# Lockdowns



## Money172375 (Jun 29, 2018)

New measures in Ontario. Stay-at-home orders. Media is all over it saying nothing has changed. Others saying big boxes are being treated preferentially. I find the media is just making it more confusing.

what big-boxes are open that don’t sell groceries? None that I know of. If you’re a small business owner selling groceries, you’re allowed to be open. To me, it’s more essential vs non-essential. Not big box vs small business.  The only change I would make is to limit aisles to food only in Costco and Walmart. 

why does the media keep trying to find loopholes or obscure ways to “get around” the rules? 

just stay home...go out for food, exercise, medication, medical appointments.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

Money172375 said:


> New measures in Ontario. Stay-at-home orders. Media is all over it saying nothing has changed. Others saying big boxes are being treated preferentially. I find the media is just making it more confusing.
> 
> what big-boxes are open that don’t sell groceries? None that I know of. If you’re a small business owner selling groceries, you’re allowed to be open. To me, it’s more essential vs non-essential. Not big box vs small business. The only change I would make is to limit aisles to food only in Costco and Walmart.
> 
> ...


Some people like to complain.
Realistically there isn't much more they can do.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

Money172375 said:


> New measures in Ontario. Stay-at-home orders. Media is all over it saying nothing has changed. Others saying big boxes are being treated preferentially. * I find the media is just making it more confusing.*
> 
> what big-boxes are open that don’t sell groceries? None that I know of. If you’re a small business owner selling groceries, you’re allowed to be open. To me, it’s more essential vs non-essential. Not big box vs small business. The only change I would make is to limit aisles to food only in Costco and Walmart.
> 
> ...


 .. not sure what media you're referring to. I think the news (media) are reporting what people (including those from the government itself) are finding the new lock-down measures confusing.

Is a skating rink an outdoor gathering? New Ontario rules present questions, Tory says

Even TO's no-teeth mayor needs clarification re issues in above link.


----------



## bgc_fan (Apr 5, 2009)

Money172375 said:


> The only change I would make is to limit aisles to food only in Costco and Walmart.


I suspect that will be the case. They'll probably cordon off other areas, or move displays accordingly. They did that in Quebec.


----------



## Money172375 (Jun 29, 2018)

It’s very simple in my mind....stay home


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

Money172375 said:


> It’s very simple in my mind....stay home


 ... I would agree based on use of common sense but then some people don't have that. And there are the special people who likes to complicate things.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

bgc_fan said:


> I suspect that will be the case. They'll probably cordon off other areas, or move displays accordingly. They did that in Quebec.


 .. and Wally / Costy didn't b1tch (yet) in Quebec? Worst ... planning a lawsuit. Is that the scare tactic?

Just a quick search on CP24 showed Mississauga's mayor (on November 25, 2020=2 and a half months ago!!!) wanted this scenario.

Mississauga wants to limit sales of non-essential items at big box stores

And yet tomorrow's "new" lockdown doesn't even address or include this.

What do the mayors (plus bloated city staff) of Ontario's city/towns do all day, except working-so-hard zooming-all-day-at-home? I really like to know.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

The latest announcements are ineffective but give the government political cover to say they "took action".


----------



## Money172375 (Jun 29, 2018)

sags said:


> The latest announcements are ineffective but give the government political cover to say they "took action".


What would you recommend at this point?


----------



## newfoundlander61 (Feb 6, 2011)

Really with businesses now having to close earlier and people allowed to go out for exercise; takeout; groceries; RX's, and curbside pickup the Stay @Home order is pointless. The reduced open hours is one change so the stay @home order is just icing on the cake and sounds impressive for them to announce.


----------



## agent99 (Sep 11, 2013)

Money172375 said:


> what big-boxes are open that don’t sell groceries? None that I know of.


Depends on what open means. Home Depot, Lowes, CT etc are open for pick up. They sell non-essentials. We are supposed to stay at home except when shopping for essentials, so who will be shopping there?

