Joe Biden Wins - Becomes 46th president of the United States

[UltraSUPRA]

Did you know that people can...gasp...be gay, regardless if a governing body says it's okay or not?

If you outlawed straight marriage right this very second, people will still be straight. It wouldn't cause tons of people to rip their clothes off and start being gay in the streets. Because, I know, shockingly, it's not a choice people make. It "perpetuates" nothing.

Again. The problem is actions, not people.

 

[Joom]

Okay. You feel like there are too many people on the planet. I feel like we should have the freedom not to wear a mask. Let's compromise.

There is no compromise. You advocate for death, I advocate for the preservation of life. I'm just saying that we can stop with this "we gotta keep populating to save the human race", because it's just nonsense. Do you know why there are hunting seasons, especially for deer? It's because they're a parasite that will destroy ecosystems and starve to death due to overpopulation that strips their habitat is of all food and resources. This is what's happening to humans. Or at least, it will be in the very near future.

 

[djpannda]

Again. The problem is actions, not people.

This changes everything, I mean how do you expect to have any credibility, in overturning an election or allowing millions to die because we don't want mask, and not aknowledging homosexuality. with you being a Virgin...

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

like I said your either like 15 year old... or saving yourself..

 

[Chary]

Again. The problem is actions, not people.

Those people's actions don't change. Again, gays gonna gay, straights gonna straight. Those actions won't change whether daddy government says we can or can't marry people. Also, totally disregarded the fact that married couples get tax cuts, therefore contributing to society, allowing them to start families and better support small businesses. And no, don't tell me that gay couples can't have families because adoption is totally a thing that exists. So which ACTIONS do you hate? The icky gays supporting local business with their marriage lovey-dovey tax money or what?

 

[VinsCool]

Again. The problem is actions, not people.

This changes everything, I mean how do you expect to have any credibility

I love people manage to prove a point using themselves as an example. lol

 

[UltraSUPRA]

Those people's actions don't change. Again, gays gonna gay, straights gonna straight. Those actions won't change whether daddy government says we can or can't marry people. Also, totally disregarded the fact that married couples get tax cuts, therefore contributing to society, allowing them to start families and better support small businesses. And no, don't tell me that gay couples can't have families because adoption is totally a thing that exists. So which ACTIONS do you hate? The icky gays supporting local business with their marriage lovey-dovey tax money or what?

Imagine a world with only gay people. How long would it last?

 

[AlexMCS]

This is what's happening to humans.

Boy... we are SO far away from an overpopulation issue it's not even funny.
It will be a concern in a few centuries, but now? It's a complete non-issue.
Especially when considering the adaptability of the species.

Imagine a world with only gay people. How long would it last?

He is not advocating for this though.

 

[Joom]

Imagine a world with only gay people. How long would it last?

Why are you arguing the impossible? Whataboutism is just dumb.

 

[Chary]

Imagine a world with only gay people. How long would it last?

...so? What does a hypothetical world have to do with the real world? I understand that your point is that they "couldn't" sustain the human race, but that isn't reality.

 

[djpannda]

Imagine a world with only gay people. How long would it last?

yea... how is the world going to last.. I mean its not like there millions of kids in that are up for adoption in the world.. and that people just keep making babies that they can't support and giving them away..no that not happening in our current world..

 

[Joom]

Boy... we are SO far away from an overpopulation issue it's not even funny.
It will be a concern in a few centuries, but now? It's a complete non-issue.
Especially when considering the adaptability of the species.

You're ignoring the climate change that is a product of the population. You're also ignoring our rapidly depleting fossil fuel sources. We don't have a few centuries, more like a few decades.

 

[UltraSUPRA]

You're ignoring the climate change that is a product of the population. You're also ignoring our rapidly depleting fossil fuel sources. We don't have a few centuries, more like a few decades.

Nuclear energy is the solution.

 

[Joom]

Nuclear energy is the solution.

I agree. Wholeheartedly. Finally something we can both come together on. But that's just one piece to the solution.

 

[djpannda]

Nuclear energy is the solution.

