It is an outright war right now. People need to realize this. It is war right now.
"Most of the American politicians, media and educational systems train another generation of people who think they are living at the peace time. False. The United States is in a state of war. Undeclared total war against the basic principals and foundations of this system. And the initiator of this war is the system however ridiculous this may sound. The world communist system."
You're right but the covid-19 is taking it a step too far. We don't need this sort of recommendation at all. If you replaced covid-19 with the flu and posted this 30 years ago as a parody, it would have been laughed at for how ridiculous it was.
If someone is willing to have sex with another person, they aren't concerned about covid-19. This comes across as a demoralizing fear tactic to tear lovers a part more than an actual health recommendation. It's insulting is what it is.
Interesting, I thought you were a little more pro-mask. While there does exist a group of "masks are completely ineffective, period" group. I'd say many of these people are just taking that stance because they're mostly against them having to be forced or socially guilt tripped into wearing one.
On the flip-side to these anti-mask to the extreme people, there are pro-mask people to the extreme. I've seen people try to blame a lack of mask use on everything. If a covid-19 stat is bad, it's because no one is wearing masks. To these people masks are the difference between a second lock-down or not and it's a do or die situation for them to such an extent that people are getting killed for not wearing masks.
The reality is that a second lock-down will be decided by the government and no amount of mask wearing or not will decide if there's a second lock-down because there is no actual metric by which to measure whether one should actually engage in a second lock-down or not. We could literally not lock-down anything, not mandate masks and open everything. There's no reason we can't. A choice of a lock-down is a choice and masks are never going to be the make or break to someone making that choice. The hysteria of mask wearing goes both ways, which is another reason governments shouldn't be mandating on masks and staying the hell away from them because they're too political for such little gain.
The core point of this paper is that despite researchers not agreeing on the effectiveness of masks, even slight effectiveness can have exponential results due to the way communities spread viruses. My specific concerns aren't actually addressed. The researchers of this paper would have used standard statistic distributions likely mapping virus transmission in populations not already expecting to social distance etc... (i don't have time to completely verify this but it's a plausible assumption on my part because that tends to be what researchers do) to assess probability and avoid specific adjustments for human behavior, as I indicated.
Regardless, masks do work somewhat seems to be the evidence. Somewhat of it working is better than nothing seems to be the sentiment. That is ultimately the argument. I would agree with this sentiment but that's an individual choice not something that should be government mandated.
Why were we not required to wear masks prior to covid-19? Why is it right for the government to force this on citizens? Viruses are a part of nature and we shouldn't be giving up our individual liberties over a virus with such a small death rate. If you feel covid-19 is a risk then wear a mask. It will still be effective for you. Yes, it would be more effective if other people wore masks but you'd also have less chance of dying from a car crash if more people rode bikes to work etc... It is not anyone's place to force masks on other people.
Just like with gun control or any other issue. It's a liberty vs. safety issue at its core. And how long do you want this to go on for? You're opening up the floodgates with these masks. What happens if there's no vaccine? Then what? Masks forever? What if covid-19 goes away? Now you've set a precedent that all people should wear masks to avoid viral transmissions so we should be wearing one for the flu, which also kills many people. What happens if there is a vaccine but compliance for the vaccine is low? You realize people will advocate that we keep wearing masks because low vaccine uptake + social distancing + masks is even better protection? Thus we've now cornered ourselves into a situation where the masks never end. Worse yet, people who want the masks to end will start coming up with vaccine passports to encourage more people to get the vaccine so we can stop wearing masks. Masks will start to be used as a weapon against people to force vaccinations.
The whole thing is wrong wrong wrong. The good from mandated mask use does not outweigh the bad. I am perfectly fine accepting masks probably help somewhat but it should be up to every individual to choose to wear a mask or not.
The evidence is fairly questionable on their effectiveness though.
While the evidence appears to indicate a reduction in coronavirus (uncertain for covid-19 specifically) spreading through droplets, that doesn't necessarily mean masks are very effective.