Same with liquor/beer stores - they are now likely curbside only? But if they are non-essential we should not go out to pick up? 

Rules say there is no restriction on buying non-essentials. But if we must stay at home, how do we buy them? On-Line?

The rules released are all over the map, so no wonder public are confused.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

^


> Rules say there is no restriction on buying non-essentials. But if we must stay at home, how do we buy them? On-Line?


 ... that or curbside pick up. Ie. no in-person or inside-the-store buying non-essential stuffs. Or Ford's begging Ontarians to stay-at-home as much as possible. Only go out for "essentials". [And please no redefining what's considered essentials]



> The rules released are all over the map, so no wonder public are confused.


. ... I think the (still) weak enforcement is the problem.


----------



## Money172375 (Jun 29, 2018)

agent99 said:


> Depends on what open means. Home Depot, Lowes, CT etc are open for pick up. They sell non-essentials. We are supposed to stay at home except when shopping for essentials, so who will be shopping there?
> 
> Same with liquor/beer stores - they are now likely curbside only? But if they are non-essential we should not go out to pick up?
> 
> ...


I think how we define essential is the issue. I agree with what was said today.......what is essential for me, can be non-essential for others. ex. My toilet breaks, or I need a fuse for my furnace, or I need to replace a flat tire. I’m fine with “big-boxes” or any other retailer selling curb-side.


----------



## bgc_fan (Apr 5, 2009)

Beaver101 said:


> .. and Wally / Costy didn't b1tch (yet) in Quebec? Worst ... planning a lawsuit. Is that the scare tactic?


As far as I know, they are complying. Quebec merchants adjusting to new restrictive retail reality


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

bgc_fan said:


> I suspect that will be the case. They'll probably cordon off other areas, or move displays accordingly. They did that in Quebec.


And Manitoba.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

IMO curbside pickup is a good thing.
I'm stuck at home, maybe I want to finish off that reno project. I've got time, I should do that.


----------



## fplan (Feb 20, 2014)

Unless they close warehouse type of stores ( like Costco, Walmart, superstore, etc), *cases will never come down*. they should have done this from the beginning.. local Costco is full of people and most of the time they buy items that are not related to essential items. no wonder Costco/Walmarts are made a lot of money during the pandemic.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

fplan said:


> Unless they close warehouse type of stores ( like Costco, Walmart, superstore, etc), *cases will never come down*. they should have done this from the beginning.. local Costco is full of people and most of the time they buy items that are not related to essential items. no wonder Costco/Walmarts are made a lot of money during the pandemic.


I'm not so sure about that.
I think it's people interacting more that is causing the numbers to spike.

I think work & in home gatherings are spreading. I'm not so sure it's stores where people are properly masked.


----------



## cainvest (May 1, 2013)

fplan said:


> Unless they close warehouse type of stores ( like Costco, Walmart, superstore, etc), *cases will never come down*.


Well cases dropped here with all box stores still open so it appears your guess is wrong.


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

The larger amount of infections and almost all ICU infections come from these 3 culprits.

1) Social Gatherings
2) Workplaces
3) Vehicles: Only reason no one cites vehicles is because they are usually part of either social gathering or car pooling to work.

Stopping any other areas of infection will be insignificant to the goal of reducing the current rate of infection.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

OptsyEagle said:


> The larger amount of infections and almost all ICU infections come from these 3 culprits.
> 
> 1) Social Gatherings
> 2) Workplaces
> ...


Or public transit


----------



## agent99 (Sep 11, 2013)

OptsyEagle said:


> The larger amount of infections and almost all ICU infections come from these 3 culprits.
> 
> 1) Social Gatherings
> 2) Workplaces
> ...


Do you have a source for that information?


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

agent99 said:


> Do you have a source for that information?


Yes. The pandemic. Open your eyes.

