Do you wear a mask in public?

[Conaeolos]

For **** sakes. How do you even know you have it? Look, man, I am 44, been a fanatic about my training and diet my whole life. 44 years old and still rocking abs. I am not worried about it for me. Hell, if I get it, it's quite possible I won't even know I got it. I am not at all worried about getting it myself. What I do worry about is having it, not knowing I have it, and giving it to someone with health issues that are at risk. So I wear a mask when I run into the store and other public places indoors. I don't like wearing a mask when I go to stores. It's hot as hell out right now. I hate wearing the damn mask, but I still wear it because I don't to risk getting someone else sick.

How the **** wearing a mask became political is beyond me. When you go to the store and other public places indoors, wear the ****ing mask. Tell your friends and family to do the same and wear the ****ing mask. Give a **** about your fellow Americans and wear the ****ing mask.

You are literally describing something that happens all the time, you just focused on this one. This one got attention for very specific reasons. It looked like it had a huge mortality rate, it looked like China was covering up something crazy deadly. It look like it transmitted much faster than normal viruses perhaps via asymptomatic carriers. We feared overwhelming hospitals, a Spanish flu, people dying in their homes. We all took extreme action, thinking we'd be saving millions of lives. Thinking such actions would make heros, as places that didn't lockdown or took weak action fell into complete chaos. The huge cost would be worth it in lives saved.

Yeah, it will not be counted in the millions. There are no heroes, just fools. The reason we had too many deaths was specific to certain regions - policy. The virus affects clusters of very specific people. Asymptomatic carriers and surface transmission mostly a myth. China was just trying to cover its economic issues through its latest crackdown excuse. Politicians will not admit this, of course, blowback is too great, so they count raw case numbers as if that will mean something, generously count death to make it seem a little more justified, then pretend if we just all wear masks, it makes it more real. It's a paper tiger. If grandma takes precautions, she is as safe as ever.

Alas, I am called the fool. You're the hero as you wear you ****ing mask. Can you imagine if we just did that from the beginning and didn't wreck our economy, but who was it saying that - oh yeah - me, in my mask. And the same people called me a fool then too.

 

[Fiddytree]

Right back at you. We need herd immunity not bs masks.

I don't believe in killing old people, disabled people, and Black people so people like you can walk around not caring.

 

[Drawdown]

That's crazy. In my area I'd say it's 99.99 percent wearing masks in public.

I guess it depends on your area. It is on the 90's here so wearing a mask just makes you that much hotter. Blacks, whites, hispanics, and Asians......seen em all ditching the mask in public so this is not a political statement for Trump. Some people have been having eye issues that might be mask related. Some have been getting yeast infections or other skin issues on their face because of wearing the washable cloth ones.

 

[Conaeolos]

I have a medical background. Do you? Obviously not.

Not goodnight. Do share that wisdom.

I have no medical background in the slightest. But, I have made a lot of money seeing where experts get things wrong, so be my guest and show me to be a dumb little simpleton:

Please, do tell, medical background person, what element of misinformation am I spreading?

- Cloth masks are designed for when you're sick to reduce your higher infection rate
- N95 masks are designed to protect at-risk individuals
- the risk is with specific vulnerable people that can be measured in 0.01%
- heard immunity in the general population is the best defence
- masks have negative impacts
- living in sterile environments are linked with higher rates of health complications
- If treatment has no known benefit over a control, it is not proscribed
- the genie is out of the bottle here, covid19 can not be contained and herd immunity will take longer with masks
- The government health officials have admitted to purposeful misleading the public in the past (masks not recommended as not make a run on supply)
- grandma would be less likely to die, in the general population with higher rates of recovered people and that being lower increases her risks and forces her to take more precautions - lowering her quality of life

 

[Eriech]

Oh? Well, I hear it's very very hard to talk to a dumb, mask refuser, like myself. So feel free to keep it simple for us simpletons.

I am just curious, so your logic goes beyond: numbers big & bad because virus, virus bad, mask stop virus, doctor says masks good - better mask up or your stupid?

