Wait until you find out they're bombing Syria and locking kids up in cages still.

For the same reason small pox is returning as an emerging threat despite most of the population being vaccinated.

Leaving a percent of the populace to walk around each year and catch a new variant of Covid and acting as the main host of proliferation, since we cannot fully supress it like they did Smallpox due to 'muh freedums' means that if these same people can come and go freely into vulnerable areas they are very much putting people at risk.

I think you might reply 'I am ok with the risk they would have to face' but I hope you see why that is not an answer.

I’m going to need some kind of stipend if I’m going to be expected to teach basic reading comprehension.

How about you just never responded to another post of mine instead to make it easier for all of us?

And lets consider the Cruise Ship industry for very different reasons.

Lets imagine that Cruise ships seeing the majority of the populace vaccinated and only a small portion not would almost certainly opt for some form of proof of vaccination before allowing customers to board.

The risk/reward ratio being too high not to.

They see massive downtown and cost to any petri dish ship being put under extensive quarantine. They also face future customer loss due to reactionary customers wanting to avoid the 'recently infected'. They also face law suits from passengers now incurring massive costs due to quarantine, hospital care and other.

Any outbreak is a disaster for them.

You then want the State, in some form to deny them the abiility to manage their own risk so we go back to 'who decides for them'?

But moreso will you at least advocate for a National Insurance plan that indemnifies any and all businesses being sued in any regard in any of the areas the companies are prevented from managing their own risk?

You understand it would be problematic to say 'you cannot manage your own risk' but you are liable and must carry the costs of defending yourself if anyone sues in these areas?

So a taxpayer funded National Plan?

No dice.

I think this is completely wrong. We have more consumer choice now than at any time in the history of humanity AINEC. And this is mostly due to companies like Amazon. The discussions of requiring vaccines by businesses is mostly about public health, not social justice. Parler is back online if you have a hankering for it. Spotify shouldn't censor stuff, but that has always happened. Vaccine "passports" help consumers by making it easier for businesses to reopen with lower liability and gain the confidence of consumers in their safety. Twitter moderation, meh Twitter is mostly a cesspool, I don't have a problem if they want to have more robust enforcement of T&C.


I'm not a spokesman for the Democratic Party. I'm just giving my own opinion about things (generally pro-capitalist), which hasn't changed from what it was when Trump was president. I don't think Democrats have gotten more pro-business suddenly, although they have never been as anti-business as you'd think if you relied on social media or 2p2 to tell you what the party thinks about things.

However, what has changed is that the GOP has become less business-friendly since Trump. They have become much more protectionist and anti-elite. They are no longer trusted on foreign policy or immigration. This means that corporations increasingly have to decide which group of consumers they want to make unhappy.

And so your answer then is to make vaccines mandatory or just allow the unvaccinated to become second class citizens?

Luckbox, let me start by saying you're taking these clowns to town. This breed of passive-aggressive authoritarianism is the worst! Blech. One guy is signing his posts "All the best."? Uh, GROSS!

Their harping on technical definitions is funny! It's exactly what a bureaucratic bloated authoritarian government does. The micro imitates the macro!

Personally, I've come to accept that western society does not seem to feel the same way towards government and corporations that I do. Most are at most mildly concerned with things like social media censorship and the cozy relationship between corporations and government. As such, I frankly believe we are on the trajectory towards authoritarianism for a little while at least. More will hopefully come to their senses as the restrictions become more severe.

I think you are doing a good job planting seeds in this thread. It's all we can do. In my day-to-day, I'm not confrontational about it, and I try not to waste too much energy, especially on those who have clearly already made up their minds. But it's important to also not stay silent! I will be joining you in the tier two class of society

Ty. And he does that all his posts. Monteroy is ok though.

Ultimately yeah...it'll guess worse

And you're right there too. You can't change people's minds but you can change how they think about future situations.

By consumer choice. That's not an argument against safety regulations. Companies working together to put defacto ear muffs on me isn't my choice. For instance, I have to go through one of a few companies to find stuff on the web, and those companies dictate what I see

My answer is what it always was prior to vaccines and prior to this tilt towards tyranny we see now, especially on the far right.

Increasingly the far right wants to RUN businesses from behind the scenes taking choice away from the Funders, Stakeholders and Customers.

They want to dictate what they must allow on their platforms and what they cannot deny. Add to that now they want to dictate who they must allow in and what safety measures they can take.


This push for authorities creep was not something I recall ever being so mainstreamed as it is now. And it always by people on the 'Trump talking Points' side of any issue, curiously.

So my answer simply is to do what we have always done and allow business to decide on and manage their own risk.