Do you actually want to debate this. It won't be the first time my common sense provided the answer that took your experts so many months to eventually figure out, if it even can be scientifically confirmed.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

agent99 said:


> Do you have a source for that information?


 ... his source is called "news regurgitation" that everyone else is doing on this board too.


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

You can wait until an expert helps you across the street, while a hungry tiger is somewhere behind you OR you can use your common sense and simply put distance between you and the threat and get yourself across the street. Waiting for help can be very dangerous. Confirmation is not without risk.

I have never asked anyone to agree with me, but I find it quite surprising that some of the concepts I was forced to bring to these boards, before anyone could prove them, were so difficult for people to work out in their minds.

Were masks really of no protection until the experts and the government about faced and eventually confirmed that they were? Was it really a stretch of ones imagination to figure out that covering up ones nose and mouth might actually be helpful in reducing the spread of respiratory viruses? Did it not seem peculiar to you that they wanted you to donate your mask to protect their healthcare workers, while still selling the idea that they had no use for your own protection?

Was dosage of infection really not applicable, when you could see from a mile away, the various effects it was having in outcomes from all ages. Did you really think pre-existing conditions explained all those variations, especially within the same age group?

This stuff was common sense.


----------



## tradesviz (Dec 8, 2020)

Perhaps, reasoning and backing for herd immunity are now stronger than ever? ...


----------



## agent99 (Sep 11, 2013)

OptsyEagle said:


> Yes. The pandemic. Open your eyes.


In other words *NO* - you have no basis. 

I had asked a serious question. I didn't have the data, but was interested in learning more. I _was_ surprised by the breakdown you posted. The way you wrote, it implied that that breakdown was factual, not something you just made up. 

In this day and age, I don't believe anything I read on the internet. Fact Checking is important as this thread has shown!


----------



## Synergy (Mar 18, 2013)

What new rules! It's a joke. You can still book an appointment for a rub minus the tug. You can still gather outdoors with friends in groups of 5 (and we all know how good people are at following distancing rules, etc.). You can still have a house cleaner, One could argue just about everything is essential for some, even the tug. People are dying, struggling to put food on the table, pay their bills, etc. all while we have others complaining about not being able to go downhill skiing! It's really sad. Just imagine what type of predicament we'd be in if this was a deadly illness with a high mortality rate.


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

agent99 said:


> In other words *NO* - you have no basis.
> 
> I had asked a serious question. I didn't have the data, but was interested in learning more. I _was_ surprised by the breakdown you posted. The way you wrote, it implied that that breakdown was factual, not something you just made up.
> 
> In this day and age, I don't believe anything I read on the internet. Fact Checking is important as this thread has shown!


and that is exactly why you need to open your eyes. I am pretty sure what I said is probably factual by now, but since I was warning people of the high dose infection risk of the things I listed, before the 2nd wave pretty much proved it, I quit looking to see if many were starting to see what I could see fairly clearly in the data. It is a conclusion made by many data points that have been talked about for months. It would be a long post to explain it and I think most have started to see it anyway. Not everything you need to know in life has a scientific study to explain it to you. If someone tells you something, you need to be able to tell if it makes any sense or not. If you can't do that, the studies can mislead you as easy as an internet poster could.

In the mean time, feel free to keep gathering socially and the rest, until you get your data. Maybe that is a safer approach. Let us know.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

OptsyEagle said:


> and that is exactly why you need to open your eyes. I am pretty sure what I said is probably factual by now, but since I was warning people of the high dose infection risk of the things I listed, before the 2nd wave pretty much proved it, I quit looking to see if many were starting to see what I could see fairly clearly in the data. It is a conclusion made by many data points that have been talked about for months. It would be a long post to explain it and I think most have started to see it anyway.
> 
> Feel free to keep gathering socially and the rest until you get your data. Maybe that is a safer approach.


There is a difference between things you can logically see, and making claims regarding the data.