I am assuming you realize: your cloth mask doesn't protect you, there are side effects of wearing a mask that make you more vulnerable to getting sick, you are very unlikely to be at a hospitalization/death risk level beyond that of the flu. People high risk are more than able to use n95s and protect themselves.

Thus, your theory is either you're virtue signalling to protect grandma in some complex attempt to make people around her act this way or preventing another lockdown.

So just a few questions to set the stage: why didn't we always wear masks or lockdown to stop getting sick? What is more common airborne or contact transmission? Does not widespread use of masks lower the risks of one at the cost of others? On a flu curve, at what stage does a random of high-risk population sample stop being related to total infections?

And most importantly:
We are so crazy as to inflect people with dominant/live strains of viruses to increase population immunity, even though there are side effects in a limited number of cases, but if masks and social distancing is so effective, why not just live in more sterilize environments? What possible danger does that prevent…?

And if you're going to argue, the mortality rate is so much higher, please keep our data out of it, use Singapore, where I am happy to speak numbers.

Not sure if we agree or not. Lol
The only purpose of masks is to let people know who see you that they should wash their hands, don't touch their face and stay home if the are ill.
The mask itself does more harm than good other than it's virtue signaling.
I keep several on my steering column to show solidarity with workers forced to wear masks when I shop. I am thinking July 1 that will end. I never did order the masks that say this mask is as useless as my governor.

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

 

[Conaeolos]

Not sure if we agree or not. Lol
The only purpose of masks is to let people know who see you that they should wash their hands, don't touch their face and stay home if the are ill.
The mask itself does more harm than good other than it's virtue signaling.
I keep several on my steering column to show solidarity with workers forced to wear masks when I shop. I am thinking July 1 that will end. I never did order the masks that say this mask is as useless as my governor.

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk

:lol: honestly after seeing I was such a minority on the poll I assumed all posters were on the mask train.

 

[JMR]

I'm a stockperson at Wal-Mart. We officially limit numbers, and we supposedly keep track, but I don't buy it. There was a period where the store was less populated, but for the past few weeks, It's been as crowded as it's ever been, and less people are masking up. One old man even tried to tell me that the virus was a liberal hoax---I didn't hold my tongue, and I'm glad he didn't report me; he must have been a proponent of free speech.

It's really difficult to change out the water pallets in a timely manner. People wait at the same four-foot section as if the available product is going to change if they just stare at it long enough.

Good luck to you. Jobs like yours are not appreciated enough, people always wanting what they want when they want it.

 

[molten_dragon]

What if you're walking outdoors in a somewhat congested situation, a downtown area for example, or the parking lot of a supermarket?

It hasn't come up. The supermarket parking lots near me are never crowded enough I've felt I needed one, and I don't really go to any other crowded outdoor areas.

 

[dave8383]

It hasn't come up. The supermarket parking lots near me are never crowded enough I've felt I needed one, and I don't really go to any other crowded outdoor areas.

Point taken.

 

[Ginger Ale]

Right back at you. We need herd immunity not bs masks. It's what you do for this type of virus.

You might have the authorities with you now, but the truth and data are pretty obviously on my side if you understand why you need to escape the narrative. It’s hard for political types to admit they made a catastrophic oopsie, they locked down unnecessarily, spend trillions, damaged millions of people lives and killed 10,000-30,000+(soon indirectly millions) people because they don’t understand math; the real mistake is it was bipartisan/international as not to be called out, indeed what can you expect taking bad advice from sources with terrible track records, who used fear to give us a lock downs where now we are in a position where backing down is impossible, all because it means admitting the truth with all its political consequences, this entire course of action was dead wrong. I get why Trump et al did it. I may have done the same(knowing what we knew then). It's looked very bad at the beginning, that's where the herd/prediction was running; it's too bad there isn't enough truth in politics for them be strong enough to admit a mistake and correct course. So here we are....new world. And let's all "wear masks" because we can't say the emperor has no clothes. f-that. That man is naked as day he was born.

