LTS

I'm not in disagreement with you here. There are all kinds of options and at the moment so many are just options, not actions. Overall the key is to take a deep breath and then let it out slowly.

What's okay? Whose life is more important? To you, your mother-in-law, to the person whose loved one needs treatment, it's their loved one. You are both right and both wrong. There are many possible ways to deal with something like this. None of them are good. There is nothing good about this situation. It's an absolute mess. These are the types of scenarios that you don't plan for because people don't want to hear about it. They are the situations that when you do plan for them and tell people to expect the worst they dismiss it because they refuse to accept that something can have such an impact. "Your problem is not my problem, my problem is more important than yours." We largely live a life where its all about us and people we know and those we don't are irrelevant or at the very least not as important. Let's talk about moving people around so as to reduce the strain and impact on medical professionals. Let's talk about moving people around to distribute the infected cases to reduce strain on supply chain logistics and other related issues that arise when too much of one thing is in one area. Let's tell the tale of two cities here with Woody and North Buffalo who are each in different hospitals with vastly different experiences in patient composition. Does it make sense to subject Woody to patients from New Rochelle? Does it make sense to leave North Buffalo in the middle of an incredibly dense outbreak of the COVID virus and wish him luck? Hell does it make sense to make it worse? In a situation where you have patient A who might need treatment and patient B who does need treatment, who do you choose? The threat indicator would suggest that patient B is in a more pressing situation. All lives being equal, patient B gets treated first and if patient A needs treatment once patient B is consuming the systems resources, then patient A is an unfortunate consequence of circumstance. Let's complicate the discussion. Let's riff of what Woody posted above. Patient A may need treatment. Patient B needs treatment but has a terminal illness already. Do you consume resources working on Patient B at the expense of Patient A? If Patient A needs treatment after B starts do you shift resources to A? After all, Patient B is going to die from another cause even if you can get them to survive COVID. The situations are not as simple as one would like to make it. It's natural to get emotional and say, "My family member is more important." It's natural, but in the objective view of the world, it's not true. Certainly one could go down the slippery slope of comparing the value of a persons life relative to what they create in society. That's not a road I would go down.

Ask him if he wants to try playing goalie... and you need to practice your shooting. ?

Every time these things happen, I think we need to change the Idiocracy counter. Similar to the Doomsday counter, but this one counts down towards us fully realizing Idiocracy.

I can't imagine how this would work. In a system that rewards the crappiest team the best chance to win, how do you run a tournament where those teams are expected to beat the better teams for a chance at what should go to the worst team? Does the better team start with a 2 goal deficit or something? ?

While related, let's fork the discussion of what makes the US great to another discussion and let this be for political discussions about COVID. The discussion on higher education is outstanding but will be lost and confused in here (or the COVID discussion will). What do we think? Now, the stimulus bill should be an interesting topic. Is it right? Is it wrong? Is it too quick a reaction or is the reaction right but the scope of the solution a little too much to try and pull off at once?

I wonder if those who had already qualified will remain qualified and those who are up for qualification will be the only ones allowed to attempt it. Almost as if, you moved 2020 to 2021 in its entirety. No changing out any of the athletes.

This change in work force distribution is expected to lead to a paradigm shift in business. My work is directly related to providing solutions that can enable remote work forces. We are expecting a massive uptick in our sales. Our residential access sales have skyrocketed the past two weeks to levels we've never seen before. We anticipate that businesses will examine the cost of office operations versus the cost of enabling remote workforce with an allowance for operating a smaller meeting/collaboration space and end up settle on the distributed work force model. This should create some serious change in the office space real estate models and subsequently impact businesses that have largely relied upon large pools of office workers keeping them in business (coffee chops, restaurants, office supply stores, etc.)

Jenny McCarthy is an idiot. So I can answer that question for you with regards to me. The flu "vaccine" is not really like other vaccines. It's seasonal and it's a "best guess". Refusing to get the flu shot should not be compared with refusing to get a polio or mumps vaccine. The real question, with regards to a COVID vaccine, should one be formulated, is whether or not it will be mandated. The virus poses a serious threat to society. Anything regarding a decision would be purely speculative. That said, thinking through it logically, if it is determined that those who have had COVID-19 are no longer able to be reinfected then I would imagine it would make sense to only require vaccination in those who have never had it. Assuming it's possible to test for that situation.

I'm not sure what your first point is... As to your second statement. No, the common every day worker is the one who is electing the politician who passes those laws and regulations. Imagine if the common every day worker actually demanded honesty and good representation. Imagine if the common every day worker actually got into politics. Imagine if the common every day worker actually got involved in making change instead of just complaining about what others do.

After what I had last night I believe NY would look like Texas if the updated that map today. Hoooooo boy

Hmmm.. I've been there before. Is this something that would be normally available or a special event?

