Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, Unmoderated said:

You want to work in a care home taking care of my dear old nan? Get the jab or get a new job. Simples. 

Again, for the slow ones in the back, you are perfectly free to refuse to patronise care homes which accept unvaccinated staff/residents.

Care homes are perfectly at liberty to refuse to hire anyone who is not vaccinated.

These are choices.

It is when the government passes laws which say that care homes must not employ unvaccinated carers that the fascism comes into play. That removes the choice, because laws are opinions enforced at gunpoint.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 119
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Just now, Unmoderated said:

Not sure what voting for a party has to do with this - and it's not like a regime that's controlling everyone's lives. Again, you have a choice. You can choose to exclude yourself from the mainstream by choosing not to have the jab. Totally fine. I'm just bewildered that people think they're something special, the rules don't apply to them and they're not going to let not having the jab get in the way of getting into the shop or the aeroplane.

"Not sure what voting for a party has to do with this" - interesting response. It's an analogy. Thought that should've been fairly obvious.

Who said anything about being something special, rules don't apply to them, and they're not getting the jab? That's your strawman.

Quote

Don't you think this is an exceptional circumstance and requires an exceptional effort to fix?

Overall, but that doesn't therefore mean anything goes when it comes to proposed measures. Each one needs individual justification.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Locke said:

So the police won't round you up and beat the shit out of you if you resist? 

Very, very stupid.

Resist what? Resist having a jab? The police wont beat you up for not having the jab. Not in this country (UK) anyway. 

I think the word you're looking for is 'naive' if that's your thinking? It's a false argument to say otherwise (which would be stupid since nobody knows the answer to what will happen in the future). There's alway vaccine passports for Yellow Fever - are you against those?

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Unmoderated said:

it's not like a regime that's controlling everyone's lives.

It is literally illegal to go outside.

 

At least hookers get paid when they blow Boris- carrying his water for free like this must be so humiliating for you- or maybe you enjoy it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, doomed said:

Oh god.

you're point then is people are free to decide if they should or should not have the vaccine? I agree with you too. I just don't think they should expect to be able to mingle with everyone else who has had the jab when those jabs are not 100% preventative. Once they are then fine, I'm protected, they're not - mingle away. Until then.... sorry, it's your choice. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Unmoderated said:

I think the word you're looking for is 'naive'

I considered it, but we are beyond naivete here. The arguments have been clearly and simply laid out for you, so we are into the territory of very evil or very stupid. 

No point talking with evil people, but idiots can at least [slowly] learn.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Riedquat said:

"Not sure what voting for a party has to do with this" - interesting response. It's an analogy. Thought that should've been fairly obvious.

Who said anything about being something special, rules don't apply to them, and they're not getting the jab? That's your strawman.

Overall, but that doesn't therefore mean anything goes when it comes to proposed measures. Each one needs individual justification.

I know you were trying to make an analogy - but analogies should be relevant. 

Not a strawman. People are arguing they should not be stopped going into a bar or restaurant or travel if they've not had the jab. 

Which measures exactly?

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Unmoderated said:

you're point then is people are free to decide if they should or should not have the vaccine? I agree with you too. I just don't think they should expect to be able to mingle with everyone else who has had the jab when those jabs are not 100% preventative. Once they are then fine, I'm protected, they're not - mingle away. Until then.... sorry, it's your choice. 

What else are you happy insisting people must do in order to go outside without scaring you?

Link to post
Share on other sites

It all comes down to individualism vs collectivism but there's some fascinating contradictions on display. This forum, as ever, never fails to deliver some interesting case studies in mental gymnastics. 

We have the libertarian, conservative types on one side who also generally tend to support the metanarrative of nationalism and shared values whilst the more left or centre leaning liberal group is generally more skeptical of that particular metanarrative but is willing to roll up its sleeve and have the jab as part of a collective effort to control the virus. 

All very odd. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Locke said:

It is literally illegal to go outside.

 

At least hookers get paid when they blow Boris- carrying his water for free like this must be so humiliating for you- or maybe you enjoy it.

It is not illegal to go outside you clown. My girlfriend went to the office today. I went for a walk last night. A police car drove past me and countless others out for an evening walk. 

You should be in a circus mate. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Locke said:

I considered it, but we are beyond naivete here. The arguments have been clearly and simply laid out for you, so we are into the territory of very evil or very stupid. 

No point talking with evil people, but idiots can at least [slowly] learn.

