If a good vaccine is not found, how long are you willing to hide?

Kevin Lewis opines:  

"I do not wish DonDiego to be deprived of health care, but I cannot help but observe that if his employer had gone out of business, he had been laid off, etc. and he suddenly found himself without health insurance, he might understand the fundamental nature of the problem."

 

Poor old DonDiego thanks Kevin Lewis for his concern and kindness in citing DonDiego's potential health insurance deprivation.  Indeed, things happen.

Nonetheless, poor old DonDiego considered health care insurance when initially seeking employment after graduation, and things have worked out pretty well over the last 50 years, . . . just as he had "hoped".

 

So not only does poor old DonDiego understand the fundamental problem of not having health insutrance; he understood it over 50 years ago.  And he comported himself so as to avoid the problem.  Over the years he has weathered illness, injury, and cancer.   So far, . . . so good.

 

 

Re: "hiding"

teechur and poor old DonDiego stepped out today and enjoyed an excellent lunch at a nearby Mexican restaurant.  

Life goes on. 

Originally posted by: Boilerman

What specifically has Trump not done?


He did nothing other than try and hide the problem for two months. He even admitted he told his aids to slow down testing. However, the greatest damage has been his COVID-19 denial its a hoax, it is like the flu, it is going to disappear like a miracle, masks and social distancing are PC and so on.  His latest denial is only 1% of people infected have negative outcomes.  For the population of hardcore Trumpers, a lot of them stopped listening after Trump told them it was a hoax. They think requiring a mask in public is some sort of violation of the Constitution.

 

Truth is we have had no shirt no shoes no service for decades and nobody bats an eye at that. But tell them they have to wear a mask during a pandemic and suddenly their panties knot up.

I had thought that Trump's idiot pronouncements wouldn't be taken seriously, even by his very base "base." But it seems that whenever he says something stupid about the coronavirus, a sizable number of people believe him. They actually fucking believe him. He is, incredibly, a role model for all the inbred mouth-breathers of America.

 

Tens of thousands of deaths are squarely his fault.

 

 

Originally posted by: Kevin Lewis

It was a loaded question, as is the title of this thread. It's not unlike "Do you still beat your wife?"

 

There's a logical term for a question that carries a false premise within it, but I forget what that term is. I do remember that it makes the question essentially unanswerable. The false premise in Boiler's question is that staying home and observing social distancing guidelines is "hiding."


I'm guessing loaded question is close enough, or trick question, forcing the responder into supporting a 'problematic presupposition'  which may be the term you were trying to remember.  Disregarding recommendations as the virus is surging would be a problematic presupposition for me on my end of the question.

 

I like Hanlon's razor, by which the responder (me) avoids assuming the worst, that the question is asked out of mean-ness or to embarrass me, or to support his position for breaking out of our cocoons and socializing regardless.  Hanlon's razor serves the responder (me) by keeping things civil rather than biting back on what may be a wrong assumption on my part, resulting in hard feelings, loss of a relationship, etc.  As I mentioned, I took it as "just a question" and replied according to a "reasonable alternative" explanation for the question: perhaps he was truly interested in how I was responding in this part of the pandemic.   So that formed my answer.

 

Hanlon's razor can apply to everyday situations.  I hear an acquaintance got married in a church wedding.  I didn't get an invitation.  I could take umbrage that I wasn't invited and say something snarky when I see her or, I could assume a "reasonable alternative explanation":  my invitation was lost in the mail; she could only afford a certain number of attendees at the reception.  In accepting either (or more) of these reasonable alternative explanations I avoid a possible misunderstanding, avoid hurting her feelings by lashing out, and a friendship is not mistakenly disrupted.


Thanks, Candy. I think that was the term I was going for. The problematic presupposition in Boiler's stupid question was that practicing coronavirus health measures is somehow cowardly. That is the meme Trump and his lackeys are trying to promote, of course.

 

It's always a matter of judgment whether you want to take people's asking such questions at face value and answer them accordingly, as you apparently did with Boiler--but you might have observed that Boiler very, very often asks such questions not because he gives a crap about the answer, but to obtain a handle by which to attack the answerer. That may or may not have been the case with you.

 

You do learn to avoid talking with some people as if they were human. For instance, if Boiler or Stalker asked me what college I attended, or for that matter what my favorite flavor of ice cream was, I wouldn't answer, because the only purpose they could have in asking would be to craft some childish insult.

 

I like Hanlon's Razor, but it doesn't apply to the horribly uncivil environment of the internet.

