Covid-19 miscellany

[ZiprHead]

Mandate that say "do this or lose your job" are though.

Really? I wonder where it is you work where you can say or do or not say or do anything you like or dislike without losing your job.

 

[ZiprHead]

Wrong.

 Jacobson v. Massachusetts

Jacobson v. Massachusetts, 197 U.S. 11 (1905), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court upheld the authority of states to enforce compulsory vaccination laws. The Court's decision articulated the view that individual liberty is not absolute and is subject to the police power of the state.

Are you not aware of the distinction between the states and the federal government? Police/health power has pretty much always been state power.

Tell that to the CDC, CMS, and all the other alphabet soup departments concerning healthcare in the US. Everyone needs a good laugh now and then.

 

[ZiprHead]

Wrong.

 Jacobson v. Massachusetts

Jacobson v. Massachusetts, 197 U.S. 11 (1905), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court upheld the authority of states to enforce compulsory vaccination laws. The Court's decision articulated the view that individual liberty is not absolute and is subject to the police power of the state.

Are you not aware of the distinction between the states and the federal government? Police/health power has pretty much always been state power.

So it's not fascism if the state does it but the feds it is?

 

[ZiprHead]

Maybe Republicans would have thought it better if Biden said anyone could just sue an unvaccinated person for $10k. Now that’s a rule I’m sure they could really get behind.

An unvaccinated person who exposed anyone.

Maybe Republicans would have thought it better if Biden said anyone could just sue an unvaccinated person for $10k. Now that’s a rule I’m sure they could really get behind.

An unvaccinated person who exposed anyone.

Or intended to expose anyone. Best to cover all the bases.

You don't even have to prove it, just suspect it. No proof is required in the Texas law.

 

[Rhea]

Mandate that say "do this or lose your job" are though.

Really? I wonder where it is you work where you can say or do or not say or do anything you like or dislike without losing your job.

My company complies with OSHA mandates.
If I refuse to wear safety glasses, I will lose my job.
If I refuse to wear steel-toed shoes, I will lose my job.
If I refuse to wear hearing protection, I will lose my job.

And. None of those are even to protect others, they are just to protect my employer from having to pay for my injuries.

This whole fabricated “right” to harm others through dangerous health practices is so childish and nonsensical.
“Oh, you’re a *fascist* if you “make” a company follow a safety rule! Oh! Cry! Sob!”
All of the companies, by the way, LOVE the vaccine mandate as it makes them more money (or makes them lose less money). You don’t hear them complaining.


But yeah, this huge whinge about how fascist it is to do something that the US has been doing for a century already is so uninformed, it’s a little pathetic.

 

[Jarhyn]

Mandate that say "do this or lose your job" are though.

Really? I wonder where it is you work where you can say or do or not say or do anything you like or dislike without losing your job.

My company complies with OSHA mandates.
If I refuse to wear safety glasses, I will lose my job.
If I refuse to wear steel-toed shoes, I will lose my job.
If I refuse to wear hearing protection, I will lose my job.

And. None of those are even to protect others, they are just to protect my employer from having to pay for my injuries.

This whole fabricated “right” to harm others through dangerous health practices is so childish and nonsensical.
“Oh, you’re a *fascist* if you “make” a company follow a safety rule! Oh! Cry! Sob!”
All of the companies, by the way, LOVE the vaccine mandate as it makes them more money (or makes them lose less money). You don’t hear them complaining.


But yeah, this huge whinge about how fascist it is to do something that the US has been doing for a century already is so uninformed, it’s a little pathetic.

So I can't help but think the same posters who post about those rules are the same ones who howl about "business killing regulations", and "OSHA, AMIRITE?" And "just remove all the warning labels, and let the idiots sort it out" and similar sentiments.

It's going to be hard when one of the less stated goals of the cohort is in fact to do this.

.I wouldn't be surprised if this is not actually misdirection that they see mask precedent erosion as a method to generate precedence for eroding reasonable workplace protections.

Because I can see any precedent against federal mandates for masks for public health to go into cases that turn such precedents against workplace protections

Well, to the extent anyone in the supreme court actually cares about precedent anymore...

 

[Jason Harvestdancer]

"They forced me to look after my health because I was too stupid to do it for myself! The fascists!"

Dictators often think the public is too stupid to get along without them.

 

[ZiprHead]

"They forced me to look after my health because I was too stupid to do it for myself! The fascists!"

Dictators often think the public is too stupid to get along without them.

 

[Rhea]

"They forced me to look after my health because I was too stupid to do it for myself! The fascists!"

Dictators often think the public is too stupid to get along without them.

I don’t care if they hurt themselves. I don’t think that is what drives the mandate anyway. They are harming others, and that is what deserves regulation.

 

[ZiprHead]

"They forced me to look after my health because I was too stupid to do it for myself! The fascists!"

Dictators often think the public is too stupid to get along without them.

I don’t care if they hurt themselves. I don’t think that is what drives the mandate anyway. They are harming others, and that is what deserves regulation.

Yeah, all those dictators passing drunk driving laws and making people stop at stop signs. The horror!

 

[ZiprHead]

The case against anti-vaxxer coddling

But appeasing conservative grievance all this time has only strengthened their bottomless sense of entitlement and victimhood. At this point the whole right-wing project of stealing elections and setting up a one-party state depends on liberal cowardice — the solid majority of the country that supports democratic institutions, not to mention ending the pandemic as quickly as possible, simply lying down and taking it. Witness D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser, who anxiously instructed residents of her city not to come out and counter-protest against the putschists on January 6 (for fear of inflaming conservative rage), thereby leaving the Capitol open to attack.