Do you know what a false argument is? To argue something is stupid implies you know better. Tell me oh wise time travelling into the future one - will the passports be here forever? Do enlighten the mortal self with your insights :D

Again an ad-hom. Look if you're out of ammo and need a break feel free to take one and come back later when you've had some fresh ideas on how to argue your precarious position.

Don't take a break outside though mate- don't want you getting arrested. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Unmoderated said:

I know you were trying to make an analogy - but analogies should be relevant.

Analogies demonstrate the general principles. For some reason some people insist on dismissing them if they're not another example of the same thing, which demonstrates a failure to understand the use and effect of analogy.

Quote

Not a strawman. People are arguing they should not be stopped going into a bar or restaurant or travel if they've not had the jab.

It's a strawman because you're raising issues out of the blue, about people who refuse to be vaccinated (that's not what this is about), and about people saying they're special and rules don't apply to them. Those aren't the reasons being raised.

Quote

Which measures exactly?

Irrelevant, since the only one we're talking about right now are vaccination passports.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Unmoderated said:

you're point then is people are free to decide if they should or should not have the vaccine? I agree with you too. I just don't think they should expect to be able to mingle with everyone else who has had the jab when those jabs are not 100% preventative. Once they are then fine, I'm protected, they're not - mingle away. Until then.... sorry, it's your choice. 

Ok, we might be getting somewhere. 

My argument would be that the costs of enforcing this 2 tier society throughout the country would be a net negative. We have certain freedoms that no longer become freedoms once the state has set the precedent of being able to remove them at will.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Riedquat said:

What else are you happy insisting people must do in order to go outside without scaring you?

They don't carry weapons for one? 

Again, not scared I just want this over with but it wont die out. Starting to wonder if the anti-covid-vaxers are just scared of needles?

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Hullabaloo82 said:

It all comes down to individualism vs collectivism but there's some fascinating contradictions on display. This forum, as ever, never fails to deliver some interesting case studies in mental gymnastics. 

We have the libertarian, conservative types on one side who also generally tend to support the metanarrative of nationalism and shared values whilst the more left or centre leaning liberal group is generally more skeptical of that particular metanarrative but is willing to roll up its sleeve and have the jab as part of a collective effort to control the virus. 

All very odd. 

Haha, a pretty good observation. :) 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Unmoderated said:

They don't carry weapons for one? 

Again, not scared I just want this over with but it wont die out. Starting to wonder if the anti-covid-vaxers are just scared of needles?

Sounds pretty scared to me. Does that include anything that could possibly be used as a weapon?

You're bringing up anti-vaxxers again. We're not talking about them, we're talking anti-vaccination-passporters. You need to understand why they're not one and the same rather than continually insisting that they are and basing your position around that.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Riedquat said:

Analogies demonstrate the general principles. For some reason some people insist on dismissing them if they're not another example of the same thing, which demonstrates a failure to understand the use and effect of analogy.

It's a strawman because you're raising issues out of the blue, about people who refuse to be vaccinated (that's not what this is about), and about people saying they're special and rules don't apply to them. Those aren't the reasons being raised.

Irrelevant, since the only one we're talking about right now are vaccination passports.

I think points two and three cancel each other out? I'm not raising issues out of the blue, we're talking about vaccines and choices.

Some people don't like the idea of a VP. I don't especially like it either but believe it is required and there shouldn't be exceptions. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, doomed said:

Ok, we might be getting somewhere. 

My argument would be that the costs of enforcing this 2 tier society throughout the country would be a net negative. We have certain freedoms that no longer become freedoms once the state has set the precedent of being able to remove them at will.


I disagree I think they would be net positive. If people are scared of the vaccine and choose not to have it then fine - but they accept there are consequences. The costs of opening up and allowing it to spread more widely again carry a much greater cost imho - just look at the lives lost, economic cost and damage already done! Who knows about future mutations. We'll have to learn to live with it but if we want to open things up sooner rather than later and keep infection rates low then I'm totally in favour of it. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Unmoderated said:

I think points two and three cancel each other out? I'm not raising issues out of the blue, we're talking about vaccines and choices.

Some people don't like the idea of a VP. I don't especially like it either but believe it is required and there shouldn't be exceptions. 

I didn't number points so I'm not sure which ones you're calling points two and three (including the point about analogies or just strawmen?)

