RevRico said:
In reply to Snowdoggie :
Then I'll forward you my business address and you can start paying me to stay home since the state has told me to go berkeley myself with regards to unemployment during this time.
Not having money coming in while bills continue to pile up is a far bigger problem to me personally than the virus itself. If you're that at risk, why the berkeley are you going out anyway? That's not entirely directed at you, but at the number of clearly high risk people I see EVERYWHERE every single day. People in the 70s plus, grouping up, congregating, driving like children, that should be staying home and safe that aren't.
To be fair, my county of almost 300k people has had less than 500 deaths even with the governor forcing infected old people to return to their personal care homes. I'm VERY surprised that the high amount of nursing homes and long term care centers in my area haven't been decimated. This does not help my utter contempt for the governor for continuing to keep the county closed at all. But because the Philadelphia region on the other side of the state is such a hot spot, all of us here in the western half need to suffer for the greater good our whatever.
There actually is a Federal Program that was set up to pay business owners to stay home. They ran out of money fast. I know people who applied and didn't get it. You might want to complain to your Congresscritter about that one. I do agree that locking down places that don't have the virus doesn't make sense. Testing for the virus has been a mess too. It helps to know where the virus is. We don't. I am very aware of the infected people being forced back into the nursing homes. My 89 year old Mother is locked down in a nursing home right now. I haven't seen here in over a month. Texas did not force nursing homes to take infected people but there are a large number of infections in the nursing homes here. I almost put my mother into one where there were five deaths in the last month. Our Governor just ordered testing for all nursing home patients, employees, staff and anybody else around the nursing homes. This is a good move on his part.
For high risk people going out, you can't exactly send the police out after them and order them back in the way they do it in China. I see a lot of heavy set old people running around where they shouldn't be, but what can you do. They may be needing ICUs and ventilators soon. The second wave may be nasty here in Dallas, but then again it may not be.
Since I am still working I help small businesses by spreading what little I make around. I try to support restaurants around here by ordering takeout. I donate money to the forum (although I don't know why they don't mark me as a forum supporter). In the last month I spent close to $2,000 buying stuff for my Miata project from GRM advertisers. I'm sure that spending on car racing parts has slowed down in this mess. But I don't do anything to expose myself to the virus. They found a guy two years younger than I am dead in his kitchen from the Coronavirus only a few blocks away from my office about three weeks ago. That scares the hell out of me. I few weeks ago I saw crowds armed with long guns in a shopping center down the street from my office. It looked like something out of Afghanistan. Scared the crap out of me with all the other stuff going on around here. The next day the opening of a beauty salon in that shopping center was national news. I'm staying inside for a while.
93EXCivic said:
I keep hearing people say this. But how are people supposed to do this? If your work opens back up, you are going to have to go back to work to make money. People that are in at risk groups shouldn't be forced to choose possible death.
What are they doing now? I think most companies will allow at risk people to stay home. If for nothing else the obvious lawsuits. If you are saying they should still be able to collect unemployment even if they can work, that is a discussion that I have heard about (in CA at least).
93EXCivic said:
SVreX (Forum Supporter) said:
In reply to Snowdoggie :
You are welcome to stay home.
I keep hearing people say this. But how are people supposed to do this? If your work opens back up, you are going to have to go back to work to make money. People that are in at risk groups shouldn't be forced to choose possible death.
They actually are having trouble finding people to work in meat packing plants now. Some of them died. Some of them are afraid to die. Last year we deported a whole bunch of them back to Mexico. I seriously doubt that the kids who lost their jobs waiting tables in Dallas are going to head to work in the meat packing plants of East Texas anytime soon even if the government does pull their unemployment.
aircooled said:
93EXCivic said:
I keep hearing people say this. But how are people supposed to do this? If your work opens back up, you are going to have to go back to work to make money. People that are in at risk groups shouldn't be forced to choose possible death.
What are they doing now? I think most companies will allow at risk people to stay home. If for nothing else the obvious lawsuits. If you are saying they should still be able to collect unemployment even if they can work, that is a discussion that I have heard about (in CA at least).
That was not the impression I got. Maybe I am wrong on that.
93EXCivic said:
SVreX (Forum Supporter) said:
In reply to Snowdoggie :
You are welcome to stay home.
I keep hearing people say this. But how are people supposed to do this? If your work opens back up, you are going to have to go back to work to make money. People that are in at risk groups shouldn't be forced to choose possible death.
So instead we take the livelihoods from people who are NOT in at-risk groups and make them face possible death??
The over-dramatism is astounding.
SVreX (Forum Supporter) said:
93EXCivic said:
SVreX (Forum Supporter) said:
In reply to Snowdoggie :
You are welcome to stay home.
I keep hearing people say this. But how are people supposed to do this? If your work opens back up, you are going to have to go back to work to make money. People that are in at risk groups shouldn't be forced to choose possible death.
So instead we take the livelihoods from people who are NOT in at-risk groups and make them face possible death??
The over-dramatism is astounding.
No we allow those people in at-risk groups to continue to pull unemployment if they choose. Which to my understanding is not really the case in most places in the US.
In reply to 93EXCivic :
...which gets paid for by the people who are not at risk, but have to go to work and put themselves at risk to support people who are not working.
Unemployment would max at 19% of my income. Do you really see that as a solution?
SVreX (Forum Supporter) said:
In reply to 93EXCivic :
...which gets paid for by the people who are not at risk, but have to go to work and put themselves at risk to support people who are not working.
