Coronavirus (methods, fit in, foreclosure)

[roadwarrior101]

Originally Posted by sav858

So your example are businesses not following safety protocols/guidelines? That's a terrible argument as most businesses are not like that.

A judge did rule against the outdoor dining ban in LA. Hopefully more are taking the state/gov to court as well.

Yes we know "medical experts" but go ahead and keep ignoring the other medical experts who don't agree with the current shutdown measures.

I'm not ignoring what they're saying. I'm stating that they (or the business owners) should prove their case that they're safe to the state or county.

[sav858]

Originally Posted by roadwarrior101

I'm not ignoring what they're saying. I'm stating that they (or the business owners) should prove their case that they're safe to the state or county.

The onus should be on CA govt/health departments to provide evidence why they need to be shut down instead of just arbitrarily doing what they feel is best imo. You're also asking already struggling business owners to get expensive lawyers. Ridiculous.

[Tulemutt]

Originally Posted by sav858

They scoop up the scraps and make a killing when the economy turns around. Just look at what happened during the last foreclosure crisis.

And you think they love that and collude with government to crash the economy? ... As opposed to some businesses / investors find ways to be opportunistic under difficult circumstances. Which Big mortgage lenders decided to collude with government and lose their shirts a dozen years ago so that other investors could buy up distressed properties?

And the government factor? What part of government desires to collude with Big Business to crash the economy? Which politicians, in active office, think that bad economic scenarios help attain them increased popularity and get reelected?

[sav858]

Originally Posted by Tulemutt

And you think they love that and collude with government to crash the economy? ... As opposed to some businesses / investors find ways to be opportunistic under difficult circumstances. Which Big mortgage lenders decided to collude with government and lose their shirts a dozen years ago so that other investors could buy up distressed properties?

And the government factor? What part of government desires to collude with Big Business to crash the economy? Which politicians, in active office, think that bad economic scenarios help attain them increased popularity and get reelected?

I wouldn't rule it completely out but I don't think it's necessarily as intentional as that. But they certainly don't seemed too concerned with preventing stuff like that from happening.

[roadwarrior101]

Originally Posted by sav858

The onus should be on CA govt/health departments to provide evidence why they need to be shut down instead of just arbitrarily doing what they feel is best imo. You're also asking already struggling business owners to get expensive lawyers. Ridiculous.

I disagree. We're in a once in a century pandemic and its not business as usual. We should be doing everything in our power to control spread.

[sav858]

Originally Posted by roadwarrior101

I disagree. We're in a once in a century pandemic and its not business as usual. We should be doing everything in our power to control spread.

So just throw crap at the wall and see if it sticks? Great strategy because people will keep listening and abiding.....oh wait...

[sav858]

New report highlights how Hollywood has dodged California's COVID-19 restrictions

"According to the report, some of the state's biggest studios have funneled tens of thousands of dollars into lobbying efforts in an attempt to receive more lax guidelines from the state. For example, Warner Brothers spent $22,500 on lobbyists contacting Gov. Gavin Newsom's office for “COVID/OUTREACH, TV/FILM PRODUCTION" and Netflix spent a whopping $70,725 per quarter on their lobbying efforts."

[roadwarrior101]

Originally Posted by sav858

So just throw crap at the wall and see if it sticks? Great strategy because people will keep listening and abiding.....oh wait...

To protect life, yes. I feel bad for the business owners and think congress should get off their lazy butts to pass a new financial assistance bill. But, I believe saving lives here (which I believe to be substantial) is by far the most important thing here. Sorry that you don't feel that way.

[sav858]

Originally Posted by roadwarrior101

To protect life, yes. I feel bad for the business owners and think congress should get off their lazy butts to pass a new financial assistance bill. But, I believe saving lives here (which I believe to be substantial) is by far the most important thing here. Sorry that you don't feel that way.

Except AGAIN it's not really protecting life if the business or activity doesn't contribute to spread in the first place. And AGAIN it actually could be making things worse by not proving why they need to be shut down as other EXPERTS have said. Not sure how you can't see that.

[roadwarrior101]

Originally Posted by sav858

Except AGAIN it's not really protecting life if the business or activity doesn't contribute to spread in the first place. And AGAIN it actually could be making things worse by not proving why they need to be shut down as other EXPERTS have said. Not sure how you can't see that.

Except you don't have proof that the businesses aren't contributing to spread. You're assuming they're not but of course, if they clearly weren't, the county/state wouldn't have closed them in the first place.

I don't buy that shutting down more places makes things worse. I think certain people are going to be lawless regardless and closing down certain avenues of spread is better than not.