It's obvious and logical that interacting with more people increases your exposure.
It isn't clear that your top 3 list is correct.
It seems not unreasonable, but I think "vehicles" is not supported.
I agree being in a vehicle, masked or not, is likely to spread, but the data to say it's a top spreader isn't there.
I do agree there is a confound here as well.

I think shopping might have more spread than "vehicles". 
since you don't have data, and I don't have data, i think it's wrong to claim it as a fact, rather than, at best, an educated guess.


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

MrMatt said:


> There is a difference between things you can logically see, and making claims regarding the data.
> 
> It's obvious and logical that interacting with more people increases your exposure.
> It isn't clear that your top 3 list is correct.
> ...


You see. You get it. Take from what is said that makes sense to you and leave out what doesn't. Now how hard was that?

Were vehicles really that important in my post to disregard the entire message? Vehicles are there because you cannot be more then 6 feet away, the ride can go on for hours sometimes, and it can be enclosed and sometimes only internal air is sometimes used if circulating heat. Even I said that most people infected would assume their vehicle infection happened during their social gathering or was another dropping of precautions at work, when they car pooled with a co-worker. In any event who cares. I am just warning people that it is definitely not safe. Sorry I don't have a study to prove that.

Lastly people. I never claimed anything as a fact. I made an internet post on what I have derived from many, many, many data points already listed. It may not be right. If we get better data I will update my views. Each new data point can have that effect. But I am certainly not going to wait for them. I am going to identify the highest areas of danger, that I can see, and I am going to avoid them, until I believe they have no more danger.

The 3 activities I listed will not account for 100% of infections, just the most dangerous ones.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

OptsyEagle said:


> You see. You get it. Take from what is said that makes sense to you and leave out what doesn't. Now how hard was that?
> 
> Were vehicles really that important in my post to disregard the entire message? Vehicles are there because you cannot be more then 6 feet away, the ride can go on for hours sometimes, and it can be enclosed and sometimes only internal air is sometimes used if circulating heat. Even I said that most people infected would assume their vehicle infection happened during their social gathering or was another dropping of precautions at work, when they car pooled with a co-worker. In any event who cares. I am just warning people that it is definitely not safe. Sorry I don't have a study to prove that.
> 
> ...


By convention, when you make a statement, it is assumed to be a statement of fact, unless declared otherwise. 

When someone makes one unsupported claim, it casts suspicion that the other claims are also not supported. 
If you show yourself to be in the habit of saying things that are not supported by the facts, people will assume you do that repeatedly, and you will have less credibility.

In my opinion, I think a vehicle could spread, likely more than many other situations. However i also don't think people are sharing cars who aren't already gathering for other purposes.
Myself, I don't know anyone who is carpooling with people outside their social bubble.


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

MrMatt said:


> By convention, when you make a statement, it is assumed to be a statement of fact, unless declared otherwise.
> 
> When someone makes one unsupported claim, it casts suspicion that the other claims are also not supported.
> If you show yourself to be in the habit of saying things that are not supported by the facts, people will assume you do that repeatedly, and you will have less credibility.
> ...


I disagree. I never assume anything, even with what is declared as fact. If someone wants to question my posts they can simply ask me to explain. The only reason the one in question was not explained was because I assumed most people were in agreement with it. To explain it would require a long post and in this case I think we can leave that aside for a slow day. I doubt too many people are going to feel safe riding in a car, with a stranger, with windows up, for 2.5 hours.

Most times I hear someone ask for back up info, I consider it just a form of laziness or a quick way to reduce the credibility of a post, without having any logical rebuke. Sure the person stating the idea may have that info closer at hand, but not always. The main point is the person stating it already believes it, so the onus is really on the person questioning it to google away and find out what they can find...or just add it to the long list of unproven but still interesting theories, or disregard it.

