Search results

Let's simplify things based on what we currently know. Ignoring every other consideration in life, let's say I want to solely minimize risk of getting Covid. It seems I should isolate myself until a) I get vaccinated or b) the virus goes away. Am I missing any other choices? What's the time...

Forget it. From this exchange, I've concluded you're just constructing some imaginary conversations/arguments when replying to me.

Are you being deliberately obtuse? One of my questions/observations was regarding a contradiction (in my view) within a paragraph of the written opinion in Jacobson's case, so how would rereading it contain "all the answers to [my] questions"? Moreover, what's the point of offering the link when...

Perhaps you could quote exactly what section of my comment you are replying to, because I can't seem to see what you are responding to for the "millionth time"? From my perspective, you introduce something from one part of my comment, set up a different argument from another, and then answer...

Since takethepoints message that you quoted was in response to me, perhaps you can explain. What is "it"? What is "Home"? Who is "they"? What will "they" "see"?

I have no idea what zero sum game have to do with shades of gray, but when it comes to governing U.S., I sure hope those in power are viewing the task as approaching zero sum.

You don't think the highlighted portions aren't inconsistent? How can a right/liberty be both "not invaded" yet unwilling to be held "secured" when it favors (passively, I might add) the minority? The fact that the direct contradiction appears in the same paragraph is what amuses me. Obviously...

Eh, I have my own thoughts on the main reasons that lead "it" to last so long, and the content is not a heavy factor. Also, depending on what you mean by "it", some would argue "it" hasn't. However, that's getting more into philosophical theory crafting and away from the covid topic.

I can't say I know what the Constitution authors wanted, but the language to me seems to have emphasized the differentiation between malleable processes and ironclad statements. [Edit: Future justices and their decisions however... e.g. the Jacobson case where it seemed rather hypercritical to...

Interesting. Out of curiosity, I skimmed the text of the Jacobson case found here: https://tile.loc.gov/storage-services/service/ll/usrep/usrep197/usrep197011/usrep197011.pdf. This paragraph seems to me to best summarize its decision. The last part highlighted in bold by me though seems as if...

The quote is directly from the Constitution itself: https://www.archives.gov/founding-docs/constitution-transcript, Article I, Section 9. I skimmed your link; none of the emergency situations have to do with a pandemic. Actually, none of it has to do with suspending the Constitution. Instead...

Hrmm, I wonder about that. When you say federal civil liberties, if you mean those protected by the Constitution, then the only "good reason" for suspending the Constitution that is written in the Constitution is "when in cases of rebellion or invasion the public safety may require it." A...

Severely underdetermined systems mixed with poor application/interpretation of statistics, but wherever there's a demand...

Political science class was decades ago for me. What tools/powers does the Federal government have here regarding lockdowns? Directly, I believe executive branch can lockdown national and interstate borders, although attempts at either would likely be delayed and wind up in the courts with...

Well, for something like forecasting the death rate of FL, if the model's expected value was able to land with half above and half below in a consecutive 10 years, I would call that either a remarkable stroke of luck or more likely somebody making adjustments to the algorithm after the fact...

I guess everything is relative. For years (5+?), I've been hearing how there's bound to be a market correction (in finance) because it's doing too well, but it never happened until now. I don't know how much relevance domestic markets such as the S&P500 relate to "growth" as opposed to metrics...

Isn't the economic danger of low growth largely a self-made problem by the government via the shutdown orders? I mean, there would be lower growth than pre-Covid without any government interference, but arguably not near the extent as today. The infusion of cash is to keep the country alive yet...

My statement about stagflation was referring to this: My limited understanding of stagflation is that the following occurs: a) slow economic growth b) high unemployment c) high inflation rate (a) and (b) are pretty much a given. A $2 trillion relief bill that gets mostly depleted within a month...

It is more than feasible that the reaction to any "incident" can be "worse" than the "incident" itself. Obviously, it's not provable either way, not to mention "worse" is subjective to begin with.

What does under/over-counting have to do with the interpretation that "[some?/most? of those] people were going to die anyways" based on that chart (which I'm not saying is valid or invalid data)?