5 ms·

I really wish people stopped digging graves for 275,000 people and counting by being able to tell the difference between basic public health measures and fascis

I really wish people stopped digging graves for 275,000 people and counting by being able to tell the difference between basic public health measures and fascism.

FriendlyNormie 6y ago
I’d love to listen to you squeal while your face is peeled off with a knife.
BillGoates 6y ago
The problem with this kind of reasoning is that you put blame on a large group of individuals, without being a 100% the measure have any positive effect at all. This creates a dangerous precedent. Putting health before anything else will make the life we live impossible. But if you insist on being right, you should stop travelling, stop using electricity or any modern device. They all pollute and potentially will cause some damage to someone's health.
- GavinMcG 6y ago
  There is zero doubt at this point that mask-wearing and reducing the number of people one comes in contact with do have a positive effect. And your slippery slope fallacy is also unconvincing. I have a reasonable choice about whether to meet someone in person, but not whether to use electricity. And while both may be harmful, only one of them can be the proximate cause of the continued spread of disease and even death. The strawman you're building is that we put health "before anything else". Being absolutist and making any one thing a priority to an extreme degree can of course be problematic. But asking people to properly wear masks in public, closing spaces where people do convene and not wear masks, and expecting people to relate to others virtually or from a distance are not "putting health before anything else" - they're making health one priority. You're making up the idea that it's exclusive of everything else.
  - BillGoates 6y ago
    You not agreeing with my statement, is only because you decided for yourself what you see as a minor or a major inconvenience. But you cannot project your belief system onto others. People should always have the choice to decide what works for them or not. Political or social pressure in any way is unhealthy. Period. At this point saying that there is zero doubt at this is 100% untrue. To put it mildly, the scientific community is divided on this topic. Till now hacker news has been my safe haven from politics and propaganda. I am sorry to see that going away also.
    - GavinMcG 6y ago
      Now who's taking the extreme position? But your accusation applies just as well to you: putting individual choice before anything else will make the life we live impossible. Should I get to choose whether taxes work for me or not? Sure be nice to take advantage of all the public resources without having to pay for them, at least until everyone else catches up. Should I get to choose whether criminal law works for me or not? Sure be nice to take what I want and shoot anyone who tries to come after me, at least until we're all at each others throats. People who are taking unnecessary risks aren't just projecting their belief systems onto others, they're threatening their health and their lives. Social pressure has its place against people who threaten us, because it's better than not having a society at all.
      - AndrewUnmuted 6y ago
        > Now who's taking the extreme position? No. There is nothing extreme about: >> you cannot project your belief system onto others >> People should always have the choice to decide >> Political or social pressure in any way is unhealthy. You know what _is_ extreme? This is extreme. > Should I get to choose whether taxes work for me or not? Thinking that no people or entities make the very deliberate choice to not pay any taxes is not only extreme, it's blindingly and overwhelmingly untrue. We see people complaining all the time on HN about how Amazon, Walmart, etc., get away with not paying any taxes through their expert utilization of accounting, legal loopholes and insider access. > Should I get to choose whether criminal law works for me or not? Sure be nice to take what I want and shoot anyone who tries to come after me, at least until we're all at each others throats. It is indefensibly extreme to suggest this is not happening every day. I just wrote in my prior post how NYC's rapid increase in senseless violent crime is the actual pandemic here. This summer during lockdown I was walking back from the grocery store and got randomly assaulted - punched in the face numerous times - by a complete stranger, who took nothing from me before running away. This is happening all the time now - in all regions of the world. > People who are taking unnecessary risks aren't just projecting their belief systems onto others, they're threatening their health and their lives. You are in no way certified to claim who is taking a risk and what constitutes that being a risk. > it's better than not having a society at all What we have now is the absence of society. And it's the most wretched, inexcusably grotesque thing I have ever seen governments do to their own citizens. If this is the way life continues on Earth, who will truly want to live on it?

I really wish people stopped digging graves for 275,000 people and counting by being able to tell the difference between basic public health measures and fascism.

FriendlyNormie 6y ago

I’d love to listen to you squeal while your face is peeled off with a knife.

BillGoates 6y ago

The problem with this kind of reasoning is that you put blame on a large group of individuals, without being a 100% the measure have any positive effect at all. This creates a dangerous precedent. Putting health before anything else will make the life we live impossible. But if you insist on being right, you should stop travelling, stop using electricity or any modern device. They all pollute and potentially will cause some damage to someone's health.

GavinMcG 6y ago
There is zero doubt at this point that mask-wearing and reducing the number of people one comes in contact with do have a positive effect. And your slippery slope fallacy is also unconvincing. I have a reasonable choice about whether to meet someone in person, but not whether to use electricity. And while both may be harmful, only one of them can be the proximate cause of the continued spread of disease and even death. The strawman you're building is that we put health "before anything else". Being absolutist and making any one thing a priority to an extreme degree can of course be problematic. But asking people to properly wear masks in public, closing spaces where people do convene and not wear masks, and expecting people to relate to others virtually or from a distance are not "putting health before anything else" - they're making health one priority. You're making up the idea that it's exclusive of everything else.
- BillGoates 6y ago
  You not agreeing with my statement, is only because you decided for yourself what you see as a minor or a major inconvenience. But you cannot project your belief system onto others. People should always have the choice to decide what works for them or not. Political or social pressure in any way is unhealthy. Period. At this point saying that there is zero doubt at this is 100% untrue. To put it mildly, the scientific community is divided on this topic. Till now hacker news has been my safe haven from politics and propaganda. I am sorry to see that going away also.
  - GavinMcG 6y ago
    Now who's taking the extreme position? But your accusation applies just as well to you: putting individual choice before anything else will make the life we live impossible. Should I get to choose whether taxes work for me or not? Sure be nice to take advantage of all the public resources without having to pay for them, at least until everyone else catches up. Should I get to choose whether criminal law works for me or not? Sure be nice to take what I want and shoot anyone who tries to come after me, at least until we're all at each others throats. People who are taking unnecessary risks aren't just projecting their belief systems onto others, they're threatening their health and their lives. Social pressure has its place against people who threaten us, because it's better than not having a society at all.
    - AndrewUnmuted 6y ago
      > Now who's taking the extreme position? No. There is nothing extreme about: >> you cannot project your belief system onto others >> People should always have the choice to decide >> Political or social pressure in any way is unhealthy. You know what _is_ extreme? This is extreme. > Should I get to choose whether taxes work for me or not? Thinking that no people or entities make the very deliberate choice to not pay any taxes is not only extreme, it's blindingly and overwhelmingly untrue. We see people complaining all the time on HN about how Amazon, Walmart, etc., get away with not paying any taxes through their expert utilization of accounting, legal loopholes and insider access. > Should I get to choose whether criminal law works for me or not? Sure be nice to take what I want and shoot anyone who tries to come after me, at least until we're all at each others throats. It is indefensibly extreme to suggest this is not happening every day. I just wrote in my prior post how NYC's rapid increase in senseless violent crime is the actual pandemic here. This summer during lockdown I was walking back from the grocery store and got randomly assaulted - punched in the face numerous times - by a complete stranger, who took nothing from me before running away. This is happening all the time now - in all regions of the world. > People who are taking unnecessary risks aren't just projecting their belief systems onto others, they're threatening their health and their lives. You are in no way certified to claim who is taking a risk and what constitutes that being a risk. > it's better than not having a society at all What we have now is the absence of society. And it's the most wretched, inexcusably grotesque thing I have ever seen governments do to their own citizens. If this is the way life continues on Earth, who will truly want to live on it?