I suppose silver lining at least some developing economies just got a massive opportunity to close some economic gaps. I personally feel like we just positioned ourselves strait for a dictatorship within next 25 years. And, no massive cloth mask wearing by healthy people is just outright making us sicker and more vulnerable(that's well known by every health official). We should get really worried when the authorities openly lie, but we will not. Remember when two mins ago, masks were bad, because "false sense of security" -- but really they admit now they were just worried about a run on the government supply. :doh

Just wondering, how long does this immunity you're out to get last?

 

[Ginger Ale]

I wear a mask, have all along. I don't leave the house much. I have made accommodations with my business, I'm self-employed so I can stay away from most people. My employees wear masks, so they don't infect a customer. I work a lot with seniors, they are Arizona's main moneymaker if you are in service work. If we don't get this under control, a lot of businesses are going to shut down. The snowbirds will avoid us, and that's a bad thing.

I am very familiar with Japan and Korea. I caught on rather quickly, looking at the numbers, that masks work well. They wear them all the time, and they work well keeping people's spit to themselves. Their COVID numbers were pretty low compared to ours and Italy's. Masks make a big difference.

 

[LosAngelesAngel]

Complete Protection

My Favorite

 

[PoS]

I do because its required where I am, but its not an actual mask though, more like a bandana with a skull, just like this:

 

[Divine_Wind]

I do because its required where I am, but its not an actual mask though, more like a bandana with a skull, just like this:

I wear a bandana. It still works according to the CDC: Use Cloth Face Coverings to Help Slow Spread | CDC

 

[ClaraD]

lol, technically no, I "rent" from a corporation I own which maintains my property with holdings across the country to offset my expenses, which lets me just say isn't easy with my wife horses. Owning a home is a terrible way to hold onto your wealth in 2020. On that point, I always said to people I wouldn't pay a dime in BS property tax either, they also said I wouldn't win...lies.

Maybe, I'll just have to become a unmasked recluse and send out my masked minions to acquire our goods :2razz:

if you don't pay property tax, you lose your property...even businesses or corporations, pay property tax...so, you're lying.

 

[marke]

This has become bizarrely politicized, but with more states imposing mask-wearing requirements hopefully the number of mask-wearers is growing. Are you wearing one in public?

I've not worn one yet. Two of my grown children have been sickened by the coronavirus and gotten over it, but not me. One of my kids who got the virus wore masks before and after getting sick.

 

[yankintx]

Absolutely. I'm not an idiot.

I snagged this from Twitter yesterday, and now it's in my signature. "A mask is not a political statement. It's an IQ test."

Trump failed that one back in April.

 

[Superfly]

For **** sakes. How do you even know you have it? Look, man, I am 44, been a fanatic about my training and diet my whole life. 44 years old and still rocking abs. I am not worried about it for me. Hell, if I get it, it's quite possible I won't even know I got it. I am not at all worried about getting it myself. What I do worry about is having it, not knowing I have it, and giving it to someone with health issues that are at risk. So I wear a mask when I run into the store and other public places indoors. I don't like wearing a mask when I go to stores. It's hot as hell out right now. I hate wearing the damn mask, but I still wear it because I don't to risk getting someone else sick.

How the **** wearing a mask became political is beyond me. When you go to the store and other public places indoors, wear the ****ing mask. Tell your friends and family to do the same and wear the ****ing mask. Give a **** about your fellow Americans and wear the ****ing mask.

Um. I think we ladies need to see photographic proof of this.

For scientific purposes, of course. Yeah, for science.

 

[Conaeolos]

if you don't pay property tax, you lose your property...even businesses or corporations, pay property tax...so, you're lying.

You're missing the point there; I am saying as a creative person, I don't see "fighting a law" as a black and white thing, where I have one binary choice, either comply or refuse. So yes, sure I am still indirectly paying property tax through another legal-entity, but not really, my taxable-benefit would be no different if property taxes were abolished tomorrow. I forgo the benefit of private homeownership, using my properties as collateral & annual income/cash flow from rental, but at what tangible loss? I don't require anyone of those, in fact, I instead benefit both short & longterm with a much better ROI.

