom & Pop store ? Some jobs are essential by their decree ?

Who is placing a value on lives ? That 350 million Americans should bow down to the scare god for 200,000 lives, no. I get it. It is only 200,000 lives because many Americans did bow down. Prove it. It does stand to reason, yet ...

quote Originally posted by maryjane: Those were your words I quoted, not mine. Noticeably missing in those quotes, is anything about saving anyone's lives.

I can chew bubble gum and walk at the same time. I have done my part to save lives.

quote originally posted by CliffW No. $$ ? How much money are you talking about ? There is such a thing as a cost benefit analysis. My reasons are not just $$, not at all. True $$ has merit for thought, yet I am concerned with something more valuable. Freedom. That 50 different despot dictators decide to choose my fate does not sit well with me. I can go to a liquor store, a pot dispensary, but not a church ? I can shop forever at a Home Depot but I can not buy paint or seeds ? Big box grocery stores can sell food but not a Mom & Pop store ? Some jobs are essential by their decree ?

Cost benefit analysis for a human life.....
Wow.

I guess I'm done here........I really don't know how to argue with the kind of logic that states someone's death from illness is justified by someone else's freedom to buy seeds or paint.

[This message has been edited by maryjane (edited 08-24-2020).]

quote Originally posted by maryjane: I really don't know how to argue with the kind of logic that states someone's death from illness is justified by someone else's freedom to buy seeds or paint.

I did not say that. Not at all. You suggest ... conflate death with my belief that the whole world does not have to suffer because some may contract an illness.

quote Originally posted by cliffw: I did not say that. Not at all. You suggest ... conflate death with my belief that the whole world does not have to suffer because some may contract an illness.

Its more than that. What they have done is remove FREE CHOICE. Those that are afraid are under NO compulsion to go to church, or walmart, or the garden center, or anywhere else for that matter. They are PERFECTLY free to sit at home in fear.

That is their CHOICE, but because of fear they have removed ours. Its all about the power and really no different than the marxists removing free speech. "I'm offended" and "I'm afraid" both mean pretty much the same thing. "YOU have to do what makes ME happy, not what YOU want, and I can always find an excuse."

Another way of phrasing it is the difference between negative and positive rights.

[This message has been edited by MidEngineManiac (edited 08-25-2020).]

quote Originally posted by cliffw: Australian Professor: Ivermectin 'Amazingly Successful' in Killing Coronavirus Ivermectin is already in use throughout the world to treat parasitic conditions. Is any virus a parasite ? Sounds good to me.

It kills parasites ? for 2 bucks a shot ?

Now THATS a product. 10 of millions of men will be buying it to treat the exes sucking them dry !!!!

quote Originally posted by MidEngineManiac: Its more than that. What they have done is remove FREE CHOICE. Those that are afraid are under NO compulsion to go to church, or walmart, or the garden center, or anywhere else for that matter. They are PERFECTLY free to sit at home in fear. That is their CHOICE, but because of fear they have removed ours. Its all about the power and really no different than the marxists removing free speech. "I'm offended" and "I'm afraid" both mean pretty much the same thing. "YOU have to do what makes ME happy, not what YOU want, and I can always find an excuse." Another way of phrasing it is the difference between negative and positive rights.

"When the freedom they wished for most was freedom from responsibility, then they ceased to be free.”


New York Governor Andrew Cuomo; coronavirus briefing; April 22, 2020.

In addressing the urgency for every New Yorker to maintain the Covid-19 countermeasures (face masks, social distancing, shutdown rules; etc.) Governor Cuomo reached back to a statement that's been traded upon as a quotation from Edward Gibbon, "Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire."

quote They wanted a comfortable life, and they lost it all -- security, comfort, and freedom. When the Athenians finally wanted not to give to society but for society to give to them, when the freedom they wished for most was freedom from responsibility, then Athens ceased to be free and was never free again.

It's been said that the credit more properly belongs to the scholar (and scholarly) Edith Hamilton, and Cuomo acknowledged even that, because the transcript of his briefing from that moment includes "Edward Gibbon" and "Edith Hamilton."

There's no doubt that Governor Cuomo hit that one out of the park.
Who dat say?

[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 08-26-2020).]

quote Originally posted by cliffw: I did not say that. Not at all. You suggest ... conflate death with my belief that the whole world does not have to suffer because some may contract an illness.

Ah..'some'. That's the 2nd time on this page you have used that vague term to describe a quantity.

quote I never insinuated that the young or old were the weak ones. It stands to reason, for some reasons, some were weaker than others.

Why not just quantify that "some" term?
I'll help you out with it and put some numbers in the graph.


Now, since you stated the weak were one of the reasons the flu epidemic of 1918 died off, tell me (and everyone else here) how many were 'weak'? (you must know, otherwise you wouldn't have stated it) A number please, and something besides conjecture to substantiate that claim.

quote The whole world does not have to suffer because some may contract an illness.

Since you used the entire world as a baseline, 'some' currently= 24,393,868..yes, that's 24.4 million people.

How many of the world's estimated 7.8 billion human beings are still at risk of contracting Covid19?
All 7.8 billion of them except "possibly' those who have had it and survived. (the medical community is yet unsure just how well antibodies work after one has recovered from Covid19) .

"some"..

[This message has been edited by maryjane (edited 08-27-2020).]

quote Originally posted by rinselberg: It's been said that the credit more properly belongs to the scholar (and scholarly) Edith Hamilton, and Cuomo acknowledged even that, because the transcript of his briefing from that moment includes "Edward Gibbon" and "Edith Hamilton." There's no doubt that Governor Cuomo hit that one out of the park. [/HIDE]

Which is the greater responsibility ? Self or Social ? If you don't practice SELF responsibility (IE: Go out and make some money to stay frackin fed) then there is no social responsibility, simply because those who have starved to death are no longer social. They are no longer able to chip in 10% or whatever to help those who cant do it themselves. Money doesnt appear out of thin air, somebody has to go out and make it happen. The lockdown fans are no different than the "law of attraction" nutbars, they seem to think all this food and "stuff" is going to manifest itself just because they want it and think about it.