COVID-19 numbers

[Deleted User 310]

What is really going on with all this hydroxychloroquine talk lately?

And the whole vaccine "chip" conspiracy theory? Why would "they" need to chip us?

[twocoach]

What is really going on with all this hydroxychloroquine talk lately?

And the whole vaccine "chip" conspiracy theory? Why would "they" need to chip us?

The talk from the loonies lately has been stirred up by the video from Dr. Demon Sperm that was removed by Twitter because it incorrectly stated that they had a "cure" for COVID in hydroxychloroquine mixed with azithromycin and zinc. It may very well work at reducing effects of COVID if given to the right patients at the right time but there is enough contrasting medical test results out there that calling it a cure is wildly dangerous.

As for the chipping, I dont know. Some gun owners say it is so they can find them when the government wants to come get their guns. General loons really haven't offered up anything more than "so they can control us" as if the government could possibly figure out how to build such a computer system. They can barely even build a computer system where cops in one state can be aware of crimes and charges in other states. It's ignorant like most of the conspiracy stories out there these days.

[ousdahl]

Wasn’t it CnB who had some good post about Bill Gates and how he’s trying to make the world a better place but a bunch of ignorant mouth breathers dismiss him because conspiracies?

[Deleted User 310]

What is really going on with all this hydroxychloroquine talk lately?

And the whole vaccine "chip" conspiracy theory? Why would "they" need to chip us?

The talk from the loonies lately has been stirred up by the video from Dr. Demon Sperm that was removed by Twitter because it incorrectly stated that they had a "cure" for COVID in hydroxychloroquine mixed with azithromycin and zinc. It may very well work at reducing effects of COVID if given to the right patients at the right time but there is enough contrasting medical test results out there that calling it a cure is wildly dangerous.

As for the chipping, I dont know. Some gun owners say it is so they can find them when the government wants to come get their guns. General loons really haven't offered up anything more than "so they can control us" as if the government could possibly figure out how to build such a computer system. They can barely even build a computer system where cops in one state can be aware of crimes and charges in other states. It's ignorant like most of the conspiracy stories out there these days.

Fwiw i have seen several other doctors besides doctor demon sperm back that idea. One was a video of a doctor on glen becks podcast.

Interesting you single out gun owners about the chip thing, i have seen literally none of that...not to mention many of those gun owners you assume are all republican already have their guns registered (but i get it, that is your thing i guess)....but i agree i dont understand what purpose a chip would serve...tracking? 99.9% of us already carry around a smart phone that would be much easier to use for that purpose.

Such weird times we are living in. I am plenty skeptical of big pharma and whether money is too influential on certain aspects of medicine....but some of this stuff is so over the top.

[twocoach]

What is really going on with all this hydroxychloroquine talk lately?

And the whole vaccine "chip" conspiracy theory? Why would "they" need to chip us?

The talk from the loonies lately has been stirred up by the video from Dr. Demon Sperm that was removed by Twitter because it incorrectly stated that they had a "cure" for COVID in hydroxychloroquine mixed with azithromycin and zinc. It may very well work at reducing effects of COVID if given to the right patients at the right time but there is enough contrasting medical test results out there that calling it a cure is wildly dangerous.

As for the chipping, I dont know. Some gun owners say it is so they can find them when the government wants to come get their guns. General loons really haven't offered up anything more than "so they can control us" as if the government could possibly figure out how to build such a computer system. They can barely even build a computer system where cops in one state can be aware of crimes and charges in other states. It's ignorant like most of the conspiracy stories out there these days.

Fwiw i have seen several other doctors besides doctor demon sperm back that idea. One was a video of a doctor on glen becks podcast.

Interesting you single out gun owners about the chip thing, i have seen literally none of that....but i agree i dont understand what purpose a chip would serve...tracking? 99.9% of us already carry around a smart phone that would be much easier to use for that purpose.

Such weird times we are living in. I am plenty skeptical of big pharma and whether money is too influential on certain aspects of medicine....but some of this stuff is so over the top.

Agreed, I have also seen some test results that show positive results for specific patients when specific doses of the drugs have been administered at specific times. But I have seen exactly zero test results show that it is a "cure" as this group of doctors claimed. And there are numerous tests out there that support that it is not a cure.

