Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

You Must Wear A Useless Facemask Or Be Fined £3,200


Social Justice League
 Share

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, Riedquat said:

Who looks after them currently after you're dead if there's nothing in your estate?

If we're going to dig around in the financial implications of this we really should have some rough estimate of the order of magnitude of the change (in relative terms to the total cost). I'm no fan of "give me a number!" - that's too often used as a dismissal of a general concept, but it's handy to have some idea whether an issue is a big one, moderate one, or not really one.

Well I linked earlier to an article on how much road accidents cost the UK per year.

It's a complex subject with lots of hidden consequences which have different probabilities of occurring. You could debate it for ages.

I think most normal people would agree that taking simple steps to reduce the amount of traffic accidents on the roads where people are severely injured or killed is worthwhile and that this is self evident, especially when the steps are minimally invasive (like wearing seat belts).

If you feel differently that is your choice, but my guess is on the issue of seat belts the majority of the country disagrees with you. I doubt whether we will have many nationwide campaigns to remove seat belts from cars in the near future.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 155
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

4 minutes ago, Riedquat said:

What, question whether or not a legal compulsion backed up by fines is  justifiable or not? Yes, we really do have to do this. Meek, blind, unquestioning obedience of anything should never be advocated.

This doesn't mean a rejection of whatever is being proposed (although in this case I'm still sceptical), but if we reach a point where no-one gets bothered, or questions, then we've got far bigger problems than a pandemic.

Thing is, most people disagree with you. 

The wearing of face masks to reduce infection is hardly a new or controversial concept and most people are

A) willing to give it a shot

And 

B sick and tired of the constant whinging about "authoritarianism" over something so trivial.

Most of us just want this out of the way so we can get on with our lives and don't think this particular issue warrants the outrage. Doesn't mean we're all "sheeple" just that people pick their battles and this is not a hill worth dying on. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Hullabaloo82 said:

Thing is, most people disagree with you. 

The wearing of face masks to reduce infection is hardly a new or controversial concept and most people are

A) willing to give it a shot

And 

B sick and tired of the constant whinging about "authoritarianism" over something so trivial.

Most of us just want this out of the way so we can get on with our lives and don't think this particular issue warrants the outrage. Doesn't mean we're all "sheeple" just that people pick their battles and this is not a hill worth dying on. 

Most people disagree with me? On what, that this should even be questioned?

Unfortunately the sort of reaction we're seeing from people like yourself does actually mean you're sheeple I'm afraid. You really are rejecting the whole concept of sufficient scrutiny about a legal compulsion, and that's pretty appalling behaviour. It's a sorry state of affairs indeed that you regard it as trivial.

Can you tell the difference between sensible scepticism and questioning and TFH wearers?

FWIW it seems that masks are potentially helpful if you're having to spend considerable time near people face to face (which includes, say, someone in a shop who'll be directly facing a lot of people who are individually only there for a moment, or everyone on a bus for twenty minutes). Probably more effective to just not point your face at people though.

Edited by Riedquat
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Hullabaloo82 said:

Thing is, most people disagree with you. 

The wearing of face masks to reduce infection is hardly a new or controversial concept and most people are

A) willing to give it a shot

And 

B sick and tired of the constant whinging about "authoritarianism" over something so trivial.

Most of us just want this out of the way so we can get on with our lives and don't think this particular issue warrants the outrage. Doesn't mean we're all "sheeple" just that people pick their battles and this is not a hill worth dying on. 

That attitude facilitates the insertion of the thin end of a wedge!

As for masks, I wear one whenever and wherever requested to protect others should I be an asymptomatic carrier.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, satsuma said:

It never fails to surprise me as to how fractured UK society is and how much the government is hated, god forbid there is ever a war as no one can get behind anything and make it work 

Unfortunately that attitude was also prevalent in 1930s Germany.

How could any libertarian not hate this authoritarian government?

Edited by Bruce Banner
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, satsuma said:

It never fails to surprise me as to how fractured UK society is and how much the government is hated, god forbid there is ever a war as no one can get behind anything and make it work 

I'm not sure whether I find the government or the population more depressing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Trampa501 said:

Most people are sick of it all, and so will co-operate with measures that they hope will help to stamp the virus out.

Unfortunately, it seems that locations that are cooled by air-con, are prime breeding grounds. This is why we see outbreaks at food processing factories, and probably why cases are breaking out again in peak summer France and Spain.

 

As well as the U.S, where airconditioning at home is near universal compared with Europe?

Does make me wonder IF, given how rare it is for homes here in the UK to be fitted with aircon, and the recent heatwave forcing people to keep windows wide open, etc that MAYBE,  just maybe, we could well be one of those few places where the much touted heat and extra UV will help significantly reduce (de facto eradicate?) the prevalance of the virus?  So much so that (provided immigration/quarantine controls are adhered to) we may well get off lightly compared others come autumn/winter??? 

We can only hope.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here in France, they've mandated the wearing of face masks in many places and it has had a positive effect. 

The French, possibly because their distancing limit is 1m, are not good at distancing. They look at you as if you're mad when you jump out of their way as the brush past you in the street, but with the introduction of masks they have become more aware.

