User Tag List

Page 2918 of 2929 FirstFirst ... 19182418281828682908291629172918291929202928 ... LastLast
Results 29,171 to 29,180 of 29284

Thread: "Currants Bw..."

  1. #29171
    Administrator Letters's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    33,152
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Niall_Quinn View Post
    We're talking about people being rounded up by the army and put in camps. If you can find nuance in that then you have a rare gift.
    The nuance is in the reason for it, the conditions in the camps and the temporary nature of people's stay there.

    Saying people are being rounded up in to camps - and Wengerbabies calling them concentration camps - is emotive language designed to invoke shades of the Holocaust. Obviously this is nothing like that. There's a clear difference between people being rounded up into camps because of their race, treated like animals or worse in those camps and then being killed and what is happening in Australia.

    The reason people were being rounded up in Nazi Germany is because their was a policy to exterminate an entire race of people. I would argue that's a bad thing. The reason for the policies in Australia are because they are trying to contain a pandemic. I would argue that's a good thing. And their hardline policies have demonstrably worked - their death numbers are orders of magnitude better than ours.

    Overall do I think the policy is good or bad - if you want to be binary about it then I agree, it's bad.
    If there's a global pandemic which is airborne then there are different ways of handling that. One extreme is to basically do nothing, keep the borders open, let it rip through the population naturally, hope herd immunity sorts itself out. In the case of Covid I don't believe that would have been the right approach. Listening to testimony from people who work on the front line, this this feels like a situation which required some response.
    The other extreme is lock everything down. Close the borders, literally lock everyone in their houses. That is clearly going to work - if people aren't meeting then a virus is not going to spread. But it's not practical and is an unreasonable restriction on people's liberties.

    So I would suggest some middle ground is needed - which is what pretty much every country has done.

    Some governments - like ours - have in my view erred towards the former approach. It seems like Johnson didn't want to lock people down, he wanted to go full herd immunity before realising things were getting pretty grim and then locking things down too late. He did it twice last year. The result of that was we were for some time in the "top" 5 countries in the world in terms of deaths per million.

    Australia have erred towards the other extreme. Yes, it has worked. They've had very few deaths. But was it worth the effect on people's mental health and the economy? Was it worth restricting people's liberties for so long? I don't think so.

    What was the "right" thing to do? It's really hard to say, this is a complicated situation, no-one alive has any experience of dealing with something like this. But I think locking down harder and earlier would have been better. Closing the borders - or at least implementing some quarantine - earlier would have been better. Hopefully then we'd have got away with shorter lockdowns, fewer restrictions on our lives.

    But the underlying point here is that all countries were dealing with a situation. That is the reason they have done these things. Australia aren't putting people in camps because they've suddenly gone full Hitler. Johnson didn't ban weddings and close pubs because he wanted to stop us enjoying ourselves. He might be a self-serving incompetent oaf but he's not actually a tyrant. So sure, we can discuss whether our government - or any government - got things right. We can lament the way they dished out PPE contracts etc to their mates. You have a point about some of the legislation they have slipped through when no-one was looking. But to suggest that this is a "slippery slope" into an authoritarian regime is a stretch. There has been no slippery slope, the restrictions have consistently followed the data. Right now we can basically do what we want. Boris is doubling down on his "do nothing and hope it all goes away" from last Winter. He might just get away with it this year.

  2. #29172
    Pat Rice LDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    17,301
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    It's better to burn out, than to fade away.

  3. #29173
    ***** Niall_Quinn's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    64,344
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Letters View Post
    The nuance is in the reason for it, the conditions in the camps and the temporary nature of people's stay there.

    Saying people are being rounded up in to camps - and Wengerbabies calling them concentration camps - is emotive language designed to invoke shades of the Holocaust. Obviously this is nothing like that. There's a clear difference between people being rounded up into camps because of their race, treated like animals or worse in those camps and then being killed and what is happening in Australia.

    The reason people were being rounded up in Nazi Germany is because their was a policy to exterminate an entire race of people. I would argue that's a bad thing. The reason for the policies in Australia are because they are trying to contain a pandemic. I would argue that's a good thing. And their hardline policies have demonstrably worked - their death numbers are orders of magnitude better than ours.