Anyway, nothing is certain. I could post plenty of published scientific garbage to prove that but I have to assume we have all come across that before. With C-19, most of the scientific garbage is made so confusing simply because they probably know it is garbage...but they probably still need more funding, so they publish it anyway. Still not very helpful even if one can understand it. And if you can't understand it, is it really better if this stranger on the internet has some credentials after their name? You still have never met this person.

Better, is a well thought out theory that is understandable, in my opinion. The above explains why I don't find much independent thinking on this board. I just like to post my theories and sometimes a person comes back with a useful rebuke and it allows me to make some small or larger adjustments. That is why I state things the way I do. To help others and more importantly to help myself. But to rule it out because of no confirming links is just rediculous.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

OptsyEagle said:


> I disagree. I never assume anything, even with what is declared as fact. If someone wants to question my posts they can simply ask me to explain. The only reason the one in question was not explained was because I assumed most people were in agreement with it. To explain it would require a long post and in this case I think we can leave that aside for a slow day. I doubt too many people are going to feel safe riding in a car, with a stranger, with windows up, for 2.5 hours.
> 
> Most times I hear someone ask for back up info, I consider it just a form of laziness. Sure the person stating the idea may have that info closer at hand, but not always. The main point is the person stating it already believes it, so the onus is really on the person questioning it to google away and find out what they can find...or just add it to the long list of unproven but still interesting theories, or disregard it.
> 
> ...


I always assume, because you have to.
In general I assume people are following the typical conventions of Canadian English interaction.
Words use a dictionary definition, or a statement is a statement of fact, not simply an opinion.

But that's okay, I'll adjust my assumptions wrt yourself. I'll assume you're just making stuff up and posting whatever you feel like at the time. I'll treat it accordingly.

Cheers.


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

MrMatt said:


> I always assume, because you have to.
> In general I assume people are following the typical conventions of Canadian English interaction.
> Words use a dictionary definition, or a statement is a statement of fact, not simply an opinion.
> 
> ...


What the heck is all that? Your opinion. OK. If that works for you, knock yourself out.

Keep in mind. I have posted that list numerous times. Probably the 1st few times, it might have been a little less matter of fact. After no negative rebukes eventually I assume most people know them and hence they get listed a little differently, mostly for brevity. These ideas are developed over time. They are not just a single published opinion by me. They are ongoing work, but a statement of theory, at the time. That's all they are and can never really be anything else, no matter how much data might be available.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

Opposition party calls for changes to Quebec curfew after homeless people ticketed

^ Are the La belle province cops that dense? Ticketing the homeless ones? Duh ... like they're able to pay.

'We have not even seen a draft:' Stay-at-home order takes effect at midnight but Toronto officials say they haven't seen legal regulations

^ And I don't think Torontonian cops are gonna to see a legal draft of any sorts when the premier's office has issued this advice: Stay Home. Restez la maison.

Is a skating rink an outdoor gathering? New Ontario rules present questions, Tory says

^ While our comical-toothless mayor is waiting for clarification on whether a skating rink is considered a social gathering spot? LOL.


----------



## MrMatt (Dec 21, 2011)

Beaver101 said:


> Is a skating rink an outdoor gathering? New Ontario rules present questions, Tory says
> 
> ^ While our comical-toothless mayor is waiting for clarification on whether a skating rink is considered a social gathering spot? LOL.


Tory is a wimp, he can make his own orders, or get his Chief Medical Officer to make an order, or simply have law enforcement order them to disperse. 
He just doesn't want to make the tough calls, and upset voters, remember Tory is the mayor of a city that is mostly ignoring guidelines (see the COVID19 modelling update presentation from Tuesday, traffic patters are at 80+% of normal)

Ford is getting a lot of heat for making decisions and taking action, which will hurt in the next election. However his supporters understand that he's making decisions, and while not perfect, it's better than the disasterous leadership we've seen in other jurisdictions.


----------



## agent99 (Sep 11, 2013)

Did anyone read all that from OE??


----------



## Eclectic12 (Oct 20, 2010)

OptsyEagle said:


> I disagree. I never assume anything, even with what is declared as fact ...


