Page 24 of 42 FirstFirst ... 1420212223242526272834 ... LastLast
Results 461 to 480 of 838

Thread: Covid-19 by the numbers

  1. #461
    Originally Posted by accountinquestion View Post
    Originally Posted by Bob21 View Post
    Accountinquestion, do you understand that regulations have been piled onto businesses since the 30s. I mean the first thing every new Democrat administration does is just piles on more regulations. It’s never enough for liberals. And Obama took it to a whole new level.

    I’ve listened to the liberal playbook so much, I can always quote it verbatim.
    2 things. Of course new regulations have been created since the 30s. Some other bozo (was it Danny instead?) was basically bragging how many regulations our country had created for the environment and therefore conservatives are not against the environment.

    At least you don't try that line of bs.

    Plastic just keeps piling up and up. In our seafood, everywhere. Tiny little pieces. No clue about parks or why water bottles disturb you so much.

    You believing you know the "liberal playbook". L-O-L Given that any idea that is not "conservative" is generally considered liberal, you're full of shit. The is more variation in liberals than conservatives. It is nothing more than the fantasies coming from a not intelligent man that "understands them liberals". fuck off dumbass.
    Oh hey brah, it wasn't me man. I'm not the bozo that mentioned any regulations. You might want to light another bowl and then go up and get some pudding from mom.

  2. #462
    Originally Posted by accountinquestion View Post
    Plastic just keeps piling up and up. In our seafood, everywhere. Tiny little pieces. No clue about parks or why water bottles disturb you so much.
    A couple things: Okay, I get it, plastic keeps piling up and up. That’s a problem. So why not do something about it if you and your buddy Obama feels so strongly about it?

    How does regulating plastics bottles in National Parks address this issue?

    I’m not “disturbed” by plastic bottles. I’m disturbed by how stupid the libs are at controlling how many plastic bottles are out there. Do you really think regulating plastic bottles in National Parks will make a dent in the situation?

    To me this points out how stupid Obama and anybody who supported him are. The reason Obama’s cronies put so many regulations on National Park is because the Federal Government owns National Parks. This made it easier for them to implement all these stupid regulations, which were meaningless in addessing any real pollution problems. They were basically regulating themselves.

    Just think what an Obama administration would do if they could own more of America. They would regulate it (us) to death. They’d probably regulate how much toilet paper we can use since toilet paper comes from trees that are cut down. We know how much that hurts global warning.

    So accountinquestion, now that you know wiping your butt with toilet paper is leading to global warming and destroying the environment for future generations are you going to quite using toilet paper?
    Last edited by Bob21; 05-11-2020 at 08:29 AM.

  3. #463
    Originally Posted by dannyj View Post
    Originally Posted by accountinquestion View Post
    Originally Posted by Bob21 View Post
    Accountinquestion, do you understand that regulations have been piled onto businesses since the 30s. I mean the first thing every new Democrat administration does is just piles on more regulations. It’s never enough for liberals. And Obama took it to a whole new level.

    I’ve listened to the liberal playbook so much, I can always quote it verbatim.
    2 things. Of course new regulations have been created since the 30s. Some other bozo (was it Danny instead?) was basically bragging how many regulations our country had created for the environment and therefore conservatives are not against the environment.

    At least you don't try that line of bs.

    Plastic just keeps piling up and up. In our seafood, everywhere. Tiny little pieces. No clue about parks or why water bottles disturb you so much.

    You believing you know the "liberal playbook". L-O-L Given that any idea that is not "conservative" is generally considered liberal, you're full of shit. The is more variation in liberals than conservatives. It is nothing more than the fantasies coming from a not intelligent man that "understands them liberals". fuck off dumbass.
    Oh hey brah, it wasn't me man. I'm not the bozo that mentioned any regulations. You might want to light another bowl and then go up and get some pudding from mom.
    Someone needs to wave a white flag...Danny is leaving this slob out on the curb like a trash can lololololol

  4. #464
    Accountin, does daddy always tell you that you must be home by 10 PM as you live under his roof and under his rules? Otherwise, you can forget your next weeks allowance.