The evidence clearly indicates distancing works.
So here's the situation most people are going to be in. Either you're practicing social distancing and thus are already significantly reducing the spread of covid-19 or you aren't. If you are, then you don't need a mask. While yes, a mask would in theory be more effective if you were practicing social distancing to act as a second fall back. Since you're already reducing the transmission through social distancing, the impact of the mask is going to be minor. It's like wearing a condom when the woman's already on birth control. We could also all wear n95 masks. We could also not go outside. We could also, etc... At this point, it should be a personal choice by the individual not something the government mandates.
The second scenario is someone is not practicing social distancing. The only time people would be not be practicing social distancing is with friends/family, likely in a close quarters setting and likely for a longer period of time. In this scenario a mask helps but due to the nature of these scenarios and a mask's overall relatively small impact, it's only a matter of time until you get infected regardless of the mask. It's kind of like leaving your water-resistance phone in the bathtub for a few hours. Even though it's effective for 10 minutes, after a few hours it'll be water damaged. Given this scenario, masks aren't really that effective.
Then you have the issue of people not using the masks correctly. There is evidence of viruses being found on the outside of masks after people cough. The mask acts as a focal point for the virus to collect. When people readjust their masks by touching the front of the mask, something you can observe nearly every person required to wear a mask for any length of time do, they then run the risk of contamination, likely at a much higher risk than not wearing a mask due to the focal point nature of the front of the mask. This posses a higher risk then not wearing a mask.
When you combine the above with the fact that masks are inconvenient, are hot, cause rashes, reduce people's oxygen intake, reduce effectiveness of communication, increase anxiety and stress levels etc... the case for wearing a mask is pretty small.
If the government opened up business 100% and stopped with useless mask requirements or other silly regulations the numbers would come down. There is a fair point that some people have which is that if the government mandates businesses must stop down against the freedom of the business and consumer to choose to instead have the business open, it's not right for people to suffer from this. I would prefer if the payment came from the pockets of the politicians instead of tax payers. The reality is that the government has no business shutting down businesses for this pandemic.
Where is that from? I remember some mainstream news trying to push a narrative like that a while ago but I thought they dropped it. Anyone with half a brain (so not people who watch mainstream media) would know that a reduction in the average age who gets infected IS A GOOD THING because less people die.
Though, I suppose if your angle was to control the people, take away more civil liberties and sway an American election then it might be a bad thing.
Be sure to order some trendy political masks if you're going to be forced to wear a mask. You can just reuse these masks.
https://www.redbubble.com/i/mask/You-Are-Here-by-Art-Man/44319633.9G0D8
https://www.redbubble.com/i/mask/This-Mask-Is-Useless-Funny-Face-by-tronictees/48348022.9G0D8
https://www.redbubble.com/i/mask/This-Mask-Is-As-Useless-As-Our-Governor-by-GiftTees/48693369.9G0D8
https://www.redbubble.com/i/mask/I-can-t-breathe-by-MarcoPolok/47773924.9G0D8
https://www.redbubble.com/i/mask/Placebo-Mask-by-GentryRacing/48411258.9G0D8
https://www.redbubble.com/i/mask/Covid-1984-by-oliveribanez/47780281.9G0D8
Indeed, the left's ideology is entirely about power. Here is a quote that essentially describes the left.
“To some people the notion of consciously playing power games – no matter how indirect--seems evil, asocial, a relic of the past. They believe they can opt out of the game by behaving in ways that have nothing to do with power. You must beware of such people, for while they express such opinions outwardly, they are often among the most adept players at power. They utilize strategies that cleverly disguise the nature of the manipulation involved. These types, for example, will often display their weakness and lack of power as a kind of moral virtue. But true powerlessness, without any motive of self-interest, would not publicize its weakness to gain sympathy or respect. Making a show of one’s weakness is actually a very effective strategy, subtle and deceptive, in the game of power.
Another strategy of the supposed nonplayer is to demand equality in every area of life. Everyone must be treated alike, whatever their status and strength. But if to avoid the taint of power, you attempt to treat everyone equally and fairly, you will confront the problem that some people do certain things better than others. Treating everyone equally means ignoring their differences, elevating the less skillful and suppressing those who excel. Again, many of those who behave this way are actually deploying another power strategy, redistributing people’s rewards in a way that they determine.” – Robert Greene
That's basically the left in a nutshell. Any ideology that puts power at its core essence will never lead to happiness and will always be hungry for more power. That is why society must adopt objective morality again if we want to promote unity and happiness in our society. The wisdom from our ancestors for thousands of years should not be ignored. Christian morality is what built the western world and there is much wisdom in the roots of its philosophy and morality. We should adapt Christian morality for the modern era rather than forsake it as the left has done. Doing so would improve society immensely.
There really isn't a middle-ground though.
What does everyone want? Happiness, correct? Why aren't people happy? You seem to think it's money but it's not money. Let me explain:
For someone to be happy they need the following things:
-
Feeling of inclusiveness within a community of other people who share similar values and acknowledge one's skills and accomplishments
-
The feeling of growth and self-improvement.
-
The feeling of being being loved and cared for by another along with the feeling of loving and caring for another.
-
The feeling of having freedom to pursue the things that will make one happy without being obstructed.
-
The feeling of being fairly treated in response to one's actions; aka justice.
If you have these things, you will have happiness. Notice no where does it say having a house, or food or whatever. If you have those things above you such as liberty and justice then no one is stopping you from acquiring food, shelter, etc... You have your own power to procure those things and you are not obstructed from procuring them.
The problem with our society is that people are not focusing on the right things to find happiness and the things they are focused on actually lead people down paths that make happiness harder for people to find.
When you for example use the threat of violence of the government to tax someone against their will, you are treating them unjustly while also restricting their freedom. Now they may not be able to put food on their table or find shelter because they are not being treated fairly. A person needs to put in more work to get less from the work they put in.
When you hire based on sex, race, sexual orientation, etc... instead of on competence you are being unjust. This makes it much harder for an individual to feel a sense of acknowledgement for one's skills/accomplishments because they are being ignored in favour of acknowledging another person's sex, race, sexual orientation, etc... It is also unjust so you will feel your contribution is not being properly rewarded.
When we as a society push movements like fat acceptance and any acceptance of clearly negative qualities we are making it much harder for a person to grow and improve because now the metrics by which the culture measures "improvement" are not wired properly. Someone should want to eat health, go to the gym and then gain positive acknowledgment for that but when modeling agencies are now hiring fat ugly people instead, it doesn't reward the right behavior which creates a negative emotion in people who should be feeling happy about their hard work and accomplishments but they aren't because society is unjustly treating them for it by giving the acknowledgement and rewards to people who are making obviously worse decisions.
When you refuse to teach children anything to do with gender roles or worse you teach men to be like women and women to be like men (what is going on right now), eventually what happens is you have a bunch of feminized men and maculinized women; however, men are predominately attracted to feminine women and women are predominately attracted to masculine men so you make it more difficult for both men and women to truly find what it is they are looking for in a partner to fall in love with.
When you give subsidies to poorly run companies in the name of some sort of movement that doesn't promote profit, you are giving incentive to the wrong thing. Honest entrepreneurs feel now at a disadvantage because their competition is being unfairly propped up by funds the government stole. This again doesn't promote the right emotions to be happy. Entrepreneurs aren't being rewarded for growth and there is no justice.
When you create endless amounts of regulation which cements oligopolies in place by stifling competition you are again creating an unjust playing field for commerce which reduces justice in your society.
When you give people money for not contributing to society off the labour of those who do contribute to society against the will of those who contribute you are creating an unjust situation.
By promoting all this injustice in society and putting everyone against one another. Boomer against zoomers. Parents against children. Men against women. Rich against poor. White against black etc... All you're doing is creating division instead of unity and you make it much harder for anyone to find the feeling of community among like-minded individuals that all people seek.
You must promote a society that is just, moral and that works together to promote a unified sense of culture and values but at the same time respects individual freedom. That is not what we have as a society and there is no compromise here. Until the left understands what justice is by understanding that their push for equality is unjust there isn't much to discuss. The left must accept that men and women are different and have different roles to play in society, though either can shift between roles, most men and most women predominately are aligned to one such role and for the sake of love and family children must be taught how to best fulfill this role. Finally, we must promote as a society people who show strength in their contribution to the betterment of themselves, of others and of their society. Those that wish to destroy instead of build, those that wish to take instead of give and those that wish to hate instead of love deserve no recognition from society and they should not be rewarded. The left in their social justice crusade feigns weakness in order to elicit a sympathetic response but they do not have the moral high ground for they use they victim complex to seize power in order to benefit themselves in the name of benefiting others and this kind of immoral behavior tears at the soul no matter how good they think they are, deep down, they know they are ugly and that is why they will never be satisfied because the path they've chosen to act in and reinforce never leads to happiness. This is why there is no compromise.
Can someone explain the reasoning?
Whenever I look up mask effectiveness, I find limited studies supporting the use of masks. Most studies that seem to suggest masks reduce transmission are studies done where the infected was coughing into the mask. If you're coughing you have covid-19 symptoms and shouldn't be out in the public...
What's wrong with this study?
"Disposable medical masks (also known as surgical masks) are loose-fitting devices that were designed to be worn by medical personnel to protect accidental contamination of patient wounds, and to protect the wearer against splashes or sprays of bodily fluids (36). There is limited evidence for their effectiveness in preventing influenza virus transmission either when worn by the infected person for source control or when worn by uninfected persons to reduce exposure. Our systematic review found no significant effect of face masks on transmission of laboratory-confirmed influenza."
https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/26/5/19-0994_article
Why are we being forced to wear masks?
I'll give you some feedback:
-
I disagree with your opening statement. Part of the problem right now is that many people are seeking to maximize intersectionality points in order to get positive feedback from like-minded communities rather than promote profit in Canada. They are usually doing this at the expense of profit.
-
Inequality is not the issue. Injustice is the issue. Inequality being front-and-center has a leftist bias to it because that is their doctrine which they promote. Just inequality is fair but unjust equality is not. That is the biggest issue going on in our society.
-
Your comments regarding lack of affordability and opportunities thus leaving friends, family, communities doesn't make intuitive sense. If where you lived was affordable for your parents to raise you such that you formed friends and a bond within your community then why is it not affordable for you and why are there no opportunities for you? You insinuate the reason is lack of resources but the ultimate root issue is not that people can't afford things because of housing and cost of living, it's that people are choosing career prestige and materialism over family, friends and community.
-
Canada is not divided by the haves and have-nots. It is divided by the dos and do nots but it isn't even divided by this either. Most of the division going on in society is subversion of christian morality/values in order to promote wage slavery. We have a bunch of children who think there is no such thing as immoral behavior rebelling against what they perceive as restrictions on their individual freedom without the wisdom to understand the emotional consequences of their decisions. To teach people to see themselves has having or not having in regards to money/wealth is precisely the kind of thinking that never ends in well. People should be seeking love and family not materialism. Canada provides more than enough for anyone to find love/family if people would only accept moral behaviors that lead to this outcome instead of constantly trying to fill a hallow void through their constant desire for more of things that don't truly matter.
Your message is a typical centrist message. You believe yourself as trying to bridge the chaos and division between competing forces in society in order to promote some sort of consensus which will pave a better path forward. While this seems honourable, it lacks true understanding of what is going on.
The path to a better society for Canadians is quite clear:
We must promote liberty, justice, individualism, capitalism, Christian morality, and family values. If everyone embraced this, much of the perceived problems of today would vanish. This needs to be done at the educational level. A complete overhaul of the public education curriculum needs to be enacted at a federal level with the mandate to completely abolish public education within 20.
Solutions from the government include:
Closing the borders; decoupling from China entirely; a complete ban on foreign funding to any social cause. Foreign funds must only promote industrial projects not philosophy or culture; multi-payer healthcare system; reducing taxes, especially payroll and income taxes; reduce social spending, especially in education and any non-value add welfare spending; balancing the budget; reducing government regulations and subsidies in all industries, especially telecommunications, banking, agriculture, O&G and construction; all government laws surrounding class, race, gender and sexual orientation to be removed entirely from the books. Rip-up the charter of rights and freedoms; ending the Indian act and assimilating indigenous people into Canadian culture; Removal of gay marriage
With the education overhauled to promote entrepreneurship, personal accountability, christian morality, two gender roles, capitalism and the pursuit of liberty and justice after a couple generations, along with closing the border and decoupling from foreign funds subverting our culture's morality we would see much more unity and the quality of life of our citizens would rise immensely. Pretty much everything you think is a problem in society can be fixed by these suggestions.
You can't find a middle-ground with someone who's political ideology is to be perpetually unsatisfied with everything because they see the world through specific lenses that have perpetual power imbalances and inequality. Not to mention how when you gain your power from a position of playing the victim (a position of weakness) then you will always try to maintain that air of weakness instead of admitting your strength because to do the latter gives up the moral grandstand position you've taken to promote your philosophy. The people you're trying to compromise with are people who will never be happy because they aren't happy with themselves because they've been taught to view everything as a conflict and promote values which are simply not congruent with who they truly are as individuals.
There is such a thing as good and evil. The right thing and the wrong thing. You can't compromise with evil and people who choose to do the wrong things. Doing so is what led us to this path in the first place.
As a man who has done the same, I also agree with the concept that "more sex hurts your chances of a real relationship" but I would also say that any person, man or woman has the ability within themselves to put aside the "sin" (negative emotions and barriers) the "more sex" has led to such that it is still possible. As you say, it makes it more difficult but the easier path isn't necessarily the better path.
I would argue that the real problem in our society is equality combined with men and women's desire for hypergamy. Men prefer women who are relatively more attractive (from a physical and personality perspective) than them and women prefer men who are relatively better at providing (have more wealth/power/reputation) than themselves. More sex means more experiences which means one has a much better perspective on relative attractiveness and relative wealth/power/reputation which means one isn't fooled by inexperience. This can be a good thing because we see time and time again, people who fall in love early in life only to fall out of love after they develop a larger breadth of experience.
The fact of the matter is that by making women equal to men, we've essentially reduced the relative pool of attractive men from a woman's perspective in half. Not only that but for women to be equal to men they were forced to forgo self-improvement on physical appearance because they needed to spend more time/energy on education/career/work while also being forced to adopt masculine personality traits while forgoing feminine personality traits. This means from a man's perspective the pool of attractive women has shrunk roughly in half as well. People who have more sex get a better gauge of reality and it makes it much harder to fall in love when most women are unattractive to men and most men are unattractive to women. Only inexperienced people have the lack of perspective to fool their minds into falling in love; however, they always run the risk of falling out of love once they get a greater perspective.
That's my take anyway. I would be interested in hearing your take.
If someone attacks you and you defend yourself, you think the defender is the one who is at fault? The assassult you speak of is in relation to the employees instigating a confrontation with the man. I agree the old man handled the situation poorly but we're talking about a mask.
There's a huge difference between a criminal black person with a weapon who gets gunned down by police because he assaulted someone vs. an old white man who doesn't want to wear a mask that then gets gunned down because he assaulted someone who confronted him about not wearing a mask.
If you don't see the difference you're beyond help.
This is a perfect example of how the leftists create their own reality to suit their narrative and are incapable of critical thinking. People like Sumsuch are dangerous because their reasoning skills have been replaced by leftist cult collectivist propaganda which is perpetuated by mainstream media.
No one deserves to die for choosing not to wear a face mask when the entire perceived reason for wearing one is to save lives, elderly lives mostly. Reasonable people don't handle situations like this.
Looks like Mark Wahlberg is working on a new movie.