Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
An emergency event is a sudden, urgent, usually unexpected incident or occurrence that requires an immediate reaction or assistance for emergency situations faced by the recipients of public assistance. The main purpose of such assistance is to bring the situation under control and to restore normality. It usually poses a threat to the health or safety of those involved, responders, and people in the surrounding area. In Glass v. Board of Common Council, 262 Ky. 471 (Ky. 1936), the court observed that “An emergency is any event or occasional combination of circumstances that calls for immediate action or remedy; pressing necessity; exigency; a sudden or unexpected happening; an unforeseen occurrence or condition. Existing and continuing conditions are never considered emergencies.” (Source: https://definitions.uslegal.com/e/emergency-event/)
I would concede that there was a bona fide emergency from March until May. From early/mid May onwards, it is no longer an emergency. If you look at the chart in the below link, you may understand my point better.
On July 19th there were only eight (8) COVID-19 deaths in NYS. How is that an emergency?
The chart is meaningless unless the placement of the red marks is explained; it simply looks like someone's opinion to me. Surely we should not be classifying the danger of COVID-19 based solely on current local hospitalizations and ICU admittances while disregarding what is happening all around us.
Your uncited definition of emergency above might be significant if the bolded part was simply ignored. Until the situation is under control and normality has been restored we rightfully remain on emergency footing.
Status:
"Smartened up and walked away!"
(set 26 days ago)
11,782 posts, read 5,795,007 times
Reputation: 14207
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt Marcinkiewicz
Around here in WNY, a couple bars got creative by creating 'dollar menus', whereby a patron could order food options such as a 'handful of croutons', lol. Unfortunately at least one of these has already been ordered to eliminate said menus
Could you post a link to that - I'm in WNY and don't see any articles but do see $1 menus advertised on Social Media for a bunch of bars.
I've already acknowledged that it was you who I originally replied to.
Congratulations. I never claimed otherwise.
Quote:
And it is the responsibility of someone making claims to support them, not require every reader to do their own searching.
As I'm sure you do for every one of your own posts.
2+2 = 4
Looking out my window, I currently see a blue sky.
Today is Tuesday.
All are facts. The absence of a supporting link does not make any point an opinion.
Quote:
Particularly when search engines seem to be focused entirely on current temporary restrictions.
Without supporting links, this is just your opinion.
Quote:
You're conflating two entirely different subjects here and suggesting that Cuomo has an interest in limiting liquor only establishments simply because he has taken a temporary step to control this virus by limiting crowds in bars through a food requirement. Even now that you've returned you have done nothing to support your contention that Cuomo has a problem with beverage only establishments in the normal sense of business.
Cuomo's policies are anti-business (unless you are an insider who stands to benefit). If you want to call that opinion, be my guest. It is, however, an opinion that many NY business owners agree upon.
His policies during the COVID situation have been especially hard on small businesses, including small local bars. Lowes, Target, and Wal-Mart can be filled with people - with zero enforcement on mask and other guidelines. Mass protests are all okay. But neighborhood bars (along with many other local businesses) are forbidden to open, regardless of any safety protocols they may set in place.
Can I _prove_ this is "anti-" anything? No. The facts should make it obvious. COVID has only made things easier for Cuomo to get what he wants without the pesky legislature getting in the way (even though they usually rubber-stamp his policies, it helps to avoid floor debate from the other side).
Quote:
Splitting hairs over whether a license is truly transferable if its conditions are significantly changed in doing so does not address the question.
I'm not splitting anything. I merely corrected your claim on what I wrote.
I didn't realize you had a question. I thought you simply enjoyed being a contrarian (opinion, yes... But I could also provide many links to posts which support that claim).
Quote:
Do you have any idea when the terms changed back apparently to where they were in the 1950s, requiring food sales at all on-premise locations? At that time I believe there was a fifty percent food requirement according to a relative who had a bar in Brooklyn, not that it ever happened that way.
What happened in the 1950s has no bearing on this conversation. If you have factual information to contradict what I wrote, state it. "What you believe" is more opinion.
Quote:
It may also be interesting to note that language in the temporary ruling appears to indicate that if food sales are not required under the current license that the business may be exempt from the temporary ruling.
No links so that must be another opinion?
So what you are saying is that the new order requires food only if food is currently required. If food is not currently required, then food is not required. No change from the current rules which makes this entire thread pointless.