What's more is that pushing hard on responsible COVID measures is good politics in the here and now. Polls show a large majority of Americans support both vaccine mandates and virus control measures to fight Delta and save lives. Standing up for that platform puts Democrats on the winning side of a culture war battle and drives a wedge deep into the Republican base (which is not at all uniformly against vaccination).

It is not 1988 anymore. Conservatism is a distinctly minority phenomenon, and is becoming more so with every passing year. I for one have had it up to here with the shrieking anti-vaccine maniacs who are doing their level best to put more children in intensive care. They should be exiled from society until they get their shots, and their efforts to intimidate people against controlling the pandemic should be met with massive resistance.

 

[ZiprHead]

From the majority opinion on Jacobson v Massachusetts:

"There are manifold restraints to which every person is necessarily subject for the common good,” “On any other basis, organized society could not exist with safety to its members. Society based on the rule that each one is a law unto himself would soon be confronted with disorder and anarchy.”

“Real liberty for all could not exist under the operation of a principle which recognizes the right of each individual person to use his own, whether in respect of his person or his property, regardless of the injury that may be done to others."

 

[Jarhyn]

From the majority opinion on Jacobson v Massachusetts:

"There are manifold restraints to which every person is necessarily subject for the common good,” “On any other basis, organized society could not exist with safety to its members. Society based on the rule that each one is a law unto himself would soon be confronted with disorder and anarchy.”

“Real liberty for all could not exist under the operation of a principle which recognizes the right of each individual person to use his own, whether in respect of his person or his property, regardless of the injury that may be done to others."

I can let help but think that there are members of society they would as soon see have no safety, particularly from them. That they would like a world where there are some the law serves and some the law binds, and have those dimensions laid around individual capabilities to violence rather than a democratized thing of any kind.

 

[untermensche]

"They forced me to look after my health because I was too stupid to do it for myself! The fascists!"

Dictators often think the public is too stupid to get along without them.

Dictators do that to serve themselves.

Protecting idiots from harming themselves and society is not what dictators do.

To think the government has no right to protect the public from the deluded and dangerous is infantile stupidity.

That dictator he outlawed murder and rape.

The FASCIST!

 

[Patooka]

"They forced me to look after my health because I was too stupid to do it for myself! The fascists!"

Dictators often think the public is too stupid to get along without them.

Dumb cunts often think regulation and fascism are the same thing.

 

[Jarhyn]

"They forced me to look after my health because I was too stupid to do it for myself! The fascists!"

Dictators often think the public is too stupid to get along without them.

Dictators do that to serve themselves.

Protecting idiots from harming themselves and society is not what dictators do.

To think the government has no right to protect the public from the deluded and dangerous is infantile stupidity.

That dictator he outlawed murder and rape.

The FASCIST!

So, slight quibble here, you can be a dictator and still not be an asshole. The issue is that is the exception rather than the rule, and the bad dictators use good dictators as justification for their own bad dictation.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Covid-19 death rates 10 times higher in countries where most adults are overweight, report finds

We need OSHA to mandate no donuts in the company kitchen; weekly weigh-ins.

Can someone catch obesity from their coworker eating donuts? There’s a difference between personal health and public health threats. To pretend there isn’t is being disingenuous in this conversation.

Um, if we paradoxically have to protect the vaccinated from the unvaccinated - as amnesia Joe scolded us - then protection from the unhealthy is a must, as their poor body habitus permits the virus to spread.

The economy needs the vaccinated to be able to freely spend money and not be passing around the virus.

More virus means leaner profits.

 

[Jarhyn]

Um, if we paradoxically have to protect the vaccinated from the unvaccinated - as amnesia Joe scolded us - then protection from the unhealthy is a must, as their poor body habitus permits the virus to spread.

The economy needs the vaccinated to be able to freely spend money and not be passing around the virus.

More virus means leaner profits.

With the variants, the vaccine has a 20% chance of still allowing you to get it and bring it home to your children.

I don't see why this is controversial to say that the vaccinated still need protection from Plague Rats...

It's like saying it's OK to shoot at cops because they wear body armor and so will probably not be badly hurt...

 

[untermensche]

Dictators do that to serve themselves.

Protecting idiots from harming themselves and society is not what dictators do.

To think the government has no right to protect the public from the deluded and dangerous is infantile stupidity.

That dictator he outlawed murder and rape.

The FASCIST!

So, slight quibble here, you can be a dictator and still not be an asshole. The issue is that is the exception rather than the rule, and the bad dictators use good dictators as justification for their own bad dictation.

Being a dictator is being an asshole.

Not letting deluded dangerous children harm others is not being a dictator.

Stopping your child from walking into traffic is not being a dictator.

 

[TomC]

As silly as saying we need to protect the vaccinated from the unvaccinated?

Silly?
Yes, everyone needs protection from the folks who keep the epidemic going!
Not just from getting sick or dying. From the damage done to everything from the economy to families to freedom.

Sorry, at this point in time there is mountains of evidence on the safety and effectiveness of vaccination. Anybody who still chooses to remain unvaccinated, without a medical reason, is choosing against a strong and free USA.
Tom