Biden's policies debated ( formerly known as Biden outrage of the day )

[brandon1827]

Are we really talking about Dems (and now many prominent Reps) working for vaccine acceptance/mandates and equating that with Texas forcing women to carry unwanted pregnancies?

If Dems can't say "my body my choice" while working for vaccine mandates, Reps sure as hell can't say "my body my choice" for mask mandates while supporting this ridiculous abortion law.

[wenchsenior]

Texas, aided by Trump's Supreme Court, in a gross abuse of women's rights has just shut down abortion provision. I bet Biden will do and say nothing.

Shame on the USA.

Biden's administration is paralyzed at the moment. Nor can Dems say "My body, my choice" when demanding vaccine mandates.

Transcript of Biden's call to Afghanistan President has been released.

https://www.reuters.com/world/exclusive-call-before-afghan-collapse-biden-pressed-ghani-change-perception-2021-08-31/

"In much of the call, Biden focused on what he called the Afghan government’s “perception” problem. “I need not tell you the perception around the world and in parts of Afghanistan, I believe, is that things are not going well in terms of the fight against the Taliban,” Biden said. “And there is a need, whether it is true or not, there is a need to project a different picture.”

That's hilarious, and it tracks with all the previous administrations' constant lying PR about how 'things are stable and/or improving...we just need a troop surge/increased funding/a little more time to train the Afghan army'.  I was listening to a reporter whose team had finally accessed all these internal state dept and military memos etc re: the Afghanistan war dating all the way back to the invasion, and there was widespread internal agreement that the whole thing was a complete hopeless shit-show with no chance to truly nation build or stabilize the place (without permanent American/Nato occupation) as early as the 3rd year of the war. Year 3 out of 20!  But nevertheless politicians of both parties spouted the same bullshit for decades, and poured pointless money into the place.

One thing I'll give Trump credit for...he helped set a timeline for getting the fuck out. And Biden stuck to it.

America just never never never learns about 'nation-building'.

My read on this isn't so charitable. So he knew full well the collapse was imminent yet pressured the Afghan government to "fake" like they were winning? All the while he was preaching Kabul would not fall so fast. Did they have any impact on people who were on the verge of leaving but decided to stay? maybe they stayed longer thinking they had more time... why would he do this, i'm not seeing any upside politically or practically.

I hope the news reports stories like this daily until every last person who wants out gets out.

https://abc7news.com/society/exclusive-3-year-old-california-boy-stranded-in-afghanistan/10990233/

Sadly most of the country will likely just forget ( to some degree) about this as life goes on. Close to half the country will attempt to bury this sad story down the memory hole as its impossible to defend.

Not sure how I was being charitable. My point was, the prevailing opinion in the state dept and military from very shortly after the invasion was that the American-propped gov't would collapse very soon upon the U.S. getting out.  And yet everyone constantly spun the situation as being far better and more stable than it was. Biden is no different in THAT regard.  Some of the sickly humorous details I heard from the internal memo reporting was that the bulk of the Afghans that the U.S. military was planning on training 'in the image of U.S. forces' were totally illiterate and couldn't count above 4! 

Exactly how soon the gov't would collapse was apparently debated, and it looks like the Biden admin believed they had several months before collapse, which was clearly a massive fuck-up. As to processing refugees/political emigrants, the Trump admin had set the deadline, but then also stalled or stopped processing all the visas for most of the people who wanted to get out (which was already hugely backlogged)...apparently this was sometimes through direct obstruction of processing, but there were also massive budget cuts to personnel and infrastructure PLUS a huge reduction in immigration caps. So by the time Biden got in and they attempted to hugely ramp up visa processing, they already had a huge backlog of people who wanted to get out who were never going to be processed in time to meet the deadline.  However, I believe the Biden admin has not acted to increase immigration caps (so much for opening the borders LOL).  So that is on the Biden admin, for sure.  At this point I heard about 100K people still hypothetically might want to get out, and at the rate visas are currently being processed (which is much faster than under Trump), it would take years to process them all. A lot of those people are fucked.

It's a clusterfuck. And it is a clusterfuck shared by an INCREDIBLE number of people in positions of power, starting with the decision to go in and nation build in the first place.

Were they talking about the Afghanistan Papers?

Yes.

[bacchi]

Yes. They are. Vaccine mandates make sense as long as you start with the assumption "there is a global pandemic." The way that masks guidelines have been handled and how vaccinated can still spread the disease (https://www.npr.org/sections/coronavirus-live-updates/2021/07/30/1022867219/cdc-study-provincetown-delta-vaccinated-breakthrough-mask-guidance) has moderates doubting things now.

Polling from a legit poller?

Also, what governmental authority has a vaccine mandate for all citizens? Are there police/troops/CDC thugs going door-to-door?*



* This is/was a topic on alt-right forums for a while. "Biden is sending CDC police door-to-door to give everyone the jab!"

[gentmach]

Are we really talking about Dems (and now many prominent Reps) working for vaccine acceptance/mandates and equating that with Texas forcing women to carry unwanted pregnancies?

If Dems can't say "my body my choice" while working for vaccine mandates, Reps sure as hell can't say "my body my choice" for mask mandates while supporting this ridiculous abortion law.

Yep. That's why we should drop both.

Yes. They are. Vaccine mandates make sense as long as you start with the assumption "there is a global pandemic." The way that masks guidelines have been handled and how vaccinated can still spread the disease (https://www.npr.org/sections/coronavirus-live-updates/2021/07/30/1022867219/cdc-study-provincetown-delta-vaccinated-breakthrough-mask-guidance) has moderates doubting things now.

Polling from a legit poller?

Also, what governmental authority has a vaccine mandate for all citizens? Are there police/troops/CDC thugs going door-to-door?*



* This is/was a topic on alt-right forums for a while. "Biden is sending CDC police door-to-door to give everyone the jab!"

Isn't Bidens approval rating on COVID dropping?