I single out gun owners because I have had specific conversations with some gun owning coworkers of mine on the topic and they are the only group of people who have given me a specific reasoning behind their concerns about the government microchipping us. Anyone else I have spoken to about it just had general "Big Brother watching me" fears. It's sad that I even know people who have these absurd concerns yet here we are.

Yes, you are correct that a cell phone gives the government ample opportunity to track us in whatever fashion they choose and the infrastructure to do it is already 100% in place.

[jfish26]

I must say, the "we need our guns in case fascism" thing falls apart, some, when fascism indeed comes, and it's cheered on by the gun nuts.

[twocoach]

I must say, the "we need our guns in case fascism" thing falls apart, some, when fascism indeed comes, and it's cheered on by the gun nuts.

Name one argument from the right that doesn't fall apart over closer inspection other than "the government is incompetent and shouldn't be used to do so much". I wish we didn't have to use the government to force people to help others more but we do.

They even torpedoed their fight against abortion by taking up "my body, my right" as their rallying cry against wearing masks.

[jfish26]

I must say, the "we need our guns in case fascism" thing falls apart, some, when fascism indeed comes, and it's cheered on by the gun nuts.

Name one argument from the right that doesn't fall apart over closer inspection other than "the government is incompetent and shouldn't be used to do so much". I wish we didn't have to use the government to force people to help others more but we do.

They even torpedoed their fight against abortion by taking up "my body, my right" as their rallying cry against wearing masks.

I am guilty - guilty, guilty, guilty - of previously being an adopter and promoter of a lot of the talking points.

On principle, I like the idea of small government. I like the idea of strong defense of civil liberties, and a healthy free market, and so on and so forth.

I...even found Ann Coulter entertaining and insightful.

I was wrong. I see now that it is not any of these principles that actually motivates the GOP as presently constructed. It's entirely about consolidating power, money and influence. Playing a zero-sum game that keeps these things away from others.

I look forward to a day where there's a reasonable alternative to the Democrats. But that can't come as long as the GOP is this cynical and corrupt.

[Deleted User 318]

I...even found Ann Coulter entertaining and insightful.

Yikes....

Not to shame, because, I'm extremely happy that you have at least seen some of the game the GOP has been playing, which gives me hope. But she has been a white supremacist and neo-nazi apologist for years.

[jfish26]

Specifically, I'm remembering a book that came out when I was in high school, and I thought it was funny.

In the way that a lot of things are funny, until you learn a bit more.

[Deleted User 318]

Gotcha. We were all more edgy as a teenager. That's different. I was thinking you meant like three years ago, you realized this Coulter person might not be on the level.

[TDub]

I must say, the "we need our guns in case fascism" thing falls apart, some, when fascism indeed comes, and it's cheered on by the gun nuts.

Name one argument from the right that doesn't fall apart over closer inspection other than "the government is incompetent and shouldn't be used to do so much". I wish we didn't have to use the government to force people to help others more but we do.

They even torpedoed their fight against abortion by taking up "my body, my right" as their rallying cry against wearing masks.

I am guilty - guilty, guilty, guilty - of previously being an adopter and promoter of a lot of the talking points.

On principle, I like the idea of small government. I like the idea of strong defense of civil liberties, and a healthy free market, and so on and so forth.

I...even found Ann Coulter entertaining and insightful.

I was wrong. I see now that it is not any of these principles that actually motivates the GOP as presently constructed. It's entirely about consolidating power, money and influence. Playing a zero-sum game that keeps these things away from others.

I look forward to a day where there's a reasonable alternative to the Democrats. But that can't come as long as the GOP is this cynical and corrupt.

So basically youre a libertarian.

[jfish26]

I don't know - that label carries baggage, too. I'm certainly in favor of certain policies that align more liberal than libertarian (like a strong social safety net (including comprehensive, free early-childhood education and school-age after-school programming) funded through reasonable taxes on extreme wealth/income).

[Deleted User 318]

I think a party that is based truly on equality, putting reasonable taxes on business and ultra-wealthy, simplifying tax code to close loopholes that many take, strong workers rights by federal mandate, a public option, but small government on everything else, would do wonders right now.

[Deleted User 310]

I think a party that is based truly on equality, putting reasonable taxes on business and ultra-wealthy, simplifying tax code to close loopholes that many take, strong workers rights by federal mandate, a public option, but small government on everything else, would do wonders right now.

[pdub]

The issue there ( likely not for me, but for a lot of the USA, as I agree with all of those in principle ) are words like 'reasonable' taxes and 'ultra' wealthy and 'strong' workers rights.