It's fine to believe it's required but there's a very large impression of absolutism there, an impression that you aren't able to empathise with those who find the idea too repugnant to be acceptable at all; too much "I'm right and anyone who disagrees is an idiot." Heaven knows we all feel like that from time to time (I certainly do about a whole raft of issues - including anti-vaxxers), but you really do need to be able to look at things from someone elses' perspective before criticising them.

Edited by Riedquat
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Riedquat said:

Sounds pretty scared to me. Does that include anything that could possibly be used as a weapon?

You're bringing up anti-vaxxers again. We're not talking about them, we're talking anti-vaccination-passporters. You need to understand why they're not one and the same rather than continually insisting that they are and basing your position around that.

LOL, yeah I am a cowering wreck and too scared to leave my house. 

Your baiting skills require work my friend. A weapon or a tool? A blunt instrument or a hammer? I think it's pretty obvious what is meant and by and large the majority of people are ok with that too. You cannot carry a blade in public for instance. Do you think that's not ok?

If you're not anti vaxxer than why are you anti passporter? You'll get the passport with the jab?

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Hullabaloo82 said:

It all comes down to individualism vs collectivism but there's some fascinating contradictions on display. This forum, as ever, never fails to deliver some interesting case studies in mental gymnastics. 

We have the libertarian, conservative types on one side who also generally tend to support the metanarrative of nationalism and shared values whilst the more left or centre leaning liberal group is generally more skeptical of that particular metanarrative but is willing to roll up its sleeve and have the jab as part of a collective effort to control the virus. 

All very odd. 

Yes, all quite baffling. It is almost as if people can support one thing without supporting everything else that the group you want to put them in does. It sure is a crazy world.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Riedquat said:

I didn't number points so I'm not sure which ones you're calling points two and three (including the point about analogies or just strawmen?)

It's fine to believe it's required but there's a very large impression of absolutism there, an impression that you aren't able to empathise with those who find the idea too repugnant to be acceptable at all; too much "I'm right and anyone who disagrees is an idiot." Heaven knows we all feel like that from time to time (I certainly do about a whole raft of issues - including anti-vaxxers), but you really do need to be able to look at things from someone elses' perspective before criticising them.

Second and third para. One said I'm making up cases and then you gave the example of the passports which seems to now be where we're at. 

I do not think those disagreeing with me are idiots if they're able to craft an argument as to why they disagree with me, or why they're in that position. 

Lockey thinks now it is illegal to go outside and will be beaten up by the police if he doesn't get his jab. Seriously lol!

So, what is your issue with a vaccine passport?

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Unmoderated said:

LOL, yeah I am a cowering wreck and too scared to leave my house. 

Your baiting skills require work my friend. A weapon or a tool? A blunt instrument or a hammer? I think it's pretty obvious what is meant and by and large the majority of people are ok with that too. You cannot carry a blade in public for instance. Do you think that's not ok?

If you're not anti vaxxer than why are you anti passporter? You'll get the passport with the jab?

A knife is a handy tool that can often come in useful, so yes, I don't think it's OK to have a blanket ban on carrying a blade.

Why do you think I'm an anti-pasporter? Treat this as a good exercise in learning  empathy. It should always be possible to see things from someone else's point of view without requiring an explanation (although there may be multiple ways someone could be looking at something, or some we've not thought of, so clarification might then be needed).

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Hullabaloo82 said:

It all comes down to individualism vs collectivism

No, it comes down to whether it is morally right to assault innocent people.

8 minutes ago, Unmoderated said:

If you're not anti vaxxer than why are you anti passporter? You'll get the passport with the jab?

This is too ignorant to be believable, so I guess you're just going with being evil.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Riedquat said:

A knife is a handy tool that can often come in useful, so yes, I don't think it's OK to have a blanket ban on carrying a blade.

Why do you think I'm an anti-pasporter? Treat this as a good exercise in learning  empathy. It should always be possible to see things from someone else's point of view without requiring an explanation (although there may be multiple ways someone could be looking at something, or some we've not thought of, so clarification might then be needed).

I do try to do this a lot but sometimes there's just no rational reason behind it. Maybe people just don't like the idea of it. My view is that anti-vaxxers are growing in number and it's time it was called out and dealt with, frankly. UK lost the measles free status because of these morons. It's a shame in a way because in touchy feely care bare world people could do as they like without consequences on others. 

Are you in favour or against vaccine passports?

Link to post
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...
  • 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.