Boilerman is OK with me.  Over and out.

Originally posted by: Candy Wright

Boilerman is OK with me.  Over and out.


That doesn't reflect well on you, but to each his/her own.

Originally posted by: Candy Wright

I'm guessing loaded question is close enough, or trick question, forcing the responder into supporting a 'problematic presupposition'  which may be the term you were trying to remember.  Disregarding recommendations as the virus is surging would be a problematic presupposition for me on my end of the question.

 

I like Hanlon's razor, by which the responder (me) avoids assuming the worst, that the question is asked out of mean-ness or to embarrass me, or to support his position for breaking out of our cocoons and socializing regardless.  Hanlon's razor serves the responder (me) by keeping things civil rather than biting back on what may be a wrong assumption on my part, resulting in hard feelings, loss of a relationship, etc.  As I mentioned, I took it as "just a question" and replied according to a "reasonable alternative" explanation for the question: perhaps he was truly interested in how I was responding in this part of the pandemic.   So that formed my answer.

 

Hanlon's razor can apply to everyday situations.  I hear an acquaintance got married in a church wedding.  I didn't get an invitation.  I could take umbrage that I wasn't invited and say something snarky when I see her or, I could assume a "reasonable alternative explanation":  my invitation was lost in the mail; she could only afford a certain number of attendees at the reception.  In accepting either (or more) of these reasonable alternative explanations I avoid a possible misunderstanding, avoid hurting her feelings by lashing out, and a friendship is not mistakenly disrupted.


I have two brothers who are largely staying at home.  They will do carry out food, but will not visit a restaurant or a bar.  I've asked them the same question and received an "I don't know" response from both.

 

I have a good friend who is 77 years of age.  He's a bit over weight, but he's in pretty good heath.  Bud is a retired cop.  He also worked railroad security for years.  His attitude is "I'm 77 years old.  I don't know how many years I have left.  Am I going to stay at home for half of my expected lifespan waiting this thing out?"

 

Bud has decided to be out an about.  We will enjoy cocktails together later today at our local pub, and we'll be golfing together this Saturday morning.

 

I wear a mask when I'm in the grocery store or when in any store, for that matter.  We're all mask free at the local pub and certainly mask free on the golf course.

 

 

Since you asked, here is my take. I will wear a mask whenever out around other people. There is, as yet,  no way to know who could be/is infected. I could fall over dead my next breath - or- I have "X" amount of days/years left. Who knows? One thing I do know is that one's life is largly affected by the choices we make, from the moment we wake up til we fall asleep each day. The only thing I ask is if you decide to not wear a mask, then stay away from me. I am in no hurry to die just because I could not be patient til a vaccine is found. Do yourself a favor and make wise choices.

Originally posted by: Boilerman

I have two brothers who are largely staying at home.  They will do carry out food, but will not visit a restaurant or a bar.  I've asked them the same question and received an "I don't know" response from both.

 

I have a good friend who is 77 years of age.  He's a bit over weight, but he's in pretty good heath.  Bud is a retired cop.  He also worked railroad security for years.  His attitude is "I'm 77 years old.  I don't know how many years I have left.  Am I going to stay at home for half of my expected lifespan waiting this thing out?"

 

Bud has decided to be out an about.  We will enjoy cocktails together later today at our local pub, and we'll be golfing together this Saturday morning.

 

I wear a mask when I'm in the grocery store or when in any store, for that matter.  We're all mask free at the local pub and certainly mask free on the golf course.

 

 


Bars, as in your local pub, have been major incubators of outbreaks since this thing began. The close proximity of bar patrons to one another in an indoor environment is perfect for spreading the virus. Bar patronage has been identified as a significant factor in the recent surge of cases in several states.

 

If you go to a bar and hang around, maskless, you may pick up the virus, then take it home and infect your brothers and/or your friends. Thus, you're negating their caution with your careless selfishness. And so is your friend Bud.

 

I know it's easy to come up with rationalizations why your behavior is supposedly OK. That's why you've been twisting the numbers and ignoring common sense. I thought it was political or ideological with you, but it might just be that you lack the discipline to behave the way everyone should during this pandemic and have been trying to convince yourself that that's OK.

Already a LVA subscriber?
To continue reading, choose an option below:
Diamond Membership
$3 per month
Unlimited access to LVA website
Exclusive subscriber-only content
Limited Member Rewards Online
Join Now
or
Platinum Membership
$50 per year
Unlimited access to LVA website
Exclusive subscriber-only content
Exclusive Member Rewards Book
Join Now