A French friend says that their government lied about masks like ours did. Not necessary when they didn't have any and essential now they have.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Chunketh said:

Why wouldn't you want to have a good chance to be immune to Flu? Flu sucks!

Some years, the flu vaccine kills more people than the flu does.

There are several steps people should take before injecting themselves with chemicals no one really understands:

1) Stop eating seed oils (aka "vegetable oil", omega 6 fat, linoleic acid, sunflower oil, rapeseed oil, polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFAs))

2) reduce carb intake

3) Ensure adequate nutritional status by eating fatty meat, connective tissue, organs and whole, lightly cooked eggs

4) Get at least 10 minutes of midday sunlight exposure daily to as much bare skin as possible

5) Do resistance exercise such as weightlifting, gymnastics, wrestling or swimming 4 or more times per week

6) Put much more effort into maintaining your closest social connections

 

Incidentally, point 1 alone would solve about 80% of the healthcare spend in the West- it would cure diabetes, heart disease, obesity & a lot of mental problems, which are actually symptoms of metabolic dysfunction caused by vegetable oil consumption.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Hullabaloo82 said:

Thing is, most people disagree with you. 

Truth and justice are, of course, popularity contests.

1 hour ago, Hullabaloo82 said:

constant whinging about "authoritarianism" over something so trivial.

I wear a mask in shops, doesn't really bother me that much. 

I do not want to be forced to wear a mask. I wonder whether you are capable of understanding the difference.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Locke said:

Some years, the flu vaccine kills more people than the flu does.

 

I seriously doubt that is true. Vaccine death rates are quite hard to pin down, but a figure of 1-2 per million doses seems to be accepted.

If you vaccinated the entire worlds population you would expect something like 18000 deaths as a direct result. Flu kills 300,000 to 600,000 people every year.

Even if you increased the death rate tenfold, you would get halfway to the annual death toll and thats vaccinating the entire planet, which does not happen. For the last season, 162-169 million doses were made. Multiply that out, 340 deaths.

The vaccine would need to kill one in 500 people for your statement to hold up.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Chunketh said:

I seriously doubt that is true. Vaccine death rates are quite hard to pin down, but a figure of 1-2 per million doses seems to be accepted.

If you vaccinated the entire worlds population you would expect something like 18000 deaths as a direct result. Flu kills 300,000 to 600,000 people every year.

Even if you increased the death rate tenfold, you would get halfway to the annual death toll and thats vaccinating the entire planet, which does not happen. For the last season, 162-169 million doses were made. Multiply that out, 340 deaths.

The vaccine would need to kill one in 500 people for your statement to hold up.

 

Yes, because there are more than one type of flu virus......not possible to vaccinate all people with all flu vaccines every year.?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

“Carnt tell me wot to do, Ahm a soverin British individual.” 

Fires caused by portable barbecues, wild flowers being dug up, the disturbance of shorebirds, and an avalanche of rubbish. These are just some of the threats to Britain’s wild places as record numbers enjoy coastal and countryside “staycations”.

Beleaguered rangers complain that a new generation of holidaymakers are treating the countryside like a festival site, leaving behind tents, chairs and excrement, as well as endangering rare habitats and wildlife.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, PeanutButter said:

“Carnt tell me wot to do, Ahm a soverin British individual.” 

Fires caused by portable barbecues, wild flowers being dug up, the disturbance of shorebirds, and an avalanche of rubbish. These are just some of the threats to Britain’s wild places as record numbers enjoy coastal and countryside “staycations”.

Beleaguered rangers complain that a new generation of holidaymakers are treating the countryside like a festival site, leaving behind tents, chairs and excrement, as well as endangering rare habitats and wildlife.

Your point being? Because it sounds like you're trying to lump very different behaviours together there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Locke said:

Truth and justice are, of course, popularity contests.

I wear a mask in shops, doesn't really bother me that much. 

I do not want to be forced to wear a mask. I wonder whether you are capable of understanding the difference.

Yes, because you're the arbiter of truth and justice, not the millions of people whose compliance on masks suggests overwhelming public support. 

What about truth and justice for the people whose lives you'll put at risk by encouraging this self serving, self aggrandizing, pointless drivel? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Hullabaloo82 said:

Yes, because you're the arbiter of truth and justice, not the millions of people whose compliance on masks suggests overwhelming public support.

Since when has the level of public support being the factor that determines whether something is medically effective or not?

Quote

What about truth and justice for the people whose lives you'll put at risk by encouraging this self serving, self aggrandizing, pointless drivel? 

You're attacking the argument there rather than the assumptions it's based on, which is logically fallacious.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Hullabaloo82 said:

Yes, because you're the arbiter of truth and justice, not the millions of people whose compliance on masks suggests overwhelming public support. 

What about truth and justice for the people whose lives you'll put at risk by encouraging this self serving, self aggrandizing, pointless drivel? 

That sounds a bit like the drivel BJ comes out with at PMQs, when he tries to tell Starmer that it's the opposition's job to "get behind the government".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Social Justice League said:

 

Not long now until the second wave and 'Stay At Home, Save The NHS, Save Lives' again. 

2020 is turning into the year that breaks the Tory party imo.  Let's see how things look on 5th November. 

 

Planning Something?  If you see the same van parked across the street often, worry.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.





×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.