DavidSpeaks

Again, not talking about you or the title. Look at the OPs post and follow up posts. I also have not said I know better than anyone else here. Where did you pull that from? This place is littered with people who take statements like "I like dogs" and turn that into "DavidSpeaks hates cats". Its like where did I say that? Where did you see that?

Flyfalcons

Well since you can't answer a simple question about reopening criteria, it appears we can't definitively say these lockdowns aren't endless, can we?

And did you not capitalize multiple words in post 36? Get over your grammar nazi nonsense and stick to the actual points being made, if you can.

DavidSpeaks

We can absolutely state that people are not asking to be locked down, or support being locked down, for forever. Also, the post you are referring to was mocking the OP. Congratulations on getting whooshed. You should also avoid using the term nazi.

Flyfalcons

No, the term grammar nazi is entirely appropriate for someone who bases their arguments in how someone spells or capitalizes words. If the shoe fits, and all that.

So you agree that the lockdowns are open-ended. Glad to hear that.

DavidSpeaks

This is how I know you don't actually read what others have written before you type. I really hope the rest of your day gets better from here.

Anson Harris

Gee, thanks. Is that really the best reassurance, that the lockdown is not a life sentence?

The lockdowns were initially pitched as necessary to flatten the curve and preserve critical hospital capacity. And I have to say, pretty much everybody went along with that for quite a while. Were there widespread protests of the initial lockdown orders? We didn't know how serious this was going to be. But since then, we've seen a far less serious impact than feared and generally ample hospital capacity. Despite that, the lockdowns are barely easing at all in some places and painfully slowly in many others. There are also many burdensome conditions that are being added with reopening.

I certainly hope there's no one who thinks we should be locked down literally "forever." But when the rules keep changing with no end in sight, rhetorically referring to many of the lockdowns this way is understandable.

DavidSpeaks

The OPs premise:



I haven't seen anyone suggest we should be in an endless lockdown. My whole issue with the OP was statements like this. I pointed out that he was being intentionally misleading.

GeeWizDriver

So we’re going to parse the meaning of the term “endless”? Ok, SEEMINGLY endless. Happy now? Everybody knew what it meant but you chose to be obtuse and parse one word rather than acknowledge that certain elected officials have gone off the rails with their naked power grabs.

And now you are also the arbitrator of proper message board typing etiquette as well. There is no means of conversational inflection on a message board if not for the use of caps.

But you knew all this. You just can’t argue your case that these lockdowns are still necessary and appropriate.

DavidSpeaks

There is no point trying to point out that this will not be a seemingly endless or even close to endless lockdown. You just don't know how to make a point without being dramatic.I also don't disagree with your point about our elected officials. There are some that have gone off the rails. I never denied that. If I wanted to argue for or against that point I would have quoted a post and done just that. I don't feel it necessary to quote a post and write "I agree" every time somebody writes something I agree with.

Progress is being made across most of the world in terms of lessening restrictions. Its happening in the US as well. Many states are moving from phase 1 to phase 2 and I believe California is moving to phase 3 or already did today. There are more signs that we are moving further and further away from a lockdown than evidence to say a lockdown is never going to end.

If you don't like people quoting your words and pointing out how off they can be at times then choose them more carefully.

WhistlePig

What is fallacious? Poor people don’t get to choose whether it is safe or not to work. We do. At least those of us who know how to appropriately budget in this career do. 90% of the industry is getting payed sitting reserve knowing they won’t fly. We aren’t losing a thing. Oct 1 is going to suck for some, and it’s going to suck really bad for those who failed to prepare. But even those folks had a choice. We are not doing the working poor in the service industry or the real bus drivers, any favors by putting “the economy” first over public safety. Airline flying isn’t perfect, but it sure beats working for a living. And no, I absolutely would not do it for free. I appreciate the sacrifices of the ALPA pilots in the early days to ensure that flying was and remained a profession, appropriately compensated commiserate to the skill involved. That does not mean we are more important than the service workers who are forced to interact with the public, a public that may or may not take health precautions seriously because of misguided and ignorant notions of what freedom is.