Statements of assumptions or implied assumptions can be ignored, right? 




OptsyEagle said:


> Most times I hear someone ask for back up info, I consider it just a form of laziness or a quick way to reduce the credibility of a post, without having any logical rebuke ...


Okay ... after coming up empty with google and review data points - what are your data points that make vehicles an issue?

My data points are that pre-covid:
1) work can't get enough people riding transit to get a company wide discount.
2) for my dept (about 20% of the staff), those using transit outnumber those who car pool by 3x.
3) those car pooling do so with those outside their home at a rate of 20% of the total that car pool.

Is it likely that those willing to car pool with strangers are going to increase during a pandemic?
Both categories during covid are likely irrelevant as we actively discouraged from going into the office where manager approval is required.


For my neighbours, far fewer are going into work. Of those who are, most are going in on their own, just like they did before and have said they are skipping requests to car pool. For those with more than one in the car, it's someone from the same house hold. Where one is already in the same household, some extra time is a car doesn't seem all that risky.


According to my friend who works at the LTC close by, car pooling has dropped. 
Work is discouraging it as well.


There's also the delivery guys doing deliveries for ten hours. 
Is a car pool for an hour going to add to the risk?




OptsyEagle said:


> .... The main point is the person stating it already believes it, so the onus is really on the person questioning it to google away and find out what they can find...or just add it to the long list of unproven but still interesting theories, or disregard it.


I doubt either of our data points is going to prove much, other than make it clearer why there is a disagreement.




OptsyEagle said:


> Anyway, nothing is certain ...


Yet somehow you are certain that asking for references is mostly laziness while asking for an explanation is not lazy while making no assumptions.


Cheers


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

agent99 said:


> Did anyone read all that from OE??


 ... answer: no. 

I like that simple pic of a wastebasket though.


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

Eclectic12 said:


> Statements of assumptions or implied assumptions can be ignored, right?
> 
> 
> Okay ... after coming up empty with google and review data points - what are your data points that make vehicles an issue?
> ...


Vehicles. Simple. I opened my eyes and saw the people in them. Some could be in the same household and many could not be. It is rampant. It is within the 6 foot radius and most time no one wears a mask, and many of my car rides are longer then 15 minutes so I suppose their's are not much different.

I never said car pooling increased with pandemics. It has nothing to do with my point. Whether someone delivers pizza or not has nothing to do with getting inside a car with someone else. If they do that, they put themselves in danger of infection. Are we really disputing if cars are safe or if I make a post that I cannot prove. If it is the latter, you win. If you think car rides are safe then knock yourself out. Either works for me.

I did not say that asking for explanation was laziness. That is just a question about a post. If the poster wants to go and link all kinds of evidence or just explain their post, I think that should be accepted. A reader can decide the merits afterwards. When someone highlights in capital letters and bold that no evidence was given, it is my belief that they are taking the lazy way out in attacking the merit of a post without having to take the time to explain what is wrong with it. It is an opinion only. One that I have seen many times and I think it is tacky at times. But that is just me. Many seem to like it as a debating technique, so let it continue. I really don't care. It doesn't distract me very often and as most should have noticed, it has not stopped me from using my mind to work out many details that most are simply waiting for someone else to work out.


----------



## Eclectic12 (Oct 20, 2010)

So your data points are different than mine as I rarely see more than two people in a car. The times I have seen four people in a car that are clearly not from the same household the indicator is that they are wearing masks.

Correct ... you did not say car poling increased during pandemics - just like I didn't. Car pooling is linked to vehicle point because you linked it by saying "they are usually part of either social gathering or car pooling to work".

My point is that work car pooling was minimal before covid and that it likely hasn't increased during. 

As for deliveries, I seem to have left off the part about two or more people being in a single delivery vehicle. For example, the two guys in the cab of the truck that delivered the desk to my house. I didn't mean a pizza delivery person who is driving on their own.