New York requires Vaccine Card and state Identification at every business. There is an authority some where then.

[bacchi]

Yes. They are. Vaccine mandates make sense as long as you start with the assumption "there is a global pandemic." The way that masks guidelines have been handled and how vaccinated can still spread the disease (https://www.npr.org/sections/coronavirus-live-updates/2021/07/30/1022867219/cdc-study-provincetown-delta-vaccinated-breakthrough-mask-guidance) has moderates doubting things now.

Polling from a legit poller?

Also, what governmental authority has a vaccine mandate for all citizens? Are there police/troops/CDC thugs going door-to-door?*



* This is/was a topic on alt-right forums for a while. "Biden is sending CDC police door-to-door to give everyone the jab!"

Isn't Bidens approval rating on COVID dropping?

Yeah, it's dropped a lot since April. As covid surges, his polling on covid goes down. Is that connected to masks or?

[former player]

Biden policy reversed. A win for property rights. CDC eviction moratorium over turned.

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/21a23_ap6c.pdf

I think his heart is in the right place but he shouldn’t knowingly issue edicts just to have them litigated in court. I’d like to see the federal government assist the states with getting rental assistance out to tenants that need it if they could.

It’s crazy that something like only 10% of the money allocated to rental assistance has actually been spent.

Landlords now have more control over their rentals than women do over their own bodies.

[EvenSteven]

Biden policy reversed. A win for property rights. CDC eviction moratorium over turned.

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/20pdf/21a23_ap6c.pdf

I think his heart is in the right place but he shouldn’t knowingly issue edicts just to have them litigated in court. I’d like to see the federal government assist the states with getting rental assistance out to tenants that need it if they could.

It’s crazy that something like only 10% of the money allocated to rental assistance has actually been spent.

Landlords now have more control over their rentals than women do over their own bodies.

If pregnant people start changing rent to the fetus, can they all it an eviction to get around this new law?

[nereo]

Biden's administration is paralyzed at the moment. Nor can Dems say "My body, my choice" when demanding vaccine mandates.

I don’t see how someone can equate a vaccine mandate to having the choice for an abortion.

The unvaccinated are prolonging this pandemic and fueling its spread - put simply hundreds are dying daily and thousands more are getting seriously ill in the US primarily because of the unvaccinated.

Pregnancy is a significant risk and health cost to the mother.  Terminating the pregnancy directly impacts the mother and (if you wish to make the ‘every fetus is a person’ moral argument) the developing embryo/fetus. My elderly grandparents, my immune compromised sibling, myself and others are not at risk when a woman has an abortion.

This is one of the worst false equivalencies I’ve heard in a long time.

The point being that the government can tell you what you can and cannot do with your body. And it isn't YOU that the Dems are worried about, it is moderates that would see that the idea is selectively applied.

It’s not a very good point. There is no “selective application” because the two issues are so vastly different  for all the reasons I listed above, and others. There is also countless examples of laws - most which enjoy broad public support - that limit what you can do with your body, especially when it creates a very real risk to others.

[the_gastropod]

The whole idea of "personal freedom" is just deeply flawed. Every action—beyond just thinking, I suppose—has some external impact that could affect others. This impact could be minuscule (making noise while walking) or it could be huge (drunkenly crashing your H2 Hummer into a pedestrian). We do a bad job, culturally, of acknowledging this, in my opinion.

To reiterate what nereo said: a woman having an abortion has a much tinier external impact than someone walking about unvaccinated for a highly contagious disease. I think it's completely consistent to believe "my body, my choice", with respect to health decisions that have a negligible impact others, and be in favor of requiring people to take small measures so that they don't negatively affect others. In some sense, that's the bedrock rule of living in a society, and the purpose of government: finding the sweet spot between maximizing personal freedom and minimizing the negative impacts on others.

[HPstache]

To reiterate what nereo said: a woman having an abortion has a much tinier external impact than someone walking about unvaccinated for a highly contagious disease. I think it's completely consistent to believe "my body, my choice", with respect to health decisions that have a negligible impact others, and be in favor of requiring people to take small measures so that they don't negatively affect others. In some sense, that's the bedrock rule of living in a society, and the purpose of government: finding the sweet spot between maximizing personal freedom and minimizing the negative impacts on others.

Unless you believe at some point in the pregnancy, an abortion is literally killing a human person... that seems pretty impactful to at least one other.

[FIPurpose]

To reiterate what nereo said: a woman having an abortion has a much tinier external impact than someone walking about unvaccinated for a highly contagious disease. I think it's completely consistent to believe "my body, my choice", with respect to health decisions that have a negligible impact others, and be in favor of requiring people to take small measures so that they don't negatively affect others. In some sense, that's the bedrock rule of living in a society, and the purpose of government: finding the sweet spot between maximizing personal freedom and minimizing the negative impacts on others.

Unless you believe at some point in the pregnancy, an abortion is literally killing a human person... that seems pretty impactful to at least one other.

Pro-life, anti-mask people do think this, but with the Delta variant having a R0 of 5-8 and a death rate of about 2%, that means everyone who is taking no precautions (while testing positive) is killing on average 1/5 of a person (potentially more if we include excess deaths). This makes the pro-life stance hypocritical

The pro-choice, pro-mask stance doesn't believe that this is killing a human person. And both views promote the healthiest outcomes for everyone involved.

One stance is straight up non-sense hypocrisy, the other is at the very least a coherent framework. Plus, we've known for decades that you'd reduce abortions a looot more by better education and free birth control. Limiting abortions will cause higher teen suicides, deaths by back alley abortions, and poverty. Politicians are using this, not because they care about abortions. We've seen plenty of stories of anti-abortion politicians secretly paying off their mistresses to get abortions. This is all to rally the Theocratic, Christian Sharia voters.

EDIT: I know of a handful of people who are pro-life, pro-mask and they readily recognize the hypocrisy in being pro-life, anti-mask. But these people are few and far between.