Considering the source (Cuomo) such useless absurdity actually makes sense.
Quote:
I'm no stranger to the business and know of at least one long-standing bar that had food at one time but cannot do so any longer as the health department has deemed cesspool capacity inadequate. Would that mean the license, and therefore the business itself, is valueless for the purpose of selling it?
Being such an expert in the field, you should already know the answer. I have no idea. I can only relate my own information from two different situations. Neither bar had to serve food in the past (both pervious owners were not alive in the 1950s, so that has no bearing). As part of the license transfer, both were required to serve food. There was no % requirement that I know of, and based on their compliance, I don't see how there could be.
And no... the bar owners that shared this information with me did not provide links. So I guess their experience (and investment in compliance) is just "opinion." They are both smart individuals who have no reason to lie to me.
Peace.
Not everything has to be an argument. This forum is getting worse by the day. I'm done with this thread.
The chart is meaningless unless the placement of the red marks is explained; it simply looks like someone's opinion to me. Surely we should not be classifying the danger of COVID-19 based solely on current local hospitalizations and ICU admittances while disregarding what is happening all around us.
Your uncited definition of emergency above might be significant if the bolded part was simply ignored. Until the situation is under control and normality has been restored we rightfully remain on emergency footing.
I added the markings to the chart to graphically show my opinion of emergency vs. non-emergency.
The citation for the definition is right there (link provided).
I think your approach is part of the problem. The goal posts have moved multiple times. Hospitals are not swamped, ICU beds are open, and deaths are <10 per day. The virus is not killing hundreds of people per day. The "emergency" is over and we will need to learn to deal with the virus being around. Cuomo should be relieved of his emergency powers and Government order restored so the Legislature can govern versus King Cuomo making decrees and issuing edicts.
As I'm sure you do for every one of your own posts.
2+2 = 4
Looking out my window, I currently see a blue sky.
Today is Tuesday.
All are facts. The absence of a supporting link does not make any point an opinion.
Without supporting links, this is just your opinion.
Cuomo's policies are anti-business (unless you are an insider who stands to benefit). If you want to call that opinion, be my guest. It is, however, an opinion that many NY business owners agree upon.
His policies during the COVID situation have been especially hard on small businesses, including small local bars. Lowes, Target, and Wal-Mart can be filled with people - with zero enforcement on mask and other guidelines. Mass protests are all okay. But neighborhood bars (along with many other local businesses) are forbidden to open, regardless of any safety protocols they may set in place.
Can I _prove_ this is "anti-" anything? No. The facts should make it obvious. COVID has only made things easier for Cuomo to get what he wants without the pesky legislature getting in the way (even though they usually rubber-stamp his policies, it helps to avoid floor debate from the other side).
I'm not splitting anything. I merely corrected your claim on what I wrote.
I didn't realize you had a question. I thought you simply enjoyed being a contrarian (opinion, yes... But I could also provide many links to posts which support that claim).
What happened in the 1950s has no bearing on this conversation. If you have factual information to contradict what I wrote, state it. "What you believe" is more opinion.
No links so that must be another opinion?
So what you are saying is that the new order requires food only if food is currently required. If food is not currently required, then food is not required. No change from the current rules which makes this entire thread pointless.
Considering the source (Cuomo) such useless absurdity actually makes sense.
Being such an expert in the field, you should already know the answer. I have no idea. I can only relate my own information from two different situations. Neither bar had to serve food in the past (both pervious owners were not alive in the 1950s, so that has no bearing). As part of the license transfer, both were required to serve food. There was no % requirement that I know of, and based on their compliance, I don't see how there could be.
And no... the bar owners that shared this information with me did not provide links. So I guess their experience (and investment in compliance) is just "opinion." They are both smart individuals who have no reason to lie to me.
Peace.
Not everything has to be an argument. This forum is getting worse by the day. I'm done with this thread.
I added the markings to the chart to graphically show my opinion of emergency vs. non-emergency.
The citation for the definition is right there (link provided).
I think your approach is part of the problem. The goal posts have moved multiple times. Hospitals are not swamped, ICU beds are open, and deaths are <10 per day. The virus is not killing hundreds of people per day. The "emergency" is over and we will need to learn to deal with the virus being around. Cuomo should be relieved of his emergency powers and Government order restored so the Legislature can govern versus King Cuomo making decrees and issuing edicts.