Because people love you.. very much. ? I have not.. I am also intrigued.. this is a thing?

So your illusion of choice example is not relevant. Your employer mandated you have one. Your employer creates the situation for you. You can choose to change jobs if you feel that strongly about it. I moved out of healthcare when they finally forced me to have a flu shot. Not ideal, but I absolutely refused to have the shot. Yes, earned the right. What people CHOOSE to do with that is on them. They still have to earn it. You act as though the common every day worker has never backstabbed another worker to try to get ahead.

I too am intrigued by birch syrup

Fair point... no guns. But yeah.. the insults are cool. I have not played Odyssey. Are you looking for single player experience in an FPS? I have played WarZone.. I liked it, but its all multi-player, battle royale. I played on PC but its cross-platform, etc.

I'll go as far as their sports franchises as well. I don't share the same opinion on the GM, but its' really not relevant to me. The Amerks, Sabres, etc. are all dead to me with regards to support. It's easy for me to avoid going back to a game and I'm already canceling cable (only had it for MSG) and now I won't have a reason to get it again.

Yeah. They should take a beating for this. I'm no longer interested in supporting them or their businesses.

So I should continue with my Gin & Tonic regiment?

1st bolded - this is why I don't think it will happen. China, as it currently stands, would not let it happen. 2nd bolded - people do buy Nike products.. all the time. They will continue. 3rd bolded - I agree, the problem is that there are never enough consumers demanding change. The other problem is that if China improved conditions the next country over might want all that investment from the businesses. The government leaders happy to look the other way as corporations line their pockets and trample their people. 4th bolded - despite popular opinion, CEO performance is a factor. The performance of the stock is critical to their livelihood. People get bent over a CEO having a golden parachuts and all that.. it's like getting a no trade clause in hockey. Someone wants your skills bad enough, they'll give you what you want. Your initial story is an excellent example of how things can and do work in the US. My problem is that these days, it's very different because of globalization.

No, they would pay the doctor to be a doctor who also had to clean the room. Most likely however, they would have folded by then. In addition, a doctor would likely find some other job before agreeing to clean a room at a janitors rate, but they are certainly capable of doing the janitors job.

Heh. There's a point where it can be ridiculous, but you can generally get along if you run, roll, and block a lot to get through. If you get too many people with guns then it begins to be difficult. Most of the time I find you can lure them away and just kill them. The AI isn't always the best. You'll get there.

For the most part absolutely nothing has changed for me. I work from home and continue to do so. The kids are home but it's like vacation when they are home. I have my space and they know not to intrude. The biggest change is what to do with not having to play taxi driver for the kids, but even that had already slowed down. The weather was crap so I didn't feel like going outside anyway. Right now, every day is the same for me. I spend most of my "free" time talking to friends of mine who are not getting through it as easy.

Without going into too much I can say that I agree with you. The problem is that a Union is often looked at as the appropriate response to corrupt business but much like in politics, Unions also become corrupt and amoral. It's the greed of the company versus the greed of the Union. Who gets to be greedy? You'd love for corporations to have some level of compassion for those they employ. Unfortunately the leadership of a corporation is responsible to the board. The board is responsible to the shareholders and the shareholders want their damn money. They are so far removed from any of the impacts that it doesn't matter to them if someone is getting killed every other day. Pair that with people in the US looking at the cheap goods and thinking, who cares if someone is getting killed every other day. It's not someone I know. We know all about animal abuse on farms, people abuse in other countries, and yet the vast majority of people keep on buying the products because if they don't have to see it, it's not their problem. You can put your garbage anywhere you'd like, except my backyard. Globalizaton of unions would be an interesting concept. Do you foresee that working in China? It worked in the US because of our culture and courts. I think it might be a harder achievement in China. I'm not saying it shouldn't happen. As for the phrase "the money is there to share a lot more equitably with enough potential for individual wealth to inspire innovation just fine"... I cringe when I read it. Someone/ some group has to draw that line of what is "too much". The entire process to define that point is a great target for corruption. It also would need some rules, what do you consider in accounting for the individual wealth? Is it property? What if the company owns the property and the CEO just gets to live on it? The loopholes.. they could make our heads spin.

The bottom line... who votes for these candidates? People. What word do you use if you were to take something away from someone who has earned the right to have it? I call that punishment. I don't follow your differentiation of wealth and money. But it's clear you have a disdain for those who create large, powerful, companies. Who is the victim? The person who chooses to buy from Amazon? You are correct, people only have power if they are mostly unified in a goal. This is how business works. Create a product, sell it to enough people who want to buy it, profit. What other model were you looking for? As for your illusion of choice... why do you need a smartphone? There are plenty of people who live their lives each day without them. You are blaming the people who make the product you choose to buy for making the product. Did you also yell at your mother when she made you dinner?