[Tyler durden]

To reiterate what nereo said: a woman having an abortion has a much tinier external impact than someone walking about unvaccinated for a highly contagious disease. I think it's completely consistent to believe "my body, my choice", with respect to health decisions that have a negligible impact others, and be in favor of requiring people to take small measures so that they don't negatively affect others. In some sense, that's the bedrock rule of living in a society, and the purpose of government: finding the sweet spot between maximizing personal freedom and minimizing the negative impacts on others.

Unless you believe at some point in the pregnancy, an abortion is literally killing a human person... that seems pretty impactful to at least one other.

Pro-life, anti-mask people do think this, but with the Delta variant having a R0 of 5-8 and a death rate of about 2%, that means everyone who is taking no precautions (while testing positive) is killing on average 1/5 of a person (potentially more if we include excess deaths). This makes the pro-life stance hypocritical

The pro-choice, pro-mask stance doesn't believe that this is killing a human person. And both views promote the healthiest outcomes for everyone involved.

One stance is straight up non-sense hypocrisy, the other is at the very least a coherent framework. Plus, we've known for decades that you'd reduce abortions a looot more by better education and free birth control. Limiting abortions will cause higher teen suicides, deaths by back alley abortions, and poverty. Politicians are using this, not because they care about abortions. We've seen plenty of stories of anti-abortion politicians secretly paying off their mistresses to get abortions. This is all to rally the Theocratic, Christian Sharia voters.

EDIT: I know of a handful of people who are pro-life, pro-mask and they readily recognize the hypocrisy in being pro-life, anti-mask. But these people are few and far between.

Wait, so because the pro choice pro mask crowd doesnt believe its not killing a human person that makes it so?

The law is on their side but that doesn't make the morality or science of it any different.

Is the science, not the law, settled on when life begins?

[sui generis]

To reiterate what nereo said: a woman having an abortion has a much tinier external impact than someone walking about unvaccinated for a highly contagious disease. I think it's completely consistent to believe "my body, my choice", with respect to health decisions that have a negligible impact others, and be in favor of requiring people to take small measures so that they don't negatively affect others. In some sense, that's the bedrock rule of living in a society, and the purpose of government: finding the sweet spot between maximizing personal freedom and minimizing the negative impacts on others.

Unless you believe at some point in the pregnancy, an abortion is literally killing a human person... that seems pretty impactful to at least one other.

Pro-life, anti-mask people do think this, but with the Delta variant having a R0 of 5-8 and a death rate of about 2%, that means everyone who is taking no precautions (while testing positive) is killing on average 1/5 of a person (potentially more if we include excess deaths). This makes the pro-life stance hypocritical

The pro-choice, pro-mask stance doesn't believe that this is killing a human person. And both views promote the healthiest outcomes for everyone involved.

One stance is straight up non-sense hypocrisy, the other is at the very least a coherent framework. Plus, we've known for decades that you'd reduce abortions a looot more by better education and free birth control. Limiting abortions will cause higher teen suicides, deaths by back alley abortions, and poverty. Politicians are using this, not because they care about abortions. We've seen plenty of stories of anti-abortion politicians secretly paying off their mistresses to get abortions. This is all to rally the Theocratic, Christian Sharia voters.

EDIT: I know of a handful of people who are pro-life, pro-mask and they readily recognize the hypocrisy in being pro-life, anti-mask. But these people are few and far between.

Wait, so because the pro choice pro mask crowd doesnt believe its not killing a human person that makes it so?

The law is on their side but that doesn't make the morality or science of it any different.

Is the science, not the law, settled on when life begins?

There's no point at which there is not life.  The cells are alive, the gametes are alive, the embryo is alive, the fetus is alive.  That's not a valid measure of when it is or isn't ok to terminate a pregnancy.

[FIPurpose]

To reiterate what nereo said: a woman having an abortion has a much tinier external impact than someone walking about unvaccinated for a highly contagious disease. I think it's completely consistent to believe "my body, my choice", with respect to health decisions that have a negligible impact others, and be in favor of requiring people to take small measures so that they don't negatively affect others. In some sense, that's the bedrock rule of living in a society, and the purpose of government: finding the sweet spot between maximizing personal freedom and minimizing the negative impacts on others.

Unless you believe at some point in the pregnancy, an abortion is literally killing a human person... that seems pretty impactful to at least one other.

Pro-life, anti-mask people do think this, but with the Delta variant having a R0 of 5-8 and a death rate of about 2%, that means everyone who is taking no precautions (while testing positive) is killing on average 1/5 of a person (potentially more if we include excess deaths). This makes the pro-life stance hypocritical

The pro-choice, pro-mask stance doesn't believe that this is killing a human person. And both views promote the healthiest outcomes for everyone involved.

One stance is straight up non-sense hypocrisy, the other is at the very least a coherent framework. Plus, we've known for decades that you'd reduce abortions a looot more by better education and free birth control. Limiting abortions will cause higher teen suicides, deaths by back alley abortions, and poverty. Politicians are using this, not because they care about abortions. We've seen plenty of stories of anti-abortion politicians secretly paying off their mistresses to get abortions. This is all to rally the Theocratic, Christian Sharia voters.

EDIT: I know of a handful of people who are pro-life, pro-mask and they readily recognize the hypocrisy in being pro-life, anti-mask. But these people are few and far between.

Wait, so because the pro choice pro mask crowd doesnt believe its not killing a human person that makes it so?

The law is on their side but that doesn't make the morality or science of it any different.

Is the science, not the law, settled on when life begins?

No, I'm talking about internal consistency.

Pro-life generally reasons that a woman doesn't have the right to take the life of a fetus despite the restrictions it puts on her life, money, and health because that fetus is equivalent to a person. While being anti-mask absolutely causes loss of human life and doesn't even have the health, life, or money costs of pregnancy. Wearing a mask is less onerous than pregnancy and saves lives.