I simply want to not be personally liable for property tax (et al) well living in a well-maintained home, owned/controlled by me with unlimited access to travel property, all with the ultimate ability to pass those investments on to my daughters when I die. I get all of those, as I said, the yearly cost to me is the same, the initial costs (not including time) equivocal. My hypothetical neighbour with the exact same properties, on the other hand, is personally liable for property tax and other expenses, year after year, every cent required to come right off her balance sheet, well not a dime changes on mine, who just invested once and need to declare fair taxable benefit in exchange. I suppose this is offset, as she is "richer" with her higher income from the profits of rental income to property expense --- however, unlike mine which goes 100% to maintaining a viable\healthy property portfolio. Her higher bank balance likely just sits there, not even tracking inflation, well she hmms and hawz over how to spend or invest some of it. Her renters often overlooked for upgrades and maintenance. All the while my investment is diligently beating inflation, my renters happy & loyal, year over year with the rarest of exceptions (i.e. this year going to be interesting). I thought of a creative way to remove the element I found immoral, well meeting the conditions outlined in the unjust law. I then advocate for reform, without having all the baggage of no home, outstanding delinquent debts, court expenses….

I believe usury is immoral. Doesn't mean I just refuse to use banks, require payment upfront in business, don't account for a payment schedule in price or never make personal loans that include interest. It means I do not feel entitled to a loan plus interest nor do I allow my businesses to operate on that principle. So-call that a proclivity to loan forgiveness or whatever you'd like. To me, it's fighting for my principle, well living in 2020 America. Masks laws are just another unjust law, I'll navigate as we go, and fight every inch well meeting the basic obligations(e.g. paying daily fines, which I'll get back in court eventually, just watch).

My morals are not decided by the corrupt laws of the state. My responsibility is to live according to my principles, which at times requires fighting unjust laws. That does not entitle me to just ignore them, any more than if we had a dispute, I am entitled to just overpower you with force. Disputes have more outcomes other than win-lose, which almost always in fact are lose-lose a little less. I strongly believe, in any dispute, one can find what the other party is truly requesting in terms of needs, and no matter how far apart our demands, it is a rare scenario where we can not both have our core needs to be met in a creative way.

 

[ClaraD]

You're missing the point there; I am saying as a creative person, I don't see "fighting a law" as a black and white thing, where I have one binary choice, either comply or refuse. So yes, sure I am still indirectly paying property tax through another legal-entity, but not really, my taxable-benefit would be no different if property taxes were abolished tomorrow. I forgo the benefit of private homeownership, using my properties as collateral & annual income/cash flow from rental, but at what tangible loss? I don't require anyone of those, in fact, I instead benefit both short & longterm with a much better ROI.

I simply want to not be personally liable for property tax (et al) well living in a well-maintained home, owned/controlled by me with unlimited access to travel property, all with the ultimate ability to pass those investments on to my daughters when I die. I get all of those, as I said, the yearly cost to me is the same, the initial costs (not including time) equivocal. My hypothetical neighbour with the exact same properties, on the other hand, is personally liable for property tax and other expenses, year after year, every cent required to come right off her balance sheet, well not a dime changes on mine, who just invested once and need to declare fair taxable benefit in exchange. I suppose this is offset, as she is "richer" with her higher income from the profits of rental income to property expense --- however, unlike mine which goes 100% to maintaining a viable\healthy property portfolio. Her higher bank balance likely just sits there, not even tracking inflation, well she hmms and hawz over how to spend or invest some of it. Her renters often overlooked for upgrades and maintenance. All the while my investment is diligently beating inflation, my renters happy & loyal, year over year with the rarest of exceptions (i.e. this year going to be interesting). I thought of a creative way to remove the element I found immoral, well meeting the conditions outlined in the unjust law. I then advocate for reform, without having all the baggage of no home, outstanding delinquent debts, court expenses….