The shirtless guy who cannot enter the pub and the guy dressed in pub clothes who cannot enter the fine dining establishment will, yes have to accept their status as second class citizens as they cannot freely exercise their choice in defiance of the private establishment rules and then also demand admittance.

At least now in anything resembling a free market society.

I honestly think people on that 'Trump side of talking points' are advocating more for a Chinese type authoritarian system and maybe they do not know it. A much more 'top down' decision making on everything from what you can post or deny to be posted to who you must let in and service.

Some 'secret' body making the rules.

You are a consumer and I am a consumer. How do we agree upon and set these rules for companies to then follow?

We've said to the Founders, Shareholders and other stakeholders of the company... 'You no longer have say, we consumers do', so how does this work?

Antitrust.

You realize that in China people are already scanning covid QR codes to access places?
Your post is so wrong it's hard to even know where to begin or how to break it down.
To start, you're confusing Trump's attacks on twitter and social media with what amounts to a civil liberties issues with covid vaccines.
The idea that the "far right" is trying to run business from behind the scenes is loltastic-- they already do run it. Whose side do you think twitter and facebook are on? That's the far right. It's the same people bombing Syria, pushing for covid vaccines, and driving wealth inequality to new highs. That's the right. They're already in the boardrooms and running big business.
You perceive Republicans as attacking corporations-- the correct answer isn't to rush to their defense though-- you're supposed to attack them from a different angle.

Idk about censorship on social media. Let them censor. Who should be allowed service is generally a left pursuit though, and the right is trying to keep people out.

How long do you think we'd last as a country with a completely unrestricted internet? It's also kinda why the whole AC thing is such a delusional fantasy--corporations wouldn't magically turn into angels with even less rules. They'd be like themselves now but on meth

Antitrust would have zero place in XYZ diner saying we do not allow guns in the premise, legally carried or not and we don't allow people who cannot demonstrate their vaccines are up to date to enter.

It is not about what YOU think is right or wrong. The business has the right to decide its own safety considerations regardless if you agree.

So you need to read up on what antitrust laws actually address.

I also want an answer to my question once you realize antitrust is not applicable.

Okay, sure, let these companies fliter the truth for ya.

The difference is, the right knows exactly what companies do, operate in their self interest, the left seems to not know this anymore, and are defending them as if they are operating with altruistic motives such as safety and banning speech people hate. Who is profiting off of vaccines, and who has shares in those companies? What does FANG (- netflix) gain by regulating speech almost in concert with each other?

I've been opposed to corporate power my entire life, so as I kid I hated the Republicans.
But Cuepee is suggesting that if want to continue hating corporate power I'm supposed to hate the Democrats.
I don't believe that narrative-- Republicans are still just as controlled by corporate power as the Democrats are. But that we've got people making odes to corporate wisdom here is great.

And???

Again I honestly cannot think why you think this statement is relevant?


At the beginning of the wrong, if in fact true, would be a good place.

No. I made a correct correlation that Trumps main talking points, two of which can be accurately paraphrased as 'social media should lose its discretion to enforce its own rules' and 'these things to deal with covid are bad' seem to become the things many people, as you are doing here, stretch the most irrational arguments trying to make and defend.

It is almost as if you don't care if logic or truth is part of the argument and you have more partisan goals.


Alrighty then.

They are pushing for EVER more control and you are pushing to give it to them then as you arguing to take it away from the businesses themselves and put that decision making in outside party hands you cannot define.

Guess then who that is more likely to be, once you strip it from the business themselves? Won't it likely be more coopted by these powerful groups.

Have you considered you are a pawn to them as you make your make your best case to remove the power from the Proprietor?



k

I did answer it. Consumer choice, but you can't influence consumer choice if speech is regulated, which is why antitrust action has to be taken. You counteract bad ideas with speech, but speech is being regulated by a few companies.

Well we already see where that goes with some of the companies that get close to unrestricted free for alls. They are getting sued into oblivion as people and companies are slandered.

So if we are going to require companies take that risk then we (citizens and gov't) better indemnify them. Again outsiders cannot tell them what risk they must take and then leave them liable for it.

Perhaps a National Insurance policy paid for by citizens to cover all lawsuit costs and damages for ALL businesses, IHIV?

We're talking about vaccine passports and you said the "right" wants to be like China???? I'm confused too.





Trump's two main talking points?
That's all you got out of his 4 years was stuff about Twitter and covid? And that is leading you to go to bat for corporate liberty at the expense of human liberty?

Well--over the last number of decades anyone moving too far to the left got taken care of for the most part That doesnt leave too much room to go many other directions.