If one is pro-life, then it doesn't make sense to be anti-mask

Pro-choice generally reasons that the health and best choice of both the woman and fetus is best left between a doctor and the woman. Comparing pro-choice and one's stance on masks would be like comparing a person's ability to get a cast for their broken arm and demanding that it's your right to take a piss on the street corner cause FREEDOM. One is seen as the private concern/surgery of a single individual, the other is a public health policy.

[Tyler durden]

To reiterate what nereo said: a woman having an abortion has a much tinier external impact than someone walking about unvaccinated for a highly contagious disease. I think it's completely consistent to believe "my body, my choice", with respect to health decisions that have a negligible impact others, and be in favor of requiring people to take small measures so that they don't negatively affect others. In some sense, that's the bedrock rule of living in a society, and the purpose of government: finding the sweet spot between maximizing personal freedom and minimizing the negative impacts on others.

Unless you believe at some point in the pregnancy, an abortion is literally killing a human person... that seems pretty impactful to at least one other.

Pro-life, anti-mask people do think this, but with the Delta variant having a R0 of 5-8 and a death rate of about 2%, that means everyone who is taking no precautions (while testing positive) is killing on average 1/5 of a person (potentially more if we include excess deaths). This makes the pro-life stance hypocritical

The pro-choice, pro-mask stance doesn't believe that this is killing a human person. And both views promote the healthiest outcomes for everyone involved.

One stance is straight up non-sense hypocrisy, the other is at the very least a coherent framework. Plus, we've known for decades that you'd reduce abortions a looot more by better education and free birth control. Limiting abortions will cause higher teen suicides, deaths by back alley abortions, and poverty. Politicians are using this, not because they care about abortions. We've seen plenty of stories of anti-abortion politicians secretly paying off their mistresses to get abortions. This is all to rally the Theocratic, Christian Sharia voters.

EDIT: I know of a handful of people who are pro-life, pro-mask and they readily recognize the hypocrisy in being pro-life, anti-mask. But these people are few and far between.

Wait, so because the pro choice pro mask crowd doesnt believe its not killing a human person that makes it so?

The law is on their side but that doesn't make the morality or science of it any different.

Is the science, not the law, settled on when life begins?

No, I'm talking about internal consistency.

Pro-life generally reasons that a woman doesn't have the right to take the life of a fetus despite the restrictions it puts on her life, money, and health because that fetus is equivalent to a person. While being anti-mask absolutely causes loss of human life and doesn't even have the health, life, or money costs of pregnancy. Wearing a mask is less onerous than pregnancy and saves lives.

If one is pro-life, then it doesn't make sense to be anti-mask

Pro-choice generally reasons that the health and best choice of both the woman and fetus is best left between a doctor and the woman. Comparing pro-choice and one's stance on masks would be like comparing a person's ability to get a cast for their broken arm and demanding that it's your right to take a piss on the street corner cause FREEDOM. One is seen as the private concern/surgery of a single individual, the other is a public health policy.

I dont think that analogy fits very well either. There is a slight overlap but its not quite the same. I mean we could go deep down the path of how dare people drive when they could walk. Walking is safe, driving kills. It would be endless. So im with you on that.

[PDXTabs]

Pro-choice generally reasons that the health and best choice of both the woman and fetus is best left between a doctor and the woman. Comparing pro-choice and one's stance on masks would be like comparing a person's ability to get a cast for their broken arm and demanding that it's your right to take a piss on the street corner cause FREEDOM. One is seen as the private concern/surgery of a single individual, the other is a public health policy.

Since this thread has clearly gone off topic from Biden policies I just wanted to declare myself as pro-choice, pro-vax, mask-neutral, and pro-pissing on street corners.

[gentmach]

Biden's administration is paralyzed at the moment. Nor can Dems say "My body, my choice" when demanding vaccine mandates.

I don’t see how someone can equate a vaccine mandate to having the choice for an abortion.

The unvaccinated are prolonging this pandemic and fueling its spread - put simply hundreds are dying daily and thousands more are getting seriously ill in the US primarily because of the unvaccinated.

Pregnancy is a significant risk and health cost to the mother.  Terminating the pregnancy directly impacts the mother and (if you wish to make the ‘every fetus is a person’ moral argument) the developing embryo/fetus. My elderly grandparents, my immune compromised sibling, myself and others are not at risk when a woman has an abortion.

This is one of the worst false equivalencies I’ve heard in a long time.

The point being that the government can tell you what you can and cannot do with your body. And it isn't YOU that the Dems are worried about, it is moderates that would see that the idea is selectively applied.

It’s not a very good point. There is no “selective application” because the two issues are so vastly different  for all the reasons I listed above, and others. There is also countless examples of laws - most which enjoy broad public support - that limit what you can do with your body, especially when it creates a very real risk to others.

Pro-choice is an individualist stance. A woman would ideally know what would be the best for her health.

Vaccine mandates are a group stance. The group knows better than the individual.

Right now a woman could have a reasonable objection to these vaccines and she would have to get them despite those objections.

Seems like they only have control over their reproductive organs and not their entire body.

Pro-choice generally reasons that the health and best choice of both the woman and fetus is best left between a doctor and the woman. Comparing pro-choice and one's stance on masks would be like comparing a person's ability to get a cast for their broken arm and demanding that it's your right to take a piss on the street corner cause FREEDOM. One is seen as the private concern/surgery of a single individual, the other is a public health policy.

Since this thread has clearly gone off topic from Biden policies I just wanted to declare myself as pro-choice, pro-vax, mask-neutral, and pro-pissing on street corners.

To get back on track, Manchin has decided to oppose the 3.5 trillion dollar infrastructure bill.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/joe-manchin-says-he-will-oppose-a-2435-trillion-budget-bill/ar-AAO2fZU

[former player]

Pro-choice is an individualist stance. A woman would ideally know what would be the best for her health.

Vaccine mandates are a group stance. The group knows better than the individual.

Right now a woman could have a reasonable objection to these vaccines and she would have to get them despite those objections.

Seems like they only have control over their reproductive organs and not their entire body.