  5. #465
    Originally Posted by Bob21 View Post
    Originally Posted by redietz View Post
    Interesting perspectives here. When my girlfriend's mother was badly injured in a fall and hospitalized, we moved in with her father after he was diagnosed with dementia. We stayed in that home for more than a year.

    Based on assumptions presented above, that would have made us economically failed "libtards" milking the previous generation. Interesting assumptions.

    Now if this were 30 years ago, the assumptions would instead be that we were good children and civically responsible people taking care of the previous generation.
    Redietz, the position of a conservative on this issue would not have been any different now than 30 years ago. Conservative, in general, feel the family unit should care for the elderly and their kids. This has never changed.

    So what you did caring for your gf’s mother would’ve been seen as a very positive from a conservative viewpoint. You didn’t look for government help. You saw this as your responsibility and helped her. This is how conservatives think.

    On the other hand, a liberal position would be looking to the government to help out your girlfriend’s parents.

    You might be more of a conservative than you think.

    And yes, me and my brothers and sisters have taken care of my parents in their old age and never put them in a nursing home. They both passed away in our houses. This is the same way my parents took care of their parents and never put them in a nursing home.

    My family doesn’t believe in putting old people in government warehouse waiting to die.

    As much as it disturbs the alt-right folks, and I have stated this before, I was on board with about half of Trump's policies pre-corona. Having followed the guy my entire life, however, I can not see how anyone would vote for him for president. That aside, I was on board with most of the immigration perspective (I like Australia's model), but not the building of a wall, which is one of those silly inefficient symbols account was talking about. I was on board with political-correctness-has-become-overblown, on board with cutting UN, NATO funding, on board with anti-China trade (I'm from the Pat Buchanan school of international trade), anti-NAFTA, and so on, as I'm mega-pro-union and grew up in the land of the Molly Maguires. But the president has been a self-absorbed, self-promoting semi-autistic whack job since his 30's, so why would he change? He's been involved in two lawsuits a week against "the little guy" (mostly) for more than 30 years. So he's no champion of the working man.

    My mother, aunt, and uncle all had MS. They all spent the last 12-15 years of their lives as quadriplegics, and they all stayed home until the final few months. And they were functioning members of their households, still making decisions for the households, until they died. That's one reason I just do not understand this denigration of the elderly that evidently is part and parcel of the alt-right movement on this site. "They're over 65, let 'em die." Yeah, that would go over well with conservatives 30 years ago.

    https://dnyuz.com/2020/05/08/mcdonal...nmark-pity-us/

    Everyone should be able to make a living wage.

  6. #466
    Originally Posted by redietz View Post
    Originally Posted by Bob21 View Post
    Originally Posted by redietz View Post
    Interesting perspectives here. When my girlfriend's mother was badly injured in a fall and hospitalized, we moved in with her father after he was diagnosed with dementia. We stayed in that home for more than a year.

    Based on assumptions presented above, that would have made us economically failed "libtards" milking the previous generation. Interesting assumptions.

    Now if this were 30 years ago, the assumptions would instead be that we were good children and civically responsible people taking care of the previous generation.
    Redietz, the position of a conservative on this issue would not have been any different now than 30 years ago. Conservative, in general, feel the family unit should care for the elderly and their kids. This has never changed.

    So what you did caring for your gf’s mother would’ve been seen as a very positive from a conservative viewpoint. You didn’t look for government help. You saw this as your responsibility and helped her. This is how conservatives think.

    On the other hand, a liberal position would be looking to the government to help out your girlfriend’s parents.

    You might be more of a conservative than you think.

    And yes, me and my brothers and sisters have taken care of my parents in their old age and never put them in a nursing home. They both passed away in our houses. This is the same way my parents took care of their parents and never put them in a nursing home.

    My family doesn’t believe in putting old people in government warehouse waiting to die.
    That's one reason I just do not understand this denigration of the elderly that evidently is part and parcel of the alt-right movement on this site. "They're over 65, let 'em die." Yeah, that would go over well with conservatives 30 years ago.
    That's an interesting assumption red. One I doubt many on here would agree with.

