Jump to content

onewheeldave

Members
  • Content Count

    5,397
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by onewheeldave

  1. Is it more racist for those who don't put a bit of effort in?
  2. Personally I would say that compulsory masking is as anti social as potentially being used as a transmission aid by a virus. Compulsory masking in the context of a virus like covid carries sufficient risk in terms of serious impact on civil liberty to outweigh the relatively minor [zero if outdoors] increase in transmission risk. Well, if 'most people' are doing it, it must be good then You're lucky you weren't in Germany in the late 1930's if you're swayed by what 'most people' are doing. There is lots of information about the alleged pros of masking, sadly not so much about the cons of compulsory masking, though a fair bit of censorship and mislabeling towards anyone who attempts to talk about it. You think Sky and the BBC and independant websites?! Wow.
  3. Personally, I'd say that compulsory masking is anti-social.
  4. What makes you think that fish/chips was our main diet through 2 world wars?
  5. Given that the current total world population is only 7.9 billion, it's certainly not the case that billions have the risk factors Cases being the operative word [not hospitalisations or deaths] A ludicrous stance- the majority acted out of self interest due to the fact that they believed [rightly or wrongly] they would fall victim to a deadly pandemic Excellent response. No it doesn't- they cared about one cherry picked negative [covid infections] and dismissed all the others- the consequences of, and purely of, the lockdowns and measures- ie the mental health issues, the destroyed small businesses, the damage to civil liberties, the children with terminal cancer who died unable to be visited by family, the massive numbers of untreated patients, some with cancer, which are likely to overwhelm the NHS, care home deaths etc, etc, etc. And then these selfish people who acted primarily out of self interest and fear, have the temerity to accuse those of us who did care about all the above, of being selfish!!!
  6. As you say, local services don't exist, so that's not relevant to the point made, which is that lockdowns [not covid] have creasted a huge waiting list of people who couldn't get treatment [during the lockdowns]; thus the lockdowns are clearly a causal factor when/if the health services become overwhelmed. Oh gosh, and they've always been so accurate in the past haven't they... No, he's right, for for people who have no pre-existing conditions and under 75 years old, serious health consequences from covid infection are unlikely [not impossible, some have succumbed [although they may have had undetected underlying conditions, but, the majority have experienced minor, or no, symptoms]].
  7. A lot of people have been unable to access medical treatment during lockdowns [including many cancer sufferers]. As predicted this has led to huge queues- these will continue for some time. Is it not a bit dubious to say 'add on covid admissions' [to the queues caused by the lockdowns] 'and we will have a real problem'?
  8. Attended for what? covid? or is it non-covid ailments that they've not been getting treatment for due to the previous lockdowns? Bizarre. Top comes across to me as one of the few people on this thread who aren't scared of the virus. He/she seems to have a good understanding of the fact that the virus is no real threat to anyone who doesn't have the risk factors that make them prone to bad outcomes if infected.
  9. What are 'the public' going to do? Prior to covid I considered the public to be overly gullible to, and, overly compliant to authority. Boy, did I underestimate the extent of it!!! I've watched the public not only comply willingly with and follow increasingly bizarre demands and limitations to their personal liberty, but then go on to demand ever more extreme rules, and, cry out for extensive punishments for anyone who declines to comply, or even expresses a concern that some of the rules may cause more harm than good. It looks to me that the public will continue to do whatever they are told to do by the authorites, however extreme or long term that turns out to be. Yes, there is. We've got several industries now, based on administrating lockdowns. Vaccine passports in various forms are highly likely, as are ID cards. Pubs/restauraunts are open provided you're willing to book on an app and then be prepared to jump through the various multiple hoops in place once you arrive, as for travel- be prepared to abandon your holiday half way through if your destinations risk level is altered while you are there.
  10. Anyone worried about a pdf being 'infected' can scan it with their anti-virus software.
  11. The National Basketball Association in 2020 was composed of 74.2 percent black players, all there through actual merit and ability. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_ethnicity_in_the_NBA A basketball court not only provides a very useful community resource and encourages young people to engage in healthy fitness activity, it can also in some cases lead to a lucrative career as a high level basketball athlete in one of the few industries where blacks are proportionatly represented.
  12. I'd say that for your point to be valid, you'd need to flip around the rest of the relevant factors as well i.e. if newsrooms there maintained an environment that only comprised 17% of white staff, and 13% of white leadership in a city where more than half of the city identifies as white, then you could make a case that she is being racist.
  13. Very similar to what was said to that minority who opposed slavery in the US back in the past. --------------------------- Concerning the argument that neoliberalism is ill-defined or hard to define or that there is disagreement about exactly what it is- the exact same kind be said of pretty much any political or economic system.
  14. Interesting that you assume the only way for someone to stand up for themselves is by looking physically scary.
  15. From the link- [people who are exempt] children under the age of 11 people who cannot put on, wear or remove a face covering because of a physical or mental illness or impairment, or disability where putting on, wearing or removing a face covering will cause you severe distress if you are speaking to or providing assistance to someone who relies on lip reading, clear sound or facial expressions to communicate to avoid harm or injury, or the risk of harm or injury, to yourself or others ‒ including if it would negatively impact on your ability to exercise or participate in a strenuous activity police officers and other emergency workers, given that this may interfere with their ability to serve the public Clearly, most people do fit fit into any of the above categories.
  16. Transmission isn't the main problem- colds and many other minor viruses are transmitted. With covid it's the harm it does when received- and it is very relevant that the health of the average adult in the UK/US is abysmal, with lifestyle diseases like type 2 diabetes, obesity, heart disease etc being rampant, and people with those conditions being especially susceptible to harsh effects from covid. Arguably, the best defence a nation can have against covid, is a fit, healthy population, with very low rates of lifestyle diseases like type 2 diabetes, obesity, heart disease- something to think about and prioritise if we genuinely want to tackle future epidemics rather than 'manage' them with economy destroying lockdowns. Incidently, despite all the focus on the number of deaths being attributed to covid- they are minute in comparision to the toll from lifestyle diseases like type 2 diabetes, obesity, heart disease- a toll that has been around for decades and looks to set to continue into future ones.
  17. But you didn't want to mention that in your initial post?
  18. Asthmatics can't smoke? Smoking is an addiction, by definition difficult to quit even if the victim realises they are damaging his/her health. The fact that she had a cigarette does not mean she didn't have asthma.
  19. Scenario- shop assistant/manager 'excuse me sir/madam, have you got your mask' reply- 'I am exempt'. A corteous response. A very clear response.
  20. Presumably the implication being that mask exempt people not wearing a mask are being selfish??
  21. I'll tell you again- they can [wear a lanyard]- they choose not to. They have good reasons for their choice. They are not breaking any rules. Anyone pressuring them to wear identifying symbols is breaking rules.
  22. Personally I've opposed compulsory masking from the start [for reasons given multiple times on this thread] so I can hardly object to that small number of non-mask exempt individuals who don't wear masks. To the extent that masks do protect, the fact that the vast majority of the population have embraced masking, is sufficient IMO.
  23. Your suspicion that some [you've no evidence that it is 'many'] non-mask wearers are not exempt is, of course, totally innaplicable in any specific case you will encounter of a non-mask wearer, as the nature of hidden disability generally precludes being able to judge whether the person is disabled by looking at them. There have been several posters on this thread who seem unable to grasp this, and, for whatever reason, they seem to have the same urge as you to insist that the disabled must wear an identifying symbol e.g.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.