Unemployment would max at 19% of my income. Do you really see that as a solution?
So your solution is just to stay berkeley it and let people die?
In reply to 93EXCivic :
My solution is to stop making things overly dramatic.
Im out there. I've been exposed. My company has 700 people working in a "hot spot" without any cases.
It's not a death sentence. The world is still spinning. I'm still doing my part.
Unemployment isn't supposed to pay people who can work and choose not to, because really nobody wants to. It's not fair to those who do work or to the business.
If you are employed and your business wants you to come back in but you are in a high risk group the right answer is to seek a medical accommodation just like you would if you had a repetitive motion injury or some other permanent medical condition. Get a note from your doctor defining what you can and can't do, and if your job cannot be performed or there are no reasonable accommodations that work than you quit or get fired so they can replace you with someone who can do that job. Then you can collect unemployment.
SVreX (Forum Supporter) said:
In reply to 93EXCivic :
It's not a death sentence. The world is still spinning. I'm still doing my part.
But it can be a death sentence to plenty of people particularly people in certain age groups and with certain conditions. I see no reason to not try to protect those people.
I am out working to and I get that I have little reason to worry personally since I am 31 with no pre-existing conditions and in good shape. But not everyone is me.
Less drama.
There is no excuse for propagating fear and destroying people's lives and incomes.
Life is about balance.
SVreX (Forum Supporter) said:
93EXCivic said:
SVreX (Forum Supporter) said:
In reply to Snowdoggie :
You are welcome to stay home.
I keep hearing people say this. But how are people supposed to do this? If your work opens back up, you are going to have to go back to work to make money. People that are in at risk groups shouldn't be forced to choose possible death.
So instead we take the livelihoods from people who are NOT in at-risk groups and make them face possible death??
The over-dramatism is astounding.
Killing yourself because the government shuts down your business and you can't pay your mortgage seems rather over-dramatic to me. Suicide is a choice, but not a solution.
SVreX (Forum Supporter) said:
Less drama.
There is no excuse for propagating fear and destroying people's lives and incomes.
Life is about balance.
I don't see how allowing people who are a risk of dying to choose to remain on unemployment is destroying people's lives.
In reply to 93EXCivic :
The problem is that you are seeking a political solution to a medical problem.
There have been many pandemics. Most have been dealt with largely hands-off from the political leadership, allowing the medical community to do their job. People die. And people live.
Government forced lockdowns are a political solution to a problem they see no solution to.
The problem is the consequences of those decisions are deadly too.
I'm not convinced we have made good decisions for the benefit of the most people. And it's time for us to begin getting honest about that and making corrections.
In reply to Snowdoggie :
None of the people I know who committed suicide owned businesses.
SVreX (Forum Supporter) said:
In reply to 93EXCivic :
The problem is that you are seeking a political solution to a medical problem.
There have been many pandemics. Most have been dealt with largely hands-off from the political leadership, allowing the medical community to do their job. People die. And people live.
Government forced lockdowns are a political solution to a problem they see no solution to.
The problem is the consequences of those decisions are deadly too.
I'm not convinced we have made good decisions for the benefit of the most people. And it's time for us to begin getting honest about that and making corrections.
Where did I say I wanted the lockdown to continue?
If you can stay home for 3 months without having anything delivered, I'm impressed.
Delivery workers have to leave home. And they're in greater demand than ever.
Is the risk of our lives a "necessary evil?"
93EXCivic said:
SVreX (Forum Supporter) said:
Less drama.
There is no excuse for propagating fear and destroying people's lives and incomes.
Life is about balance.
I don't see how allowing people who are a risk of dying to choose to remain on unemployment is destroying people's lives.
You are a young man. Ask yourself this question again in about 30 years after you've been paying the tax consequences for that long.
There is no reason a person like that should not consider permanent disability, or preparing themselves for a career they are qualified for, since they can no longer do what they used to.
A permanent handout is not a solution.
SVreX (Forum Supporter) said:
In reply to Snowdoggie :
None of the people I know who committed suicide owned businesses.
If you work you are involved in a business. What did these guys do and why did they kill themselves?
In reply to 93EXCivic :
Your "berkeley it and let people die" comment went a long way toward establishing your perspective.
SVreX (Forum Supporter) said:
93EXCivic said:
SVreX (Forum Supporter) said:
Less drama.
There is no excuse for propagating fear and destroying people's lives and incomes.
Life is about balance.
I don't see how allowing people who are a risk of dying to choose to remain on unemployment is destroying people's lives.
You are a young man. Ask yourself this question again in about 30 years after you've been paying the tax consequences for that long.
There is no reason a person like that should not consider permanent disability, or preparing themselves for a career they are qualified for, since they can no longer do what they used to.
A permanent handout is not a solution.
Edit: I am removing this cause it crosses way to much into politics.
In reply to Snowdoggie :
A student, a pastor, and a waitress.
Why the heck does that matter?
In reply to 93EXCivic :
Reganomics??? You're not old enough to remember that.
Like I said. Drama.
SVreX (Forum Supporter) said:
In reply to 93EXCivic :
Your "berkeley it and let people die" comment went a long way toward establishing your perspective.
All I am saying is given what we have seen as far as mortality rate in relation to certain ages and conditions people with those should be able to make their own decisions not the companies they work for. In no way is that saying continue a lockdown because that is clearly not the solution.