Are there places in the States where there is an absolute legal obligation to have a vaccine?  Outside possibly the People's Republic of China I'm not aware of that in most countries.  Certainly in mine the vaccine has been offered free and so far take up is close to 90% of over 12s but it's not a crime to refuse, although refusing might limit some employment and entertainment options.

[six-car-habit]

Texas, aided by Trump's Supreme Court, in a gross abuse of women's rights has just shut down abortion provision. I bet Biden will do and say nothing.

Shame on the USA.

 Looks like you lose your bet....

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/us-supreme-court-declines-block-texas-abortion-ban-2021-09-02/
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/biden-blasts-supreme-court-inaction-texas-abortion-law/story?id=79790642

[former player]

Texas, aided by Trump's Supreme Court, in a gross abuse of women's rights has just shut down abortion provision. I bet Biden will do and say nothing.

Shame on the USA.

 Looks like you lose your bet....

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/us-supreme-court-declines-block-texas-abortion-ban-2021-09-02/
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/biden-blasts-supreme-court-inaction-texas-abortion-law/story?id=79790642

All he's done so far is to ask some civil servants to take a look at the situation.  When women in Texas can freely get abortions because of something Biden's done then I'll have lost my bet.  I'm not holding my breath.  And in the meantime, for as long as it takes, it's women in Texas who are in a dreadful situation.

[nereo]

To get back on track, Manchin has decided to oppose the 3.5 trillion dollar infrastructure bill.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/joe-manchin-says-he-will-oppose-a-2435-trillion-budget-bill/ar-AAO2fZU

I don’t believe you read past the headline of the article you linked. Manchin has called for “a strategic pause” - essentially more time to read, analyze and debate what is by all fairness an absolutely massive piece of legislation.

It’s also not out of character for him to slow the process down, gain some political leverage within his own party, and then fall in line right towards the end.  It’s not unlike what Collins and Murkowsky did numerous times under the previous administration.

[gentmach]

Pro-choice is an individualist stance. A woman would ideally know what would be the best for her health.

Vaccine mandates are a group stance. The group knows better than the individual.

Right now a woman could have a reasonable objection to these vaccines and she would have to get them despite those objections.

Seems like they only have control over their reproductive organs and not their entire body.

Are there places in the States where there is an absolute legal obligation to have a vaccine?  Outside possibly the People's Republic of China I'm not aware of that in most countries.  Certainly in mine the vaccine has been offered free and so far take up is close to 90% of over 12s but it's not a crime to refuse, although refusing might limit some employment and entertainment options.

New York City has mandated you need the vaccine card and a state id in order to shop there.

Louis Rossman's series of videos on it.
https://youtu.be/3roD8cKdJlY
https://youtu.be/Z5-TQglgPj4

Also corporations are making the vaccine mandatory. Some are hesitant because it will lead to staffing shortages.
https://www.wjhl.com/local-coronavirus-coverage/ballad-ceo-nursing-shortage-one-reason-no-employee-covid-vaccine-mandate-yet/

So if you wish to participate in society you will have to get the jab.

[MudPuppy]

Can you link me some more info, @gentmach. I knew about indoor dining, fitness, and entertainment (all of these are optional activities) but not about shopping. My googling isn’t turning up anything useful.

As far as corporations, that’s not the government, that’s a business (which is legally free to make such decisions) and is not a data point that support your earlier assertion.

[the_gastropod]

Can confirm: not true. I’ve had my vaccination status checked one time at one restaurant this year.

[LennStar]

You can't do shopping for the simple reason that there are people who for medical reason can't get the vaccine, and you can't put the diagnosis of this to a cashier. Or the decision if the medical papers are forged or not, even if the cashier could demand them, which he can't.

[Tyler durden]

You can't do shopping for the simple reason that there are people who for medical reason can't get the vaccine, and you can't put the diagnosis of this to a cashier. Or the decision if the medical papers are forged or not, even if the cashier could demand them, which he can't.

We ask cashiers to refuse service all the time based on providing papers. We also hold them responsible to determine if its forged.

See: tobacco and alcohol.

[PDXTabs]

You can't do shopping for the simple reason that there are people who for medical reason can't get the vaccine, and you can't put the diagnosis of this to a cashier. Or the decision if the medical papers are forged or not, even if the cashier could demand them, which he can't.

We ask cashiers to refuse service all the time based on providing papers. We also hold them responsible to determine if its forged.

See: tobacco and alcohol.

I completely agree for institutions licensed to sell liquor. For other businesses, like a plant store, asking them to police documents etc is totally out of the norm.

[Cool Friend]

Then I have good news for you: that is not what the NYC mandate says. Here are the businesses you need to show vaccination proof to patronize or work at.

Indoor dining
Includes restaurants, catering halls, event spaces, hotel banquet rooms, bars, nightclubs, cafeterias, grocery stores with indoor dining, coffee shops and fast food or quick service with indoor dining

Indoor fitness
Includes gyms, fitness centers, fitness classes, pools, indoor studios and dance studios

Indoor entertainment
Includes movie theaters, music and concert venues, museums, aquariums and zoos, professional sports arenas, indoor stadiums, convention centers, exhibition halls, performing arts theaters, bowling alleys, arcades, pool and billiard halls, recreational game centers, adult entertainment and indoor play areas

[PDXTabs]

Then I have good news for you: that is not what the NYC mandate says. Here are the businesses you need to show vaccination proof to patronize or work at.

Indoor dining
Includes restaurants, catering halls, event spaces, hotel banquet rooms, bars, nightclubs, cafeterias, grocery stores with indoor dining, coffee shops and fast food or quick service with indoor dining

Indoor entertainment
Includes movie theaters, music and concert venues, museums, aquariums and zoos, professional sports arenas, indoor stadiums, convention centers, exhibition halls, performing arts theaters, bowling alleys, arcades, pool and billiard halls, recreational game centers, adult entertainment and indoor play areas

I'm not sure who you were replying to, but requiring coffee shops and zoos to validate vaccination status is absolutely a change to the status quo. Most coffee shops don't have liquor licenses and their staff haven't been trained in document forgery identification. Along those lines, at my local zoo the people selling you the tickets might be 16 years old and as such do not qualify to take the OLCC training although there might be some people in the food court who have gone through it.

