Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 03-20-2021, 07:13 PM
 
Location: moved
13,609 posts, read 9,647,657 times
Reputation: 23395

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by lieqiang View Post
Yet another poor comparison.

As time passed there was still risk of auto accidents which seat belts greatly mitigate injury and death.
As time passed there are still terrorists that want to blow up planes.

If time passes and society reaches herd and everyone who wants to be vaccinated can have on, the risk from covid might have reduced considerably. Thus the change in mask policy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lieqiang View Post
The argument that masks usage will go away based on the assumption we will reach herd immunity and covid cases will drop to extremely low levels where it isn't considered a major threat.

Seat belt usage continued but the issue it's trying to address, death or injury from automobile accidents, has not gone away nor does anyone think it disappear as a risk in the future.
You regard the analogy as being flawed, because you are optimistic that the ‘rona, after suitable and broad taking of precaution, will pass. That threat gone, the remedies will become moot. I disagree. Even if the pandemic won’t become endemic, the argument could be made, that well-known and less lethal maladies are also well-combated by masks, and therefore, we should take mask-wearing as a lesson from the ‘rona… a lesson to be made permanent.

If we say, that saving 1M lives is definitely worth 300M people wearing masks, then why can’t we say, that saving 100K lives or 50K lives – the likely normal annual death-toll from good old quotidian influenza – is also worth the inconvenience of masks? I mean, are 1M lives a huge thing, but 100K a merely tiny one?

If masks are a nugatory inconvenience, ought we not to be wearing them, if so doing, results in saving just one life, let alone thousands? Or, is there a line to be drawn somewhere? And if there is, well, why not draw it at 10M, instead of merely 1M? And so on.

Returning to seat belts… The point is that in the 1930s, the rate of fatality per mile driven, was higher than in the 1980s. Technology was more primitive, life-spans were shorter, and fatalistic (put intended!) acceptance of premature death was broader. 1930s-Man accepted some rate of fatal vehicular collision as an unfortunate reality of life, whereas 1980s-Man willingly accepted an inconvenience and higher cost, in exchange for reducing the fatality rate. Please note, that I’m not in the least disputing that seat-belts save lives. Neither am I disputing that masks, on aggregate, save lives. Of course they do! What I dispute is whether the trouble is worth it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-20-2021, 07:26 PM
 
Location: moved
13,609 posts, read 9,647,657 times
Reputation: 23395
An auxiliary argument: with the advent of airbags and plethora of other safety-features, cars have become considerably safer than they were in the 1980s. Certainly, drivers who are wearing their seat-belts, in addition to availing themselves of said features, will be safer still, than drivers who dispense with seat-belts and rely merely on such features. But even the latter scofflaws will be so much safer than were their predecessors ~40+ years ago, that the total mile-person-lives being saved by seat-belt usage, is quite a bit less, than in the 1980s and prior. So, if we go by the attenuation of a great threat, to a smaller one, there's reason to justify relaxing the rules.

Similarly, with curtailment of American military adventurism abroad, with the rise of China and semi-rise of Russia and so forth, we no longer have the uni-polar world of the 1990s, where America stands unchallenged as the global colossus meddling with less-advantaged peoples and places, trampling on their cultures and so forth. If we accept that, then it follows that Islamic terrorism is much less of a threat in 2021, than it was, in 2001. Does it not follow, that a smaller threat, ought to mean less onerous airport security procedures?

We do not argue that seat belts preclude all highway deaths, or that TSA procedures preclude all airline-related terrorism, or that masks preclude all 'rona restrictions. Rather, we argue that the remedy makes a significant, if imperfect positive impact. And we sustain the discomfort or hassle or invasion of privacy, thus incurring a cost, to benefit from that positive impact. Yes?

But just as highway-deaths won't cease completely, even with the safest modern high-tech electronic driving-aids or crumple zones or passive restraints, so too, infectious diseases won't completely cease, no matter how potent or effective our vaccines, or how high the percentage of the population is vaccinated. There will always be residual leaks, losses, gaps, failures. And so, the seat-belt argument and the TSA argument and the 'rona-mask argument really aren't so different.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-20-2021, 07:30 PM
 
Location: Rochester, WA
14,416 posts, read 11,959,919 times
Reputation: 38811
Quote:
Originally Posted by lieqiang View Post
until the pandemic subsides.

On this.... we really need to agree on a definition of what this means, and then stick to it.