I believe usury is immoral. Doesn't mean I just refuse to use banks, require payment upfront in business, don't account for a payment schedule in price or never make personal loans that include interest. It means I do not feel entitled to a loan plus interest nor do I allow my businesses to operate on that principle. So-call that a proclivity to loan forgiveness or whatever you'd like. To me, it's fighting for my principle, well living in 2020 America. Masks laws are just another unjust law, I'll navigate as we go, and fight every inch well meeting the basic obligations(e.g. paying daily fines, which I'll get back in court eventually, just watch).

My morals are not decided by the corrupt laws of the state. My responsibility is to live according to my principles, which at times requires fighting unjust laws. That does not entitle me to just ignore them, any more than if we had a dispute, I am entitled to just overpower you with force. Disputes have more outcomes other than win-lose, which almost always in fact are lose-lose a little less. I strongly believe, in any dispute, one can find what the other party is truly requesting in terms of needs, and no matter how far apart our demands, it is a rare scenario where we can not both have our core needs to be met in a creative way.

So, if you think it is okay to ignore laws you deem unjust...is it okay for immigrants to ignore immigration laws, because they are unjust?

 

[Conaeolos]

So, if you think it is okay to ignore laws you deem unjust...is it okay for immigrants to ignore immigration laws, because they are unjust?

Not to derail this thread, but my biggest concern with "illegal immigration" is it creates second-class citizens, not that those illegal immigrants (some who are family, fleeing Canada :lol are dodging the ridiculous arbitrarily of US immigration law. Second-class citizens are a bane to any society both morally and economically, even if everyone were of good faith - which is far from the case we have.

You may see those same second class citizens and think hey let's just give them the rights and freedoms as if by fate they were born in America. I just think that too simplified. America is built on people agreeing by acculturation on some fundamental concepts so that our diversity can coexist by us being more united than divided. Cultural norms and secure borders which unite us and make us more than just a passport. If we have any hope of preserving this principle, we need to limited citizenship. By incentivizing de facto open borders, we're just becoming a passport and economic region, which expands problems of second class citizens not addressing any core injustice. You would, in fact, be institutionalizing it.

So, again. Fighting an unjust law doesn't mean ignoring them. Plenty of ways to legally immigrate to the United States. No creative person has to break the law to comply with its restrictions.

 

[ClaraD]

Not to derail this thread, but my biggest concern with "illegal immigration" is it creates second-class citizens, not that those illegal immigrants (some who are family, fleeing Canada :lol are dodging the ridiculous arbitrarily of US immigration law. Second-class citizens are a bane to any society both morally and economically, even if everyone were of good faith - which is far from the case we have.

You may see those same second class citizens and think hey let's just give them the rights and freedoms as if by fate they were born in America. I just think that too simplified. America is built on people agreeing by acculturation on some fundamental concepts so that our diversity can coexist by us being more united than divided. Cultural norms and secure borders which unite us and make us more than just a passport. If we have any hope of preserving this principle, we need to limited citizenship. By incentivizing de facto open borders, we're just becoming a passport and economic region, which expands problems of second class citizens not addressing any core injustice. You would, in fact, be institutionalizing it.

So, again. Fighting an unjust law doesn't mean ignoring them. Plenty of ways to legally immigrate to the United States. No creative person has to break the law to comply with its restrictions.

Actually, there aren't many ways to legally immigrate to the US...Canadians don't even need a visa, so it isn't comparable and they aren't being hunt down by cartel with the assistance of the police or military.

 

[ALiberalModerate]

Trump politicized it just like Al Gore politicized global warming. Now both are a hot mess in the US while the rest of the world passes us by.

Al Gore did not politicize AGW, he just repeated the science. The energy industry and their lobbyists are who politicized it. The guy getting 85% of the science right on AGW is not politicizing it, its the folks that distort the science that are.

 

[Waddy]

This has become bizarrely politicized, but with more states imposing mask-wearing requirements hopefully the number of mask-wearers is growing. Are you wearing one in public?

I wear one, simply to put people at ease. But I doubt wearing a mask will change the course of this virus. It is eventually going to run it's course no matter what we do.

 

[Hawkeye10]

I wear one, simply to put people at ease. But I doubt wearing a mask will change the course of this virus. It is eventually going to run it's course no matter what we do.

Is there like only 14 of us who understand this?