  7. #467
    Originally Posted by dannyj View Post
    Originally Posted by redietz View Post
    Originally Posted by Bob21 View Post

    Redietz, the position of a conservative on this issue would not have been any different now than 30 years ago. Conservative, in general, feel the family unit should care for the elderly and their kids. This has never changed.

    So what you did caring for your gf’s mother would’ve been seen as a very positive from a conservative viewpoint. You didn’t look for government help. You saw this as your responsibility and helped her. This is how conservatives think.

    On the other hand, a liberal position would be looking to the government to help out your girlfriend’s parents.

    You might be more of a conservative than you think.

    And yes, me and my brothers and sisters have taken care of my parents in their old age and never put them in a nursing home. They both passed away in our houses. This is the same way my parents took care of their parents and never put them in a nursing home.

    My family doesn’t believe in putting old people in government warehouse waiting to die.
    That's one reason I just do not understand this denigration of the elderly that evidently is part and parcel of the alt-right movement on this site. "They're over 65, let 'em die." Yeah, that would go over well with conservatives 30 years ago.
    That's an interesting assumption red. One I doubt many on here would agree with.
    My main concern with redietz is that his statements are outright lies.

    I never read one post where someone (conservative or liberal) said: “They’re over 65, let ‘em die.”

    What everybody said is those at risk (elderly and people with compromised systems) should stay locked down. Those that are not at risk should be able to carry on.

    This is the problem with liberals, they make things up to fit their narrative. When welfare was reduced, all liberals came out of the woodwork, claiming anybody who wanted to reduce welfare benefits just wanted people to die on the streets starving. As we all know, that never happened.

    Liberals are like drama queens. They always hype up the worst case scenario. That’s why over time they have lost credibility, except with their hard-core supporters.

  8. #468
    Originally Posted by Bob21 View Post
    Originally Posted by dannyj View Post
    Originally Posted by redietz View Post
    That's one reason I just do not understand this denigration of the elderly that evidently is part and parcel of the alt-right movement on this site. "They're over 65, let 'em die." Yeah, that would go over well with conservatives 30 years ago.
    That's an interesting assumption red. One I doubt many on here would agree with.
    My main concern with redietz is that his statements are outright lies.

    I never read one post where someone (conservative or liberal) said: “They’re over 65, let ‘em die.”

    What everybody said is those at risk (elderly and people with compromised systems) should stay locked down. Those that are not at risk should be able to carry on.

    This is the problem with liberals, they make things up to fit their narrative. When welfare was reduced, all liberals came out of the woodwork, claiming anybody who wanted to reduce welfare benefits just wanted people to die on the streets starving. As we all know, that never happened.

    Liberals are like drama queens. They always hype up the worst case scenario. That’s why over time they have lost credibility, except with their hard-core supporters.
    Well said Bob. All of us have said the elderly should stay in and their families should not visit. Same as the other high risk categories.

    What RED and others won’t admit is that 99%+ of us have next to no risk of dying from this. As the numbers are barring that out, they are now moving onto “ other permanent health issues” for us. They have to keep the hoax going.

  9. #469
    Originally Posted by The Boz View Post
    Originally Posted by Bob21 View Post
    Originally Posted by dannyj View Post

    That's an interesting assumption red. One I doubt many on here would agree with.
    My main concern with redietz is that his statements are outright lies.

    I never read one post where someone (conservative or liberal) said: “They’re over 65, let ‘em die.”

    What everybody said is those at risk (elderly and people with compromised systems) should stay locked down. Those that are not at risk should be able to carry on.

    This is the problem with liberals, they make things up to fit their narrative. When welfare was reduced, all liberals came out of the woodwork, claiming anybody who wanted to reduce welfare benefits just wanted people to die on the streets starving. As we all know, that never happened.

    Liberals are like drama queens. They always hype up the worst case scenario. That’s why over time they have lost credibility, except with their hard-core supporters.
    Well said Bob. All of us have said the elderly should stay in and their families should not visit. Same as the other high risk categories.