    Overall do I think the policy is good or bad - if you want to be binary about it then I agree, it's bad.
    If there's a global pandemic which is airborne then there are different ways of handling that. One extreme is to basically do nothing, keep the borders open, let it rip through the population naturally, hope herd immunity sorts itself out. In the case of Covid I don't believe that would have been the right approach. Listening to testimony from people who work on the front line, this this feels like a situation which required some response.
    The other extreme is lock everything down. Close the borders, literally lock everyone in their houses. That is clearly going to work - if people aren't meeting then a virus is not going to spread. But it's not practical and is an unreasonable restriction on people's liberties.

    So I would suggest some middle ground is needed - which is what pretty much every country has done.

    Some governments - like ours - have in my view erred towards the former approach. It seems like Johnson didn't want to lock people down, he wanted to go full herd immunity before realising things were getting pretty grim and then locking things down too late. He did it twice last year. The result of that was we were for some time in the "top" 5 countries in the world in terms of deaths per million.

    Australia have erred towards the other extreme. Yes, it has worked. They've had very few deaths. But was it worth the effect on people's mental health and the economy? Was it worth restricting people's liberties for so long? I don't think so.

    What was the "right" thing to do? It's really hard to say, this is a complicated situation, no-one alive has any experience of dealing with something like this. But I think locking down harder and earlier would have been better. Closing the borders - or at least implementing some quarantine - earlier would have been better. Hopefully then we'd have got away with shorter lockdowns, fewer restrictions on our lives.

    But the underlying point here is that all countries were dealing with a situation. That is the reason they have done these things. Australia aren't putting people in camps because they've suddenly gone full Hitler. Johnson didn't ban weddings and close pubs because he wanted to stop us enjoying ourselves. He might be a self-serving incompetent oaf but he's not actually a tyrant. So sure, we can discuss whether our government - or any government - got things right. We can lament the way they dished out PPE contracts etc to their mates. You have a point about some of the legislation they have slipped through when no-one was looking. But to suggest that this is a "slippery slope" into an authoritarian regime is a stretch. There has been no slippery slope, the restrictions have consistently followed the data. Right now we can basically do what we want. Boris is doubling down on his "do nothing and hope it all goes away" from last Winter. He might just get away with it this year.
    Yeah, I didn't call them concentration camps - though I fail to see what relevance the name of the camp has. I believe they are actually called "National Resilience" facilities. LOL. So, anyway, I didn't read the rest of it because you can't resist framing the argument. When you learn that basics of honesty let me know.
    Für eure Sicherheit

  4. #29174
    Administrator Letters's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    33,152
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Exactly. When challenged you simply can’t defend your position.
    I argue with facts and data, you argue with paranoia and conspiracy theories.
    If you can’t understand that there’s a difference between a mugger stabbing to harm and a surgeon cutting to ultimately heal then I don’t know how to help you.
    You simply can’t understand nuance, it’s all black and white to you.

  5. #29175
    ***** Niall_Quinn's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    64,344
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Letters View Post
    Exactly. When challenged you simply can’t defend your position.
    I argue with facts and data, you argue with paranoia and conspiracy theories.
    If you can’t understand that there’s a difference between a mugger stabbing to harm and a surgeon cutting to ultimately heal then I don’t know how to help you.
    You simply can’t understand nuance, it’s all black and white to you.
    Delivered to you straight from the horse itself. It's not like they have a 100% record for lying, but I guess you are a trusting soul. A christian, I hear.

    But you have a fair point, I have a problem with finding the nuance in detention camps for law abiding citizens. Should I be seeking help for that? Or should it be the people apologising who book an appointment?
    Für eure Sicherheit

  6. #29176
    ***** Niall_Quinn's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    64,344
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    You're on the wrong side asshole. You know it, I know it. But you have an Internets to win so morality, ethics, humanity be damned. Rack up the points!