[Cool Friend]

What is your point?

[PDXTabs]

What is your point?

That it is a sudden new tax on businesses that have neither the staff nor the training to enforce. In my state you can work at a coffee shop at 14 years old, AFAIK. How much do you trust that 14 year old to argue with a 58 year old about their documents?

[Cool Friend]

About as much I trust 18 year olds to card people for alcohol or 16 year olds to card people trying to see an R-rated movie or buy a M-rated video game. Which is to say, “enough.”

It takes three seconds to check the vaccination card. Most businesses in our city accept the minor inconvenience because it means helping to stop the spread of a virus that’s sickening and/or killing their customers. A small amount of people will forge, and be charged with a felony if caught, as some already have.

[PDXTabs]

About as much I trust 18 year olds to card people for alcohol or 16 year olds to card people trying to see an R-rated movie or buy a M-rated video game. Which is to say, “enough.”

It takes three seconds to check the vaccination card. Most businesses in our city accept the minor inconvenience because it means helping to stop the spread of a virus that’s sickening and/or killing their customers. A small amount of people will forge, and be charged with a felony if caught, as some already have.

Fair enough. When I was a 19 year old carding people for alcohol I was very thorough, because the potential penalties for screwing up were severe for both myself and the business if we got our liquor license yanked. If you want people to pay attention to those cards, you should have the same rules. But it is going to be politically fraught when you shut down a coffee shop on their second failure.

If however you are comfortable with the movie theater level of care, that's fine by me.

EDITed to add: don't forget the police stings and five figure fines! And criminal charges.

[nereo]

New York City has mandated you need the vaccine card and a state id in order to shop there.

Also corporations are making the vaccine mandatory. Some are hesitant because it will lead to staffing shortages.
https://www.wjhl.com/local-coronavirus-coverage/ballad-ceo-nursing-shortage-one-reason-no-employee-covid-vaccine-mandate-yet/

So if you wish to participate in society you will have to get the jab.

[nereo]

Pro-choice is an individualist stance. A woman would ideally know what would be the best for her health.

Vaccine mandates are a group stance. The group knows better than the individual.

Right now a woman could have a reasonable objection to these vaccines and she would have to get them despite those objections.

Seems like they only have control over their reproductive organs and not their entire body.

Are there places in the States where there is an absolute legal obligation to have a vaccine?  Outside possibly the People's Republic of China I'm not aware of that in most countries.  Certainly in mine the vaccine has been offered free and so far take up is close to 90% of over 12s but it's not a crime to refuse, although refusing might limit some employment and entertainment options.

New York City has mandated you need the vaccine card and a state id in order to shop there.

Louis Rossman's series of videos on it.
https://youtu.be/3roD8cKdJlY
https://youtu.be/Z5-TQglgPj4

Also corporations are making the vaccine mandatory. Some are hesitant because it will lead to staffing shortages.
https://www.wjhl.com/local-coronavirus-coverage/ballad-ceo-nursing-shortage-one-reason-no-employee-covid-vaccine-mandate-yet/

So if you wish to participate in society you will have to get the jab.

[PDXTabs]

Keeping with my favorite hobby, being disappointed in the people that I vote for, I found this today: BBC: Afghanistan crisis: How Europe's relationship with Joe Biden turned sour.

[six-car-habit]

Texas, aided by Trump's Supreme Court, in a gross abuse of women's rights has just shut down abortion provision. I bet Biden will do and say nothing.

Shame on the USA.

 Looks like you lose your bet....

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/us-supreme-court-declines-block-texas-abortion-ban-2021-09-02/
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/biden-blasts-supreme-court-inaction-texas-abortion-law/story?id=79790642

All he's done so far is to ask some civil servants to take a look at the situation.  When women in Texas can freely get abortions because of something Biden's done then I'll have lost my bet.  I'm not holding my breath.  And in the meantime, for as long as it takes, it's women in Texas who are in a dreadful situation.

 I'll preface my response by saying i often agree with your statements on various topics and appreciate your non- USA centric views .

 However we have a concept where i grew up that is called "Welching" on a bet  [ and yes I realize, you and I didn't actually have a bet on the outcome of Bidens actions, or lack of action] .
    So, welching is where the losing side on a bet refuses to pay the winning side of the bet. Whether they actually just refuse to pay, or say "i lost", etc.  - or - they try to convince themselves and others that the terms of the bet agreement were different than originally stated.

  So if you had said something along the lines of - " I bet Biden will not use the powers of being president and/or the executive branch to unilaterally overturn a texas written and approved law within a week, or 3+ years " -  than sure, that may be a bet you'd possibly win. Especially as the Supreme court decisions/indecisions seem to have precedence over Dept of Justice actions.

  But what you actually said was " I bet Biden will do and say nothing ".  Which the ABC news article clearly shows he made strong public statements against the supreme court inaction, and also directed executive branch agencies to figure out how to implement a better solution for texas women. He obviously both said something and did something.

  Saying, "When women in Texas can freely get abortions because of something Biden's done then I'll have lost my bet. " - in your subsequent declaration is clearly not the same as your original statement....hence my mention of welching on a bet.

[former player]

Yes, I should have said "say nothing to any purpose" so I agree you are right, I've lost.  The ones who have really lost are the women of Texas who have been given no hope that anything will change in the next couple of years - by which time it will be too late for Biden to take any effective action at all.

Biden should have said "I will take whatever action I can to immediately reverse this ban on women in Texas exercising this constitutional right".  Fuck him for not saying that.  "I will ask people to look into it" means fuck all to a woman in Texas now, and every day that passes without him doing or saying anything else makes it less and less likely that he will be able to do anything at all.