    What RED and others won’t admit is that 99%+ of us have next to no risk of dying from this. As the numbers are barring that out, they are now moving onto “ other permanent health issues” for us. They have to keep the hoax going.
    You know this talk about denigration of the elderly, let 'em die and all that, I don't actually think red believes that is a conservative construct. But, if you flip that concept over as it relates to socialized medicine, then it becomes very possible that some elderly will be passed over for that operation late in life. Bureaucrats (death panels) making those decisions based on age, not always in the best interest of the elderly.

  10. #470
    Originally Posted by redietz View Post
    Originally Posted by Bob21 View Post
    Originally Posted by redietz View Post
    Interesting perspectives here. When my girlfriend's mother was badly injured in a fall and hospitalized, we moved in with her father after he was diagnosed with dementia. We stayed in that home for more than a year.

    Based on assumptions presented above, that would have made us economically failed "libtards" milking the previous generation. Interesting assumptions.

    Now if this were 30 years ago, the assumptions would instead be that we were good children and civically responsible people taking care of the previous generation.
    Redietz, the position of a conservative on this issue would not have been any different now than 30 years ago. Conservative, in general, feel the family unit should care for the elderly and their kids. This has never changed.

    So what you did caring for your gf’s mother would’ve been seen as a very positive from a conservative viewpoint. You didn’t look for government help. You saw this as your responsibility and helped her. This is how conservatives think.

    On the other hand, a liberal position would be looking to the government to help out your girlfriend’s parents.

    You might be more of a conservative than you think.

    And yes, me and my brothers and sisters have taken care of my parents in their old age and never put them in a nursing home. They both passed away in our houses. This is the same way my parents took care of their parents and never put them in a nursing home.

    My family doesn’t believe in putting old people in government warehouse waiting to die.

    As much as it disturbs the alt-right folks, and I have stated this before, I was on board with about half of Trump's policies pre-corona. Having followed the guy my entire life, however, I can not see how anyone would vote for him for president. That aside, I was on board with most of the immigration perspective (I like Australia's model), but not the building of a wall, which is one of those silly inefficient symbols account was talking about. I was on board with political-correctness-has-become-overblown, on board with cutting UN, NATO funding, on board with anti-China trade (I'm from the Pat Buchanan school of international trade), anti-NAFTA, and so on, as I'm mega-pro-union and grew up in the land of the Molly Maguires. But the president has been a self-absorbed, self-promoting semi-autistic whack job since his 30's, so why would he change? He's been involved in two lawsuits a week against "the little guy" (mostly) for more than 30 years. So he's no champion of the working man.

    My mother, aunt, and uncle all had MS. They all spent the last 12-15 years of their lives as quadriplegics, and they all stayed home until the final few months. And they were functioning members of their households, still making decisions for the households, until they died. That's one reason I just do not understand this denigration of the elderly that evidently is part and parcel of the alt-right movement on this site. "They're over 65, let 'em die." Yeah, that would go over well with conservatives 30 years ago.

    https://dnyuz.com/2020/05/08/mcdonal...nmark-pity-us/

    Everyone should be able to make a living wage.
    Redietz managed to get a half dozen strawman arguments into just a couple of paragraphs. What gets me about alt-lefy redietz is here he is acting like he gives a damn about the elderly. If he got his way with single payer which would cause health care to be rationed many of the elderly would go untreated and left to die. Its already happening in Europe. That is, except for the rich who can afford to come to U.S. for care. Single payer will cause a massive doctor shortage and health care will certainly be rationed.
    "More importantly, mickey thought 8-4 was two games over .500. Argued about it. C'mon, man. Nothing can top that for math expertise. If GWAE ever has you on again, you can be sure I'll be calling in with that gem.'Nuff said." REDIETZ

  11. #471
    It doesn't matter because Redietz is too busy slurping noodles with his slant eyed girlfriend.

  12. #472
    Originally Posted by monet View Post
    It doesn't matter because Redietz is too busy slurping noodles with his slant eyed girlfriend.
    Lol. One of the better lines today!

  13. #473
    lol. One clear difference between me and yall is the fact you all love being in an echo chamber.

    I'd sit here and argue, but you guys can't handle that. It is just dumbshit from here on out.

    Ultimately you're all grown men needing to hear other grown men back themselves up.

    I've seen Mickey claim he doesn't but LMAO at that assertion.

    Sorry I smoke pot. Guess you guys are such nancys you don't even drink beer. I was just pointing out how all your talk about freedom etc is so vapid. I actually have to risk being put in a cage at gunpoint and my money stolen in big swaths of the US for relatively benign behavior. The same places you nancys go talk about having so much freedom in. What a fucking joke.

    All you nancy types like big strong men. Thats why you're in love with Trump. You idolize him. His "strength" justifies your reverence in yer own heads. (even though he ran from that woman reporter just the other dad - LOL) Pathetic. Pathetic!

    I wanted to call you guys fags because it fits but I'm too PC and don't want to offend Kewl.

    Maybe Redietz and darkoz will turn this place away from being straight circle-jerk central. I have better things to do than get into politics with morons.

  14. #474
    Originally Posted by accountinquestion View Post
    lol. One clear difference between me and yall is the fact you all love being in an echo chamber.

    I'd sit here and argue, but you guys can't handle that. It is just dumbshit from here on out.

    Ultimately you're all grown men needing to hear other grown men back themselves up.

    I've seen Mickey claim he doesn't but LMAO at that assertion.

    Sorry I smoke pot. Guess you guys are such nancys you don't even drink beer. I was just pointing out how all your talk about freedom etc is so vapid. I actually have to risk being put in a cage at gunpoint and my money stolen in big swaths of the US for relatively benign behavior. The same places you nancys go talk about having so much freedom in. What a fucking joke.

    All you nancy types like big strong men. Thats why you're in love with Trump. You idolize him. His "strength" justifies your reverence in yer own heads. (even though he ran from that woman reporter just the other dad - LOL) Pathetic. Pathetic!

    I wanted to call you guys fags because it fits but I'm too PC and don't want to offend Kewl.

    Maybe Redietz and darkoz will turn this place away from being straight circle-jerk central. I have better things to do than get into politics with morons.
    So you can not directly call someone a Faggot, lol out of respect for kewlJ but you can indirectly do it as you have posted the example above?
    You have no problem using the word Moron directly???
    Perhaps Redietz will invite us all over to slurp some noodles with his slant eyed girlfriend.
    Heck, I can bring my slant eyed wife along since she loves three minute noodles.
    Attached Images Attached Images  
    Last edited by monet; 05-13-2020 at 05:38 AM.

  15. #475
    Originally Posted by accountinquestion View Post
    Sorry I smoke pot. Guess you guys are such nancys you don't even drink beer. I was just pointing out how all your talk about freedom etc is so vapid. I actually have to risk being put in a cage at gunpoint and my money stolen in big swaths of the US for relatively benign behavior.

    I wanted to call you guys fags because it fits but I'm too PC and don't want to offend Kewl.
    Oh hey brah, I like my beer and the ladies.

    You may want to leave the van at your parents house and drive somethin' else when you travelin with the nugs and the stacks across state lines.

  16. #476
    Sadly this ugly situation is going to last more maybe more than everyone expects
    Gold loves porn casino!

  17. #477
    Originally Posted by accountinquestion View Post
    Sorry I smoke pot. Guess you guys are such nancys you don't even drink beer. I was just pointing out how all your talk about freedom etc is so vapid. I actually have to risk being put in a cage at gunpoint and my money stolen in big swaths of the US for relatively benign.
    Accountinquestion, here’s what you’re missing. We are a nation of laws. This makes sure our country does not devolve into anarchy, where everybody does whatever they want to.

    There are many laws I don’t agree with but I still abide by them. One of those laws is the speed limit in some parts of our country where there are very few people on our interstates. When I’m in Germany and drive on their highways, I think my record speed is close to 120. I like to drive fast. There is no speed limit in Germany, so I’m not breaking any laws.