And I believe your approach is the problem that the USA is having in half its states right now. Declaring a problem solved does not end the problem, regardless of what political considerations dictate.
This is a public health crisis that should have been handled much more efficiently and effectively but vast amounts of people chose to make it a political issue and deal with it in rhetoric rather than in science.
Even putting aside bars, both indoor and outdoor restaurants. While my kids and grandkids live on LI, I live in PA which has the same rules.
You go to a restaurant. Party of FOUR at one table. Do all these adults live in the same household? Outdoors? I have seen picnic tables outside with SIX adult at the same table. Maybe not strangers but all these adults live in the same household?
What is next? Show us your Drivers Licenses to sit at same table to prove all at your table live together? Social distancing for extended family and friends?
And I believe your approach is the problem that the USA is having in half its states right now. Declaring a problem solved does not end the problem, regardless of what political considerations dictate.
This is a public health crisis that should have been handled much more efficiently and effectively but vast amounts of people chose to make it a political issue and deal with it in rhetoric rather than in science.
I didnt say the problem was "solved." In fact, I am admitting the virus will be with us for the foreseeable future and we as a society need to learn to live with it just like we do other viruses. The issue at hand is the Government's overreaching powers being used to effectively shut down small businesses which is unconstitutional.
I believe you would admit that at SOME POINT the Governor will need to cede his emergency powers. At SOME POINT the State will need to allow restaurants and other businesses to serve at their maximum capacity. At SOME POINT, concerts and large events will need to take place again. For somebody like you, when is that? When the virus is fully squashed? Does that seem realistic or even possible?
[quote=ThePowerBroker;58707689]I didnt say the problem was "solved." In fact, I am admitting the virus will be with us for the foreseeable future and we as a society need to learn to live with it just like we do other viruses. The issue at hand is the Government's overreaching powers being used to effectively shut down small businesses which is unconstitutional.
I believe you would admit that at SOME POINT the Governor will need to cede his emergency powers. At SOME POINT the State will need to allow restaurants and other businesses to serve at their maximum capacity. At SOME POINT, concerts and large events will need to take place again. For somebody like you, when is that? When the virus is fully squashed? Does that seem realistic or even possible?
And therein lies the problem. I have personally lost 2 cousins on LI. I do not treat this casually at all. In fact, I am a senior in great health, albeit with a few extra pounds on me. I have essentially become a hermit. I do go to the grocery store and I will go for a walk or to pick up take out. Now a big difference between myself and others is that I recognize that we all have choices to make and this is my choice. I would love it for all to treat this with masks and SD, but the reality is that many don't, so I do what I think I have to. IF I still lived on LI now, I probably would be out more than I am, with the required precautions, but I live in a tourist area and we have guests from all over the place here and therefore I am not willing to take a chance.
Further, we have an annual flu shot that many do not take. Even if they get a COVID-19 vaccine tomorrow and have enough to innoculate the world, people will have a choice to take it or not, unless they make it a requirement like smallpox.
I didnt say the problem was "solved." In fact, I am admitting the virus will be with us for the foreseeable future and we as a society need to learn to live with it just like we do other viruses. The issue at hand is the Government's overreaching powers being used to effectively shut down small businesses which is unconstitutional.
I believe you would admit that at SOME POINT the Governor will need to cede his emergency powers. At SOME POINT the State will need to allow restaurants and other businesses to serve at their maximum capacity. At SOME POINT, concerts and large events will need to take place again. For somebody like you, when is that? When the virus is fully squashed? Does that seem realistic or even possible?
And therein lies the problem. I have personally lost 2 cousins on LI. I do not treat this casually at all. In fact, I am a senior in great health, albeit with a few extra pounds on me. I have essentially become a hermit. I do go to the grocery store and I will go for a walk or to pick up take out. Now a big difference between myself and others is that I recognize that we all have choices to make and this is my choice. I would love it for all to treat this with masks and SD, but the reality is that many don't, so I do what I think I have to. IF I still lived on LI now, I probably would be out more than I am, with the required precautions, but I live in a tourist area and we have guests from all over the place here and therefore I am not willing to take a chance.
Further, we have an annual flu shot that many do not take. Even if they get a COVID-19 vaccine tomorrow and have enough to innoculate the world, people will have a choice to take it or not, unless they make it a requirement like smallpox.
I believe it will be a requirement to travel & go to school ... kind of like the yellow fever card
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