[LennStar]

You can't do shopping for the simple reason that there are people who for medical reason can't get the vaccine, and you can't put the diagnosis of this to a cashier. Or the decision if the medical papers are forged or not, even if the cashier could demand them, which he can't.

We ask cashiers to refuse service all the time based on providing papers. We also hold them responsible to determine if its forged.

See: tobacco and alcohol.

First of all that is a lot less dangerous (to ohers). Second it only applies to a small subset of custmers. not everyone.
Thirdly, and most important, it's a hell lot easier to see if an ID with all that flashy 3D stuff and always looking the same is forged than what is basically a printout you can do at home in 15 minutes at most.

[JGS1980]

It's about time!!!

https://apnews.com/article/joe-biden-business-health-pandemics-coronavirus-pandemic-c4db6f7f3f63d0083581ac9eeb576077

Folks were given 6 months of easy availability of the vaccines. Folks chose not to take it. Folks now have to take it or lose their jobs (instead of just losing their lives).

In my state, <50% of Nursing Home Employees chose to get vaccinated!!! These are the people who saw the Covid19 toll every day, and still chose to remain unvaccinated. I'm flabbergasted that it took so long to mandate their vaccinations.

You can't convince ignorant folk of anything they don't want to be convinced of. Thus -> mandates. [see: seat belt laws, carseat mandates for infants, childhood vaccination requirements, TB screening for healthcare employment, drug screening for commercial drivers, laws that prevent you from owning your own functional bazooka/tank/nuclear arsenal, licensing laws for just about any profession]. Let the good of the many outweigh the "freedom" of the few to harm others.

[chemistk]

It's about time!!!

https://apnews.com/article/joe-biden-business-health-pandemics-coronavirus-pandemic-c4db6f7f3f63d0083581ac9eeb576077

Folks were given 6 months of easy availability of the vaccines. Folks chose not to take it. Folks now have to take it or lose their jobs (instead of just losing their lives).

In my state, <50% of Nursing Home Employees chose to get vaccinated!!! These are the people who saw the Covid19 toll every day, and still chose to remain unvaccinated. I'm flabbergasted that it took so long to mandate their vaccinations.

You can't convince ignorant folk of anything they don't want to be convinced of. Thus -> mandates. [see: seat belt laws, carseat mandates for infants, childhood vaccination requirements, TB screening for healthcare employment, drug screening for commercial drivers, laws that prevent you from owning your own functional bazooka/tank/nuclear arsenal, licensing laws for just about any profession]. Let the good of the many outweigh the "freedom" of the few to harm others.

Agree completely, but now comes the real 'debate' - the true intersection of science, ethics, morality, freedom, and the interpretation of our Constitution. A new enlightenment, if you will.  It ain't going to be a pretty one.

I have an optimistic outlook that we can finally move in this country toward evidence based, data driven decision making. Our brains and their biases and heuristics are absolute shit at digesting the world around us and the gargantuan amount of information we are presented with daily. We (as biological creatures) need 'help' making sense of the very societies we have built.

You also have to acknowledge that true societal discord and even violence at much higher rates than we've seen to date is going to occur. Thanks also to that very society we've built, too many people are left out and left behind and the fears that keep so many entrenched against what should be the collective good is going to keep them forever opposed to future progress. The status quo being the only thing left to understand, I sense the real possibility that this could be a call to arms.

[brandon1827]

It's sad that such is the case. It's like we're living our own version of Idiocracy. There are so many people making so much money spreading disinformation and trying to sow doubt about things that shouldn't be debatable such as scientific facts. I'm flabbergasted almost daily at the amount of complete bullshit being spewed non-stop in certain media formats. It's a shame that we allow people to get rich on telling lies that will get people killed...and that a large percentage of our population is so far down the rabbit hole that they doubt the most basic of factual data.

[GuitarStv]

It's sad that such is the case. It's like we're living our own version of Idiocracy. There are so many people making so much money spreading disinformation and trying to sow doubt about things that shouldn't be debatable such as scientific facts. I'm flabbergasted almost daily at the amount of complete bullshit being spewed non-stop in certain media formats. It's a shame that we allow people to get rich on telling lies that will get people killed...and that a large percentage of our population is so far down the rabbit hole that they doubt the most basic of factual data.

Just because we're in the information age doesn't mean the information available at your fingertips is factual.

[tooqk4u22]

It's sad that such is the case. It's like we're living our own version of Idiocracy. There are so many people making so much money spreading disinformation and trying to sow doubt about things that shouldn't be debatable such as scientific facts. I'm flabbergasted almost daily at the amount of complete bullshit being spewed non-stop in certain media formats. It's a shame that we allow people to get rich on telling lies that will get people killed...and that a large percentage of our population is so far down the rabbit hole that they doubt the most basic of factual data.

Just because we're in the information age doesn't mean the information available at your fingertips is factual.

Social media is the real virus....and must be roped in and heavily regulated.    Self regulation does not work.

[GuitarStv]

It's sad that such is the case. It's like we're living our own version of Idiocracy. There are so many people making so much money spreading disinformation and trying to sow doubt about things that shouldn't be debatable such as scientific facts. I'm flabbergasted almost daily at the amount of complete bullshit being spewed non-stop in certain media formats. It's a shame that we allow people to get rich on telling lies that will get people killed...and that a large percentage of our population is so far down the rabbit hole that they doubt the most basic of factual data.

Just because we're in the information age doesn't mean the information available at your fingertips is factual.

Social media is the real virus....and must be roped in and heavily regulated.    Self regulation does not work.

Social media gets the lions share of the blame.  The real problem is the total collapse of legitimate news organizations due to the rise of the internet and the expectation that all news is "free" (paid by ads - and thus popularity) . . . that's why many people turned to social media to "inform" themselves.

