It’s odd but true. Farts do the same thing...that’s probably what blew out the lights in the first place.
Either farts or a stray bullet.
It’s odd but true. Farts do the same thing...that’s probably what blew out the lights in the first place.
I think the big problem people (such as myself) have with all this is that we know who the most vulnerable are, so target them instead. If they are wearing a mask why do I have to? Why shut down an entire business just because people who are 'vulnerable' may or may not go into it? If 9 out of 10 that have it are asymptomatic, why can't they still go out and enjoy a meal while those that are most vulnerable socially distance. Making lives of 90% of the population miserable, costing people their livelihoods, costing people their health because they don't go to the doctor for other ailments during this, etc. in order to try to save the lives of 100,000/330 million people (in decimals that is 0.00030 of the population or 0.030%) seems ridiculous (original estimates put deaths in the US at 200,000 so that would be 100,000 more deaths that we maybe have saved from these efforts). And the infection rate obviously doesn't matter because 9 out of 10 people seem to be immune to it in the first place, so what does it matter what the infection rate is? This is all something a powerful, controlling government would rationalize, hence the communist label I put on it (probably could have used a better word, but didn't have one at the time). You have to realize we are a nation of 330,000,000 people, not 100,000 people.I thought the whole point of the restrictions was to slow the spread not stop it. It can't be stopped but as it seems to be significantly more infectious than 'normal flu and causes more serious symptoms in a percentage of those infected, the lockdowns were aimed at ensuring health services were not overwhelmed. It doesn't matter that a large percentage of those tested were asymptomatic: they are still carriers and can spread it to others who may be less fortunate.
I agree a second economic shutdown of the same proportions would be a disastrous move but I don't see anything 'communist' about trying to save lives (or extend them to be more accurate).
The 9 out of 10 asymptomatic people will still be spreading the virus, that's why they didn't want everybody carrying on as normal. And being able to go to the doctor for other ailments was precisely why governments tried to ensure COVID-19 wasn't allowed to spread unchecked. You talk about powerful, controlling governments. Out of interest, what motive do you think the US government could have for the restrictions if not to slow the spread of this disease?I think the big problem people (such as myself) have with all this is that we know who the most vulnerable are, so target them instead. If they are wearing a mask why do I have to? Why shut down an entire business just because people who are 'vulnerable' may or may not go into it? If 9 out of 10 that have it are asymptomatic, why can't they still go out and enjoy a meal while those that are most vulnerable socially distance. Making lives of 90% of the population miserable, costing people their livelihoods, costing people their health because they don't go to the doctor for other ailments during this, etc. in order to try to save the lives of 100,000/330 million people (in decimals that is 0.00030 of the population or 0.030%) seems ridiculous (original estimates put deaths in the US at 200,000 so that would be 100,000 more deaths that we maybe have saved from these efforts). And the infection rate obviously doesn't matter because 9 out of 10 people seem to be immune to it in the first place, so what does it matter what the infection rate is? This is all something a powerful, controlling government would rationalize, hence the communist label I put on it (probably could have used a better word, but didn't have one at the time). You have to realize we are a nation of 330,000,000 people, not 100,000 people.
The testing stops the spread. Here there are thousands with Covid and they are spreading it because of ignorance like is happening here ^^^^I understand, my point is that what does the testing do other than put everyone in a panic especially when the vast majority are asymptomatic? We've just shut down the entire economy (or most of it anyway) for less than 15% of those tested that have symptons? And having symptons doesn't mean you are going to die, far from it actually. For instance, we just had a Tyson facility nearby shut down...537 people at the plant, 482 tested positive but were asymptomatic, and only 3 tested positive with symptons...so why exactly did they shut the entire plant down? Thats what I don't get...what exactly did the testing do or prove...that 3 people had a fever and cough?
Because they have it with no symptoms...they still have it. So they need to wear a mask so not to spread it.If 9 out of 10 that have it are asymptomatic, why can't they still go out and enjoy a meal