Do you suppose, if someone views masking as "virtue signaling," that there's anything physically preventing them from fucking right off and that's why they keep coming here to piss and moan? I mean let's say that, as someone who lived for decades in Asheville, which hosted a yearly protest where women went topless in response to it being socially acceptable for men, but not women, to do so, I have come to believe that all women, of all ages and sizes, should go bare-breasted at all times. I believe this is the natural order of things and that by covering their breasts, women are "signaling" some false, socially-dictated modesty (aka "virtue"). And yet, every time I emerge from the dank hole I call home, I am assaulted by the sight of women going around with their breasts completely or partially covered. I am deeply offended, but at the same time I don't take to the Internet to bitch endlessly about it, and complain at every available opportunity, in multiple threads, about all these hidden breasts that should rightfully be swinging free. At what point do you suppose it is proper for those who feel more comfortable to wear masks to wear them, those who have been vaccinated and feel more comfortable not wearing them not wear them, and for everyone ensnared in that dynamic to shut up and fuck off about it all?

(Of course, it goes without saying that those who are unvaccinated and who also refuse to wear masks are not part of the aforementioned dynamic, and can all burn in hell.)

No, it's not lol. Banning a vaccine mandate is not the logical opposite of demanding mandating a vaccine.

Yeah, well Americans need to be tricked into doing something because the government is telling them to do it. If they add an extra layer people are gonna get lost, especially when they start mixing in new agencies.

In a tight labor market, one should probably not worry about this because there's somebody willing to do it for less. It's also a public health issue so privacy doesn't matter if it can impact the health of others.

I told y'all people can't handle what the government tells them, so things must be forced other ways.

Just the first 2 minutes is relevant:
• Video Link

Yes it is.

One is about giving businesses the freedom to demand vaccination without “being the bad guy” (because they are just following a government directive). The other is about giving businesses the freedom to not police employees’ vaccination status, without facing public/media pressure to do so (because a government directive explicitly bars them from doing so).

I actually come down on the side of the latter, because I don’t think companies have any business telling their employees what to do outside of their place of work. That goes for vaccines, drug testing (people should be able to do whatever they want if they don’t show up to work actually inebriated or high), their social media activities (no one should face consequences at work for posts made in their personal time), etc.

This is about principle, as well. Companies have far too much control over their employees and anything that further expands this is bad.

No, it's not. The logical opposite of a vaccine mandate is no vaccine mandate.



There exists centuries worth of precedent in this country about the right to mandate vaccination. Sorry if you don't like it, but it is what it is.

:haha: Reminds me of grade school

-

And again, other license plates spotted in the last couple of days, 2 more from California, 2 more from Florida, and one each from Louisiana, New Jersey, and New York.

https://www.bizjournals.com/austin/n...ic-levels.html

Or is it a mandate to not get vaccinated? That would be the logical opposite. No vaccine mandate is just the absence of a thing, not its opposite.

Look, on the one hand there is a policy forcing companies to police employees’ health status. On the other is a policy barring them from doing so. I actually prefer the latter - I don’t think companies have any business enforcing this or anything else outside of the workplace.

Stay classy TX tourists.

Whether this is “better” is a value judgment. High vaccination rates are good. I’d rather live somewhere with slightly higher Covid cases but no masks.

More has come out about this incident. The "attackers" were vaccinated and apparently did show proof. The "attack" was due to tensions between the hostess and the patrons, and other videos show that the hostess was an active participant in the brawl. The "attackers" also allege that the hostess called them racial slurs before the fight.

81.59% (or 98.28% above 18) of São Paulo state population had got at least the 1st dose of the vaccine.

Despite all the anti-vax craziness, Brazilians are being vaccinated en masse. People down here are a bit hypochondriac and the country has a strong tradition of vaccination programs.

The version I read--before I posted the video--was that the Texans were in 3 groups. The first 2 groups were vaccinated but the third group to join the party wasn't and that's when the altercation started: When the unvaccinated group were denied admittance (that being the "tensions") to join their friends.

At some point later, this apparently became a cause celebre for BLM which picketed out front. I don't trust much about reporting on the incident except the video. If at least some members of the party weren't vaccinated there's not much reason a restaurant would be fighting with its customers. New York restaurants deal regularly with a lot of "diversity" and "racism" is an easy accusation to make.

In other footage that was released, the hostess was seen shouting at the "attackers" as they were apparently in the process of leaving the restaurant. This happened before they attacked her.

https://pix11.com/news/local-news/ma...o-altercation/

No one knows what was said, and I'm skeptical that she used slurs (a lot of her coworkers appear to be black), but I think it's clear that there was back and forth between her and the patrons. This incident didn't happen because she asked for their vaccination documentation, as had been widely reported by the media.

As a small global update for the forum, I arrived in Milan around lunchtime today for a meeting tomorrow. I’ve been to two restaurants and a bar and not once has anyone even mentioned checking the “green pass” that is supposed to be required to prove vaccination (or a negative test/recovery from prior infection). Italians have a very loose relationship with rules as usual. I have the pass of course (from the French government, since the Brits aren’t competent to use a foreign vaccination record).

I'm slowly forgetting about COVID over here.....

It's becoming a "meh" issue. Most people I know are living normally, making their usual plans. Masks are still the norm indoors, of course, but we're all getting used to it.

Sweden, Norway and Denmark have abandoned all internal COVID regulations, but my suspicion is that a winter outbreak will see them return, and then some.

But why should that be? Why does a “winter outbreak” matter with vaccination? What, we’re all going into lockdown again because a bunch of people get a tickle in their throat and a fever for a few days?

Other than a handful of forumers here, I think most have realised that post-vax Covid is not a big deal. Even for older people the symptoms will be like they were for most younger people (my food poisoning or stomach flu a couple weeks ago was worse than my Covid). And some modest number of very frail or unlucky people will still be hospitalized, maybe even die, but that’s no different from typical flu or pneumonia or any number of things that bring about the inevitable when people are old.

As for the unvaccinated, they just don’t matter and have waived their right to society’s concern or accommodation.