We keep moving the goal posts.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-20-2021, 08:07 PM
 
8,093 posts, read 3,420,524 times
Reputation: 5609
Quote:
Originally Posted by jbgusa View Post
The arguments for continued mask wearing are beginning to sound like the arguments for lockdown forever.
Yes, they are.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-20-2021, 08:10 PM
 
Location: Spain
12,722 posts, read 7,535,558 times
Reputation: 22633
Quote:
Originally Posted by MattCW View Post
The first, and now last, time she tried to fly commercially, she said going through the tsa was like being raped all over again. She had a major panic attack right there in the south screening point of Hartsfield airport and was taken to the ER by the EMS...AND THE DIRTBAG TSA STILL TRIED TO "FINE" HER FOR "FAILURE TO COMPLETE SCREENING!"
Your friend's unfortunate issues do not make describing a body search as "molestation" any less drama-queenery. It's pure nonsense and hyperbole, either that or you don't know the definition of molestation.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-20-2021, 08:13 PM
 
8,093 posts, read 3,420,524 times
Reputation: 5609
Quote:
Originally Posted by Diana Holbrook View Post
On this.... we really need to agree on a definition of what this means, and then stick to it.

We keep moving the goal posts.
They keep moving goal posts. People keep going along with it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-20-2021, 08:13 PM
 
Location: Spain
12,722 posts, read 7,535,558 times
Reputation: 22633
Quote:
Originally Posted by ohio_peasant View Post
You regard the analogy as being flawed, because you are optimistic that the ‘rona, after suitable and broad taking of precaution, will pass.
Nope, I view the analogy as flawed because it was offered in the context of the pandemic subsiding.


Quote:
Originally Posted by ohio_peasant View Post
Returning to seat belts… The point is that in the 1930s, the rate of fatality per mile driven, was higher than in the 1980s. Technology was more primitive, life-spans were shorter, and fatalistic (put intended!) acceptance of premature death was broader. 1930s-Man accepted some rate of fatal vehicular collision as an unfortunate reality of life, whereas 1980s-Man willingly accepted an inconvenience and higher cost, in exchange for reducing the fatality rate. Please note, that I’m not in the least disputing that seat-belts save lives. Neither am I disputing that masks, on aggregate, save lives. Of course they do! What I dispute is whether the trouble is worth it.
The point is flawed because seat belts still protect against a real threat, injury or death from vehicles of which far more people drive in and at higher speeds than in the 1930s. That threat is not going away.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-20-2021, 08:30 PM
 
Location: Spain
12,722 posts, read 7,535,558 times
Reputation: 22633
Quote:
Originally Posted by ohio_peasant View Post
Similarly, with curtailment of American military adventurism abroad, with the rise of China and semi-rise of Russia and so forth, we no longer have the uni-polar world of the 1990s, where America stands unchallenged as the global colossus meddling with less-advantaged peoples and places, trampling on their cultures and so forth. If we accept that, then it follows that Islamic terrorism is much less of a threat in 2021, than it was, in 2001. Does it not follow, that a smaller threat, ought to mean less onerous airport security procedures?
What curtailment are you even speaking about? What semi-rise of Russia? Recall that ISIL peaking in 2014, only lost Mosul in 2017, and extremism is much bigger in Africa than in the 1990s.


Quote:
Originally Posted by ohio_peasant View Post
And so, the seat-belt argument and the TSA argument and the 'rona-mask argument really aren't so different.
They are completely different, because one is predicated on the threat ending and the other on the threat continuing. If you wish to believe vaccines won't work in ending this pandemic then we have a fundamental difference in opinion on where this pandemic is going, but that doesn't change the scenario I provided with example based on the science of vaccines efficacy.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-20-2021, 09:10 PM
 
45,137 posts, read 26,325,093 times
Reputation: 24874
Quote:
Originally Posted by yspobo View Post
They keep moving goal posts. People keep going along with it.
There is a segment of the population that seems to be getting some perverse fulfillment from covid. Its as if they have a new found purpose in life,masking alone, obsessively wiping things down, social distancing, lecturing/scolding others on protocols, checking case numbers like the weather, etc. The believe their efforts are akin to the civil rights worker of the 60's. They are part of something. It gives their previously unfulfilled life meaning.
And until the next cause celebre we will have to suffer them.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-20-2021, 09:43 PM
 
Location: moved
13,609 posts, read 9,647,657 times
Reputation: 23395
Quote:
Originally Posted by lieqiang View Post
They are completely different, because one is predicated on the threat ending and the other on the threat continuing. If you wish to believe vaccines won't work in ending this pandemic then we have a fundamental difference in opinion on where this pandemic is going, but that doesn't change the scenario I provided with example based on the science of vaccines efficacy.
While I am cautiously optimistic about the vaccines, assuming that the anti-vaxxer contingent is small (big assumption!), the key point is that even a resounding conquest over the 'rona still leaves our usual spate of respiratory viruses. We already have pretty convincing data that masking and distancing substantially reduced deaths due to the regular flu. Would you agree? And since those lives-saved are precious too, would it not follow, that masking ought to continue, never mind what happens to the 'rona?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:42 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top