    If I did this in United States, I’d get pulled over and probably hauled into jail. So I don’t do it. I drive the speed limit or stay at a speed where I don’t think I’ll get a ticket.

    I guess the take away lesson for you is if you know the law and you don’t want to go to jail, don’t break it.

    And you’re right, each state will have slightly different laws so it’s important to know them. Since you’re a pot smoker, I’m sure you know which states it’s legal and which states it’s against the law. Just don’t do it in the states where it’s against the law and you should be ok.

    Btw, it seems like smoking pot is a big part of your life because you mention it about every other post. I’m thinking you might have a drug problem and might need to go into a rehab clinic. Just looking out for a fellow VCT member.

  18. #478
    Not my words but made sense to me...

    Quarantine is when you restrict the sick.
    TYRANNY is when you restrict the healthy

  19. #479
    In Montana, for the past couple weeks we had been averaging 1 positive for every 430 coronavirus tests. Thats less than a quarter percent. But for the past few days we have a string of 2,857 tests without a single positive.

    Redietz, Montana peaked in early April averaging 16 new cases per day. Since reopening on April 24, we have been averaging just 1.17 new cases per day. And that is with the number of tests per day doubling since mid April.

    Your prediction of the peak being in June or July is not going to happen.
    "More importantly, mickey thought 8-4 was two games over .500. Argued about it. C'mon, man. Nothing can top that for math expertise. If GWAE ever has you on again, you can be sure I'll be calling in with that gem.'Nuff said." REDIETZ

  20. #480
    Originally Posted by mickeycrimm View Post
    In Montana, for the past couple weeks we had been averaging 1 positive for every 430 coronavirus tests. Thats less than a quarter percent. But for the past few days we have a string of 2,857 tests without a single positive.

    Redietz, Montana peaked in early April averaging 16 new cases per day. Since reopening on April 24, we have been averaging just 1.17 new cases per day. And that is with the number of tests per day doubling since mid April.

    Your prediction of the peak being in June or July is not going to happen.
    It sounds like Montana is one of the better places to be with relatively few cases. Not all that surprising with limited population and things seemingly more open and spread out compared to a place like NYC where people live on top of each other.

    Nevada also has relatively low numbers. Last time I looked about 7000 cases and 300 some deaths. 300 deaths....hell that is just a couple good mass shootings. (sorry bad joke).

    Here my fear is that as soon as they open up casinos and put people back together cases explode. Almost has to doesn't it? And it isn't even about getting the virus. I have had the virus and maybe have some protection. What if I am in a car accident or involved in a shooting or anything medical emergency requiring medical attention and the hospitals are all overwhelmed with Covid cases. All the ICU beds are full. The nurses and doctors all overworked working 80-100 hours a week and them getting sick on top of everything. That is the concern.

    And while I don't know Montana's hospital ICU bed situation, I would imagine it isn't very much and wouldn't take all that much for it to become overwhelmed. So what if you need medical attention? God forbid have another heart issue or complication?

    I am not making a case for shutting down for 2 years, because I don't want that. I don't know what the answer is because the thing isn't going away. And I hope I am wrong about that, but it isnt the way these viruses work. They go away when they go away, not when people will them to go away.
    Dan Druff: "there's no question that MDawg has been an obnoxious braggart, and has rubbed a ton of people the wrong way. There's something missing from his stories. Either they're fabricated, grossly exaggerated, or largely incomplete".

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 2 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 2 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 03-14-2020, 08:36 AM
  2. Blackjack variance by the numbers
    By kewlJ in forum Las Vegas
    Replies: 65
    Last Post: 04-17-2019, 07:13 PM
  3. Las Vegas Numbers Shopping 101
    By redietz in forum Sports & Sportsbetting
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 02-28-2016, 12:57 AM
  4. What numbers were you trying to hit Dicesetter?
    By Alan Mendelson in forum Las Vegas
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 02-01-2016, 03:56 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •