5 ms·

I said "fuck it, I'm taking my life back" months ago. And then I realized how little that is possible. How are you going to protest your way into a concert th

by T-hawk 6y ago

I said "fuck it, I'm taking my life back" months ago. And then I realized how little that is possible. How are you going to protest your way into a concert that isn't performing? How are you going to demand your way into a university that isn't teaching? How are you going to riot your way into a Disneyland that isn't running? How are you going to force your way into a sports stadium that isn't playing? How are you going to disobey your way onto a cruise ship that isn't sailing? We are much more at the whim of our authoritarian overlords destroying everything joyful in life than we ever realized. We are no longer ever allowed to make personal risk management decisions.

hsbauauvhabzb 6y ago
Sorry if your government cares more about your peers’ health than your entertainment values. Thoughts and prayers.
- deathgrips 6y ago
  Why are you scared? Just wear a mask :)
- loveistheanswer 6y ago
  It clearly doesn't though. Obesity and heart disease have been killing far more people in the US than covid and yet Mcdonalds and Coke advertisements are everywhere inbetween television entertainment. Also note obesity/heart disease are among the greatest risk factors of poor health outcomes for covid. Why is there little to no mention of eating healthy and exercising in the government's health guidelines to combat this threat? There are countless other examples of bureaucrats caring more about money and power than public health - while putting on the appearance of caring for public health. See also: the war on drugs.
  - hsbauauvhabzb 6y ago
    Overeating and poor exercise only hurts yourself. The difference is that you going to a concert, contracting corona and passing it around our household/workplace may kill somebody completely unrelated to the initial risk vector, how would you feel if your neighbour eating McDonald’s directly affected your health?
    - nradov 6y ago
      Even before coronavirus, going to a concert, contracting influenza and passing it around could have killed someone. Influenza kills thousands every year, asymptomatic transmission is common, and the vaccine is only partially effective. COVID-19 is significantly more deadly but that's just a difference in degree; the same fundamentals still applied. So by your logic apparently concerts shouldn't have ever been permitted at all.
      - hsbauauvhabzb 6y ago
        Corona is substantially more deadly, and long term effects can be permanent, it’s also in addition to the flu. By your logic we should just let corona run it’s course? You’re willing to let others die just so you can see a concert?
        loveistheanswer 6y ago
        Do you think we should let group gatherings happen during flu season? If not, how much more deadly (be precise) would the flu need to be before we should ban group socialization? Trying to figure out if you're thinking in terms of a logical metric based risk analysis, or just emotion and terror of death.
        Rexxar 6y ago
        We can all ask ourself : How many time I would accept to be confined now to live one more day/week/month/year at the end of my life. Now we can use this ratio and apply it to our current choice to calibrate how much we stay confined.
        loveistheanswer 6y ago
        Isn't it better to live life fully when we are young and healthy, than to hide inside our homes in hopes for an extremely small chance that we might have a little extra time when we are old and decrepit? Seems like this ratio would vary greatly among such demographics.
gsk22 6y ago
> We are no longer ever allowed to make personal risk management decisions. Living life like there's no pandemic is not just personal risk, it's risk to other people and to society as a whole. If you don't understand that a year in, you're either not capable of understanding or you just don't care.
- nradov 6y ago
  In a society many things we do expose others to some level of risk, even absent a pandemic. That risk obviously can't be zero. So please quantify the level of risk we should be allowed to create for others.
gruturo 6y ago
> We are no longer ever allowed to make personal risk management decisions. Your freedom borders with mine - you should be allowed to do EVERYTHING which doesn't affect others without their consent. Ignoring COVID-19 precautionary measures isn't one of those things, and I am happy the joy-destroying authoritarian overlords took that choice from you.
- umvi 6y ago
  > you should be allowed to do EVERYTHING which doesn't affect others without their consent People don't exist in vacuums. Nearly every decision you make is going to affect society somehow. If you decide to eat fast food for every meal and become obese, that isn't happening in a vacuum. Sooner or later you will start putting strain on the healthcare system and if enough people do the same, the "joy-destroying overlords" are going to start taxing sugar and fat (or other agency-limiting measures) to save you from yourself. Is that the world you want to live in - where the government has to increasingly limit everyone's agency in order to save more lives?
  - mbg721 6y ago
    Also see Wickard v. Filburn: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wickard_v._Filburn https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wickard_v._Filburn
- T-hawk 6y ago
  People can't do these things even WITH everyone's consent. What if I and 500 of my friends want to have a comics convention? With everyone fully aware and accepting of any risks? Nope, absolutely not allowed anywhere in the entire damn world. It's right there in the US Constitution. "No law abridging the freedom of the people to peaceably assemble." It does not say "except in case of arbitrarily-declared forever-lasting so-called emergency." If you want it to say that, amend it. If such an amendment wouldn't pass, that's because it damn well shouldn't. This is freedom-destroying authoritarianism, and the frightened sheep like you eat it up. This is where democracy breaks, if 51% of people want to lock down the other 49% forever, the other 49% are fucked forever. If you fear contagion and think you need to stay away from me, that is on YOU to restrict YOUR activities. You do not get to restrict mine.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
mbg721 6y ago
What that really shows is how much popular culture depends on large organizations which might not agree with you at a given time.

by T-hawk 6y ago

hsbauauvhabzb 6y ago

Sorry if your government cares more about your peers’ health than your entertainment values. Thoughts and prayers.

deathgrips 6y ago
Why are you scared? Just wear a mask :)
loveistheanswer 6y ago
It clearly doesn't though. Obesity and heart disease have been killing far more people in the US than covid and yet Mcdonalds and Coke advertisements are everywhere inbetween television entertainment. Also note obesity/heart disease are among the greatest risk factors of poor health outcomes for covid. Why is there little to no mention of eating healthy and exercising in the government's health guidelines to combat this threat? There are countless other examples of bureaucrats caring more about money and power than public health - while putting on the appearance of caring for public health. See also: the war on drugs.
- hsbauauvhabzb 6y ago
  Overeating and poor exercise only hurts yourself. The difference is that you going to a concert, contracting corona and passing it around our household/workplace may kill somebody completely unrelated to the initial risk vector, how would you feel if your neighbour eating McDonald’s directly affected your health?
  - nradov 6y ago
    Even before coronavirus, going to a concert, contracting influenza and passing it around could have killed someone. Influenza kills thousands every year, asymptomatic transmission is common, and the vaccine is only partially effective. COVID-19 is significantly more deadly but that's just a difference in degree; the same fundamentals still applied. So by your logic apparently concerts shouldn't have ever been permitted at all.
    - hsbauauvhabzb 6y ago
      Corona is substantially more deadly, and long term effects can be permanent, it’s also in addition to the flu. By your logic we should just let corona run it’s course? You’re willing to let others die just so you can see a concert?
      - loveistheanswer 6y ago
        Do you think we should let group gatherings happen during flu season? If not, how much more deadly (be precise) would the flu need to be before we should ban group socialization? Trying to figure out if you're thinking in terms of a logical metric based risk analysis, or just emotion and terror of death.
        Rexxar 6y ago
        We can all ask ourself : How many time I would accept to be confined now to live one more day/week/month/year at the end of my life. Now we can use this ratio and apply it to our current choice to calibrate how much we stay confined.
        loveistheanswer 6y ago
        Isn't it better to live life fully when we are young and healthy, than to hide inside our homes in hopes for an extremely small chance that we might have a little extra time when we are old and decrepit? Seems like this ratio would vary greatly among such demographics.

gsk22 6y ago

> We are no longer ever allowed to make personal risk management decisions. Living life like there's no pandemic is not just personal risk, it's risk to other people and to society as a whole. If you don't understand that a year in, you're either not capable of understanding or you just don't care.

nradov 6y ago
In a society many things we do expose others to some level of risk, even absent a pandemic. That risk obviously can't be zero. So please quantify the level of risk we should be allowed to create for others.

gruturo 6y ago

> We are no longer ever allowed to make personal risk management decisions. Your freedom borders with mine - you should be allowed to do EVERYTHING which doesn't affect others without their consent. Ignoring COVID-19 precautionary measures isn't one of those things, and I am happy the joy-destroying authoritarian overlords took that choice from you.

umvi 6y ago
> you should be allowed to do EVERYTHING which doesn't affect others without their consent People don't exist in vacuums. Nearly every decision you make is going to affect society somehow. If you decide to eat fast food for every meal and become obese, that isn't happening in a vacuum. Sooner or later you will start putting strain on the healthcare system and if enough people do the same, the "joy-destroying overlords" are going to start taxing sugar and fat (or other agency-limiting measures) to save you from yourself. Is that the world you want to live in - where the government has to increasingly limit everyone's agency in order to save more lives?
- mbg721 6y ago
  Also see Wickard v. Filburn: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wickard_v._Filburn https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wickard_v._Filburn
T-hawk 6y ago
People can't do these things even WITH everyone's consent. What if I and 500 of my friends want to have a comics convention? With everyone fully aware and accepting of any risks? Nope, absolutely not allowed anywhere in the entire damn world. It's right there in the US Constitution. "No law abridging the freedom of the people to peaceably assemble." It does not say "except in case of arbitrarily-declared forever-lasting so-called emergency." If you want it to say that, amend it. If such an amendment wouldn't pass, that's because it damn well shouldn't. This is freedom-destroying authoritarianism, and the frightened sheep like you eat it up. This is where democracy breaks, if 51% of people want to lock down the other 49% forever, the other 49% are fucked forever. If you fear contagion and think you need to stay away from me, that is on YOU to restrict YOUR activities. You do not get to restrict mine.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

mbg721 6y ago

What that really shows is how much popular culture depends on large organizations which might not agree with you at a given time.