YESS after we destroy the world by harvesting every drop of natural resource, lets slowly pollute it and have a change of blowing it up too.

 

[Chary]

Nuclear energy is the solution.

Or wind or solar or hydro, right?

 

[AlexMCS]

You're ignoring the climate change that is a product of the population. You're also ignoring our rapidly depleting fossil fuel sources. We don't have a few centuries, more like a few decades.

You're overestimating that impact population has on climate change. That's more of a byproduct of our current "mainstay" culture than actual needs of the species.

A human community can be self sustained in a very small space, with a very low carbon footprint.

Fossil fuels are entirely unneeded at this point. We should have shifted to solar power for a long while now. It also helps on the whole climate change issue, since quite a bit more heat from the sun gets converted into other energy forms.

Nuclear energy is a mistake until you can safely treat the waste, aka, jettison it into the outer space, which is likely never.

 

[UltraSUPRA]

Or wind or solar or hydro, right?

Not near powerful enough to sustain a modern lifestyle.

 

[djpannda]

You're overestimating that impact population has on climate change. That's more of a byproduct of our current "mainstay" culture than actual needs of the species.

A human community can be self sustained in a very small space, with a very low carbon footprint.

Fossil fuels are entirely unneeded at this point. We should have shifted to solar power for a long while now. It also helps on the whole climate change issue, since quite a bit more heat from the sun gets converted into other energy forms.

Nuclear energy is a mistake until you can safely treat the waste, aka, jettison it into the outer space, which is likely never.

but will already know how to take care of the waste

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

Not near powerful enough to sustain a modern lifestyle.

ya its not powerful enough... so there no reason invest in evolving and upgrade the tech... its not like we invented better tech before... I mean my pc is still the size of a small factory. what size is your super computer

 

[UltraSUPRA]

ya its not powerful enough... so there no reason invest in evolving and upgrade the tech... its not like we invented better tech before... I mean my pc is still the size of a small factory. what size is your super computer

I thought we were hitting the upper limit of how powerful wind, solar, and hydro energy can get.

 

[notimp]

Narrtive is, that yes, in combination with social distancing it should have - but people were living it up too much (gastronomy) at the same time.

Reality is probably, that masks are a mitigation strategy, but couldnt do enough to prevent multiple outbreak vectors, with which we are not so sure on where they originated. (Probably those damn foreigners that couldnt keep their infection rate low, with Europe keeping their internal borders down - or something.. ) In combination with winter. (More people staying indoors again.)

Old people (good PPE regime) arent contracting it as fast as during the first outbreak f.e. This seems to indicate, that behavior (f.e. mask wearing) can mitigate infection rate.

(You dont have the 'entire old folks homes wiped out' issue italy had anymore.)

Actually gastronomy might play a larger role. In my country stricter controls are imposed for 30 days which include.

• Hotels are closed to leisure travellers/tourists; only business travellers are allowed to stay in hotels. Visitors who are already staying at a hotel when the measures take effect are allowed to remain there until their scheduled departure.
• Restaurants and bars can only offer takeout/delivery services, dining in is not permitted.
• Events such as concerts, plays, exhibitions etc. are cancelled.
• Museums, theatres, cinemas, gyms, pools, zoos, amusement parks, and other culture and leisure facilities must close (exception: libraries).
• All ski resorts are closed to the general public during lockdown. Ski area openings scheduled for November have been postponed to December. Professional ski teams will still be able to train.
• Cable cars are closed.
• Christmas markets cannot take place until 30 November.
• Shops can remain open; there must be at least 10 square metres (110 sq-ft) of space per customer. Personal services such as hairdressers can also remain open.
• Until 12 November, a curfew is in place (8 pm - 6 am).

And that was enough to reverse the exponential trend, as of now.

So that seems to indicate that 'sloppy mask usage' in those areas (and probably a few more) could have been enough to accelerate the trend again. With winter incoming. Hard to say. More infection vectors of unknown origin definitely also was a big issue.

But lets just say - with this in place for a week, exponential trends reversed already. So other sectors (work, most trade, ...) could remain open, with masks and social distancing in place, without the infection rate becoming exponential (or near exponential) again.