[tooqk4u22]

It's sad that such is the case. It's like we're living our own version of Idiocracy. There are so many people making so much money spreading disinformation and trying to sow doubt about things that shouldn't be debatable such as scientific facts. I'm flabbergasted almost daily at the amount of complete bullshit being spewed non-stop in certain media formats. It's a shame that we allow people to get rich on telling lies that will get people killed...and that a large percentage of our population is so far down the rabbit hole that they doubt the most basic of factual data.

Just because we're in the information age doesn't mean the information available at your fingertips is factual.

Social media is the real virus....and must be roped in and heavily regulated.    Self regulation does not work.

Social media gets the lions share of the blame.  The real problem is the total collapse of legitimate news organizations due to the rise of the internet and the expectation that all news is "free" (paid by ads - and thus popularity) . . . that's why many people turned to social media to "inform" themselves.

Yeah, but that is due to social media (be it FB, IG, Twitter, some blog disguised as media, or otherwise) being able to "scoop" a story without any real info thus overtime driving the actual media to do something similar for views and clicks.   Then it's a perpetual feedback loop.

[brandon1827]

Elimination of the Fairness Doctrine was the start...now social media has a huge hand in spreading disinformation...which I believe has been one factor leading to the collapse of legitimate news organizations and truth in reporting

[JGS1980]

It's about time!!!

https://apnews.com/article/joe-biden-business-health-pandemics-coronavirus-pandemic-c4db6f7f3f63d0083581ac9eeb576077

Folks were given 6 months of easy availability of the vaccines. Folks chose not to take it. Folks now have to take it or lose their jobs (instead of just losing their lives).

In my state, <50% of Nursing Home Employees chose to get vaccinated!!! These are the people who saw the Covid19 toll every day, and still chose to remain unvaccinated. I'm flabbergasted that it took so long to mandate their vaccinations.

You can't convince ignorant folk of anything they don't want to be convinced of. Thus -> mandates. [see: seat belt laws, carseat mandates for infants, childhood vaccination requirements, TB screening for healthcare employment, drug screening for commercial drivers, laws that prevent you from owning your own functional bazooka/tank/nuclear arsenal, licensing laws for just about any profession]. Let the good of the many outweigh the "freedom" of the few to harm others.

Agree completely, but now comes the real 'debate' - the true intersection of science, ethics, morality, freedom, and the interpretation of our Constitution. A new enlightenment, if you will.  It ain't going to be a pretty one.

I have an optimistic outlook that we can finally move in this country toward evidence based, data driven decision making. Our brains and their biases and heuristics are absolute shit at digesting the world around us and the gargantuan amount of information we are presented with daily. We (as biological creatures) need 'help' making sense of the very societies we have built.

You also have to acknowledge that true societal discord and even violence at much higher rates than we've seen to date is going to occur. Thanks also to that very society we've built, too many people are left out and left behind and the fears that keep so many entrenched against what should be the collective good is going to keep them forever opposed to future progress. The status quo being the only thing left to understand, I sense the real possibility that this could be a call to arms.

Great post for #1000!

[chemistk]

It's about time!!!

https://apnews.com/article/joe-biden-business-health-pandemics-coronavirus-pandemic-c4db6f7f3f63d0083581ac9eeb576077

Folks were given 6 months of easy availability of the vaccines. Folks chose not to take it. Folks now have to take it or lose their jobs (instead of just losing their lives).

In my state, <50% of Nursing Home Employees chose to get vaccinated!!! These are the people who saw the Covid19 toll every day, and still chose to remain unvaccinated. I'm flabbergasted that it took so long to mandate their vaccinations.

You can't convince ignorant folk of anything they don't want to be convinced of. Thus -> mandates. [see: seat belt laws, carseat mandates for infants, childhood vaccination requirements, TB screening for healthcare employment, drug screening for commercial drivers, laws that prevent you from owning your own functional bazooka/tank/nuclear arsenal, licensing laws for just about any profession]. Let the good of the many outweigh the "freedom" of the few to harm others.

Agree completely, but now comes the real 'debate' - the true intersection of science, ethics, morality, freedom, and the interpretation of our Constitution. A new enlightenment, if you will.  It ain't going to be a pretty one.

I have an optimistic outlook that we can finally move in this country toward evidence based, data driven decision making. Our brains and their biases and heuristics are absolute shit at digesting the world around us and the gargantuan amount of information we are presented with daily. We (as biological creatures) need 'help' making sense of the very societies we have built.

You also have to acknowledge that true societal discord and even violence at much higher rates than we've seen to date is going to occur. Thanks also to that very society we've built, too many people are left out and left behind and the fears that keep so many entrenched against what should be the collective good is going to keep them forever opposed to future progress. The status quo being the only thing left to understand, I sense the real possibility that this could be a call to arms.

Great post for #1000!

Thanks! I happened to notice only after I gained another yellow square next to my name.

[nereo]

It's sad that such is the case. It's like we're living our own version of Idiocracy. There are so many people making so much money spreading disinformation and trying to sow doubt about things that shouldn't be debatable such as scientific facts. I'm flabbergasted almost daily at the amount of complete bullshit being spewed non-stop in certain media formats. It's a shame that we allow people to get rich on telling lies that will get people killed...and that a large percentage of our population is so far down the rabbit hole that they doubt the most basic of factual data.

Just because we're in the information age doesn't mean the information available at your fingertips is factual.

Social media is the real virus....and must be roped in and heavily regulated.    Self regulation does not work.

Social media gets the lions share of the blame.  The real problem is the total collapse of legitimate news organizations due to the rise of the internet and the expectation that all news is "free" (paid by ads - and thus popularity) . . . that's why many people turned to social media to "inform" themselves.

To be fair, a few decades ago there were also crap news outlets (eg tabloids) that also peddled in fake news and sensationalism. And even the respectable news outlets constantly ran into ethical dilemmas when content conflicted with advertising (which was the main source of revenue back then, just as it is now) or an owners particular whims (Hearst, anyone?)

The dynamics are different now but the core problem of fake and biased news has been around just as long as newspapers have.