    And then go and kneel in front of God and tell him how worthy you are. Unless the church is empty, because where would be the point?
    Für eure Sicherheit

  7. #29177
    Administrator Letters's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    33,152
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Niall_Quinn View Post
    Delivered to you straight from the horse itself.
    It was data you were happy to use round about last October when you noted that the death rate wasn't out of the ordinary.

    (EDIT: Here's the exchange, it was actually last November:
    http://www.goonersweb.co.uk/forum/sh...=4687&page=415)

    At the time you wrote that, you were correct. I was of the same mind. I had a conversation with my nephew at the time. Throughout this he has been a "hide under your bed, there'll be piles of bodies on the street" kinda guy. I told him he was being ridiculous. While he was somewhat overstating things, he was more right than I was. I kept an eye on the data and the death rate grew and grew, it was something like 40% above the average by mid-Feb. The data changed so I changed my opinion. That's the sensible thing to do. What you do is use data when it fits your narrative and dismiss the same data when it doesn't. You do this with all evidence. Your bloke on YouTube is right because he's saying what you want to believe. My bloke on YouTube is wrong because he doesn't.

    I have a problem with finding the nuance in detention camps for law abiding citizens. Should I be seeking help for that?
    Well, you could try reading my post where I outline it. I gave you another hint above.

    You're on the wrong side asshole
    I'm not on a side.

  8. #29178
    Administrator Letters's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    33,152
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

  9. #29179
    Administrator Letters's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    33,152
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Niall_Quinn View Post
    And then go and kneel in front of God and tell him how worthy you are.
    By the way, this is literally the opposite of the Christian message. It's about God reaching out to us despite us being unworthy.

  10. #29180
    ***** Niall_Quinn's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    64,344
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Letters View Post
    It was data you were happy to use round about last October when you noted that the death rate wasn't out of the ordinary.

    (EDIT: Here's the exchange, it was actually last November:
    http://www.goonersweb.co.uk/forum/sh...=4687&page=415)

    At the time you wrote that, you were correct. I was of the same mind. I had a conversation with my nephew at the time. Throughout this he has been a "hide under your bed, there'll be piles of bodies on the street" kinda guy. I told him he was being ridiculous. While he was somewhat overstating things, he was more right than I was. I kept an eye on the data and the death rate grew and grew, it was something like 40% above the average by mid-Feb. The data changed so I changed my opinion. That's the sensible thing to do. What you do is use data when it fits your narrative and dismiss the same data when it doesn't. You do this with all evidence. Your bloke on YouTube is right because he's saying what you want to believe. My bloke on YouTube is wrong because he doesn't.


    Well, you could try reading my post where I outline it. I gave you another hint above.


    I'm not on a side.
    Yeah, we weren't talking about that little ramble you just went on, were we? I don't care about your imaginary friend. We are talking about the trustworthiness of the source based on the easily verifiable historical record and the inability of the "data" it provides to stand up under scientific (or even logical, common sense) scrutiny. But this has reached a ridiculous level now. It's a deep dive with a straight face into how Santa gets into houses without chimneys.

    We've had the human immune system disappear, the magic vaccine going from guaranteed salvation to irrelevance, the switch in hysterical focus from deaths to so-called cases, but above all else the censorship. In an open scientific forum criticism is paramount - it's the foundation of science. With "The Science" criticism has no place. We just accept "the data", regardless of how much science has to be thrown under a bus to do so - change the definitions when required, arbitrarily trash the protocols, hide safety behind a wall of corporate intellectual property rights, whatever it takes to drive the relentless narrative. Yet it's all good. "The Data" is not to be questioned because it can't be.

    I'm the one who changed my opinion, in a logical and rational manner. In the absence of information caution is sensible, discovery is sensible. At the other end of the scale, when information is available, analysis and the scientific principle is sensible.

    You've changed nothing. Still here hauling the establishment line, saying stupid things like being "allowed" to go clubbing is proof this is about health and not control. You can't even see how your own words explode your argument. Allowed to go to church? Allowed to go to the pub? Allowed to travel?

    Anyway, you have your new variant now which can be used to explain away every last inconvenience that has the potential to disturb utopia.
    Für eure Sicherheit

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •