Well, yes. Lives are more important than lines.
Advertisement
by Galloism » Sun Jun 14, 2020 1:42 pm
Thermodolia wrote:Ya know maybe we should look into what NZ did because they are COVID-19 free
by Valrifell » Sun Jun 14, 2020 1:43 pm
by Thermodolia » Sun Jun 14, 2020 1:44 pm
by San Lumen » Sun Jun 14, 2020 1:44 pm
Valrifell wrote:San Lumen wrote:
And what should he do? close the state again, destroy the economy and lose his job?
I'm a master proofreader of posts after they go live. You should reread some because you might have missed crucial information (like my support for increased testing capacity over lockdowns).
But yes, if the choice is between letting a lot of people die and bankrupting the state (through low consumer confidence) and saving some lives and bankrupting the state (through mandated business closure), I'd hope he pick the latter.
by Cisairse » Sun Jun 14, 2020 1:45 pm
by Cisairse » Sun Jun 14, 2020 1:48 pm
by Valrifell » Sun Jun 14, 2020 1:50 pm
by San Lumen » Sun Jun 14, 2020 1:52 pm
Cisairse wrote:San Lumen wrote:
Therefore you wouldnt care if you lost in landslide and everything you achieved in office in your first term was undone.
If it saved lives? Yes.
I've lost (small) elections before. Bettering the lives of people is far, far more important than holding power. Anyone who says otherwise is an authoritarian and not to be trusted.
by Thermodolia » Sun Jun 14, 2020 1:55 pm
by Galloism » Sun Jun 14, 2020 1:56 pm
by Valrifell » Sun Jun 14, 2020 1:57 pm
Thermodolia wrote:Cisairse wrote:
We had community transmission in late December. If we were going to ban all travel to non-citizens, we would need to do that in early December. Nobody was taking the threat seriously then.
Something would have been better than nothing. NZ had community transmission before they shutdown the borders yet they are now COVID free.
Maybe we should have done the same and not left it to the states?
by Cisairse » Sun Jun 14, 2020 1:59 pm
by Solomons Land » Sun Jun 14, 2020 2:00 pm
San Lumen wrote:Bear Stearns wrote:Kind of weird that the anti-lockdown protests help spread the virus, the BLM riots don't, but Trump rallies do. I'm seeing a pattern here.
I find it very hypocritical at this point. Why should anybody listen to their executives orders when they pick and chose what types of protests and gatherings they will allow?
by Valrifell » Sun Jun 14, 2020 2:01 pm
Solomons Land wrote:San Lumen wrote:I find it very hypocritical at this point. Why should anybody listen to their executives orders when they pick and chose what types of protests and gatherings they will allow?
I personally think all of them should be banned. The Wuhan Flu is still a very real danger.
by San Lumen » Sun Jun 14, 2020 2:02 pm
by San Lumen » Sun Jun 14, 2020 2:02 pm
Solomons Land wrote:San Lumen wrote:I find it very hypocritical at this point. Why should anybody listen to their executives orders when they pick and chose what types of protests and gatherings they will allow?
I personally think all of them should be banned. The Wuhan Flu is still a very real danger.
by Thermodolia » Sun Jun 14, 2020 2:02 pm
Valrifell wrote:Thermodolia wrote:Something would have been better than nothing. NZ had community transmission before they shutdown the borders yet they are now COVID free.
Maybe we should have done the same and not left it to the states?
A strong, federally-led response would have been better, yes.
Alas, instead we have Trump, who sent the national guard to raid supplies ordered by the states.
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Ancientania, Austria-Bohemia-Hungary, Bilancorn, Durius, Duvniask, Landorom, Lysset, Port Carverton
Advertisement