That's a sliding scale.

[jfish26]

The issue there ( likely not for me, but for a lot of the USA, as I agree with all of those in principle ) are words like 'reasonable' taxes and 'ultra' wealthy and 'strong' workers rights.

That's a sliding scale.

I think, as I've said in other threads on this topic, that a lot of people don't comprehend just how much wealth is concentrated at the furthest-right reaches of the net worth curve. It's staggering how much good could be done without even coming close to (1) disincentivizing building a great company (for example), or (2) impacting anyone's lifestyle in any way.

I'm not talking about telling a family making $4 million a year that they'll need to think about their tax burden when considering whether to buy a beach home and a place in the mountains.

[PhDhawk]

The issue there ( likely not for me, but for a lot of the USA, as I agree with all of those in principle ) are words like 'reasonable' taxes and 'ultra' wealthy and 'strong' workers rights.

That's a sliding scale.

I think, as I've said in other threads on this topic, that a lot of people don't comprehend just how much wealth is concentrated at the furthest-right reaches of the net worth curve. It's staggering how much good could be done without even coming close to (1) disincentivizing building a great company (for example), or (2) impacting anyone's lifestyle in any way.

I'm not talking about telling a family making $4 million a year that they'll need to think about their tax burden when considering whether to buy a beach home and a place in the mountains.

You're being generous by saying people making $4 million shouldn't be targeted, that's sadly not the vibe I get when we talk about a progressive income tax.

I think a lot (maybe most?) lump people making say $250,000 in with the super rich. "Bill Gates, Warren Buffett, my neurosurgeon, and my buddy who owns 7 regional successful hardware stores need to pay their fare share!"

I don't think that most people understand math and that a billion is ONE THOUSAND times more than a million.

But I'm with you, I think there's that pool of money that the truly super-wealthy are just sitting on. I used to buy into the notion that these were the people who created/funded new businesses and therefore new jobs. But then I look at Sam Walton's heirs...they're not using their billions to create new jobs, certainly not good ones.

I wish we'd bring back the inheritance tax. 100% of anything above, say $1.5 million. You'd start to see those billionaires spending their money then. I know, that's something rife with loopholes and creates all kinds of problems, but man...old money, and rich families staying rich feels so British and the antithesis of everything American.

[jfish26]

The issue there ( likely not for me, but for a lot of the USA, as I agree with all of those in principle ) are words like 'reasonable' taxes and 'ultra' wealthy and 'strong' workers rights.

That's a sliding scale.

I think, as I've said in other threads on this topic, that a lot of people don't comprehend just how much wealth is concentrated at the furthest-right reaches of the net worth curve. It's staggering how much good could be done without even coming close to (1) disincentivizing building a great company (for example), or (2) impacting anyone's lifestyle in any way.

I'm not talking about telling a family making $4 million a year that they'll need to think about their tax burden when considering whether to buy a beach home and a place in the mountains.

You're being generous by saying people making $4 million shouldn't be targeted, that's sadly not the vibe I get when we talk about a progressive income tax.

I think a lot (maybe most?) lump people making say $250,000 in with the super rich. "Bill Gates, Warren Buffett, my neurosurgeon, and my buddy who owns 7 regional successful hardware stores need to pay their fare share!"

I don't think that most people understand math and that a billion is ONE THOUSAND times more than a million.

But I'm with you, I think there's that pool of money that the truly super-wealthy are just sitting on. I used to buy into the notion that these were the people who created/funded new businesses and therefore new jobs. But then I look at Sam Walton's heirs...they're not using their billions to create new jobs, certainly not good ones.

I wish we'd bring back the inheritance tax. 100% of anything above, say $1.5 million. You'd start to see those billionaires spending their money then. I know, that's something rife with loopholes and creates all kinds of problems, but man...old money, and rich families staying rich feels so British and the antithesis of everything American.

Don't disagree with any of this - I think a 1% wealth tax on assets over $50mm (which has generally been the placeholder proposal) is reasonable.

[jfish26]

And, specifically, this is exactly right:

I think a lot (maybe most?) lump people making say $250,000 in with the super rich. "Bill Gates, Warren Buffett, my neurosurgeon, and my buddy who owns 7 regional successful hardware stores need to pay their fare share!"

Most people have no concept that the wealthiest people they personally know are pissants when it comes to the next several bands to the right on the net worth curve.