1
liberalwithasmalll 1 point ago +1 / -0

Ah, apologies I thought you replied to a different comment I made. No, I absolutely don't think we should all have to wear masks if they are 0% effective. But I agree with you, wearing a mask does shit all for your own health. Does it actually prevent you from giving it to someone else if you were pre symptomatic? We'll see I guess. There's some evidence this may be the case, but not enough. My point was more it has to be an all or nothing because I have 0 incentive to wear one unless it's mandatory for everyone else. And the data should be definitive that this will actually help to create these laws. That's not the case right now.

-1
liberalwithasmalll -1 points ago +1 / -2

You missed the whole point of the argument though. Wearing a mask does fuck all for me and I don't give a shit about you, so why the hell would I want to wear one?

2
liberalwithasmalll 2 points ago +2 / -0

Very good point, only thing I would consider is length of time is important. Grocery stores are quick interactions. But Barber shops are very intimate settings for a long period of time. Or bars, or restaurants. I don't think masks do anything in quick retail settings at all.

2
liberalwithasmalll 2 points ago +5 / -3

You can downvote this and I understand. I was very anti mask as well. But if it's possible that it's even 5% effective and you have a situation with exponential growth it could be worth doing. I was at my Barber's and he was obviously wearing a mask, I asked him how bad is it wearing it all day and he said "I don't love it, but it's given me my job back". What if this turns out to work, and we get to open up again. This should be a possible win for people who are pro business and freedom. A small price to pay if it works, and if it doesn't we'll know that pretty soon too.

6
liberalwithasmalll 6 points ago +6 / -0

No one seems to care about this, but this is a huge deal.

https://apps.cra-arc.gc.ca/ebci/hacc/srch/pub/dsplyRprtngPrd?q.srchNm=WE+foundation&q.stts=0007&selectedCharityBn=773125687RR0001&dsrdPg=3

WE Foundation charity was only registered (possibly re-registered) on January 1 2019. They have yet to submit a t3010, or if they have it hasn't been published yet. It's late enough after December 31 that they should have submitted and the CRA usually publishes by now. Possibly covid is delaying other charities as well.

But the idea that the Canadian government would hand out a sole sourced $912 B grant to a charity that's been around for less 2 years with no discernible assets or business activities is mind-boggling. There would be literally no recourse at all if money was handed out and stolen or misappropriated.

view more: ‹ Prev