@hailstone92 @pablo_honey1@tedcruz Well, we aren’t just talking about “a virus” generally— I don’t contest that lockdowns might be desirable to combat some theoretical, yet-to-come virus. But when used to combat COVID-19, the lockdowns did more harm than good, i.e. “no significant capacity to save lives.l
@MamasNewDay@pablo_honey1@tedcruz If you really thought I were spouting nonsense I don’t think you’d be this upset. It’s distressing to realize that the policies that were imposed on us were ineffective. I empathize.
@DaveMitchner@pablo_honey1@tedcruz LOL what?! The bourgeois are loving the lockdowns: they’re “working from home” in Aspen, Tulum, etc. It’s the “regular” people— restaurant owners, employees, hair stylists— who have been hurt by YOUR horrid take.
@pablo_honey1@tedcruz People who believe in science and care about the well-being of others would never advocate lockdowns, as studies show they have no significant capacity to save lives.
It's time for a walk. "I’ve stowed backup masks should I encounter any maskless pandemic denialists. I have Band-Aids, cotton balls and large-wound bandages, in case my run-in with the anti-maskers goes awry," writes @JonMethven. https://t.co/gCUzlbZfBX
@GrayConnolly@michaelbd@DrewHolden360 Agree, but not because Trump’s tweets hurt him. Rather, because blatant attack on free speech, supported by Democrats, would have shifted independents toward Trump.
@bryan_caplan@AgnesCallard No incentive to pay anything given politicians’ insistence that lockdown measures continue as long as any modicum of danger exists.