I'm disputing that it's consistent across all places as I can't recall the last time I saw more than two people in a car where they were not wearing masks. Most of the time, like pre-covid - it's one person per vehicle. And it's relatively clear when it's an Uber or similar as I don't know many adults living in the same household who sit driver in frond and second adult in the back.




OptsyEagle said:


> ... I did not say that asking for explanation was laziness.


My point was assuming that no references is being lazy while assuming asking for an explanation is not being lazy while claiming to make no assumptions _is_ making assumptions.




OptsyEagle said:


> ... When someone highlights in capital letters and bold that no evidence was given, it is my belief that they are taking the lazy way out in attacking the merit of a post without having to take the time to explain what is wrong with it.


What capital letter and bold were used when Agent99 asked for a source?

The bold part didn't come into play until after you said it was your observations with what IMO is a incredulous/dismissive comment.




OptsyEagle said:


> ... It is an opinion only. One that I have seen many times and I think it is tacky at times. But that is just me. Many seem to like it as a debating technique, so let it continue. I really don't care.


If it's opinion and you don't care - you sure seem to putting a lot of sidebar bits and at times, misreading of what was written into your responses.


Cheers


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

Your really fighting there Eclectic12. To respond to that would truly put everyone asleep. Let's just leave it.


----------



## Eclectic12 (Oct 20, 2010)

And I thought I was describing what I am observing and expressing my opinion. 


Cheers


----------



## OptsyEagle (Nov 29, 2009)

No problem with opinions. We do need to figure out a way that a person can make a simple list of 3 things he thinks people should avoid and not have to beat it to death over a couple pages of posts.

If I was not clear that the 3 danger zones I listed were just my opinion from observations I have made from numerous sources, I will apologize for that. As for opinions that cannot yet be confirmed by other sources, I believe they have considerable merit if good explanations can be given. Waiting for confirmation can be very dangerous. I wish it wasn't, but it is.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

We stay home unless to buy food or something we really need. We are stocked up and only need a few items from time to time.

It is a pain in the butt.........we can't see our son and grand kids, but we don't control where they go all the time.

I fear when I read that someone got COVID and "did everything right".

That tells me this virus is so contagious that we don't fully appreciate how contagious and deadly it is.

The misery gets lost in the statistics.

I also listened to a war hardened CNN reporter literally break down in front of the camera from what she is seeing in the hospitals first hand.

We need to observe the lock downs......end of story.









CNN's Sara Sidner cries during Covid-19 report: 'We are literally killing each other'


CNN correspondent Sara Sidner has been covering Covid-19 grief firsthand, and on Tuesday, she shared the pain that comes with reporting on the deadly virus.




www.cnn.com


----------



## kcowan2000 (Mar 24, 2020)

In Mexico, Costco put yellow tape around the prohibited goods in March and refused to ring them up at checkout. They also do temperature checks before admitting anyone.


bgc_fan said:


> I suspect that will be the case. They'll probably cordon off other areas, or move displays accordingly. They did that in Quebec.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

MrMatt said:


> *Tory is a wimp, he can make his own orders, or get his Chief Medical Officer to make an order, or simply have law enforcement order them to disperse.*


 ... I would agree so that's why I'm interested in EXACTLY what he and his (bloated) staff are doing all day other than WAH zooming each other? And please spare me he has been given the emergency power to make "all" the decisions for the city.



> *He just doesn't want to make the tough calls, and upset *voters, remember Tory is the mayor of a city that is mostly ignoring guidelines (see the COVID19 modelling update presentation from Tuesday, traffic patters are at 80+% of normal)


 ... you mean he doesn't want to take the responsibility by not upsetting the voters? He's delusional if he sees that as a job well done. In all fairness, TO is a big city with many amalgamated boroughs so the big # of violations are not unexpected.



> Ford is getting a lot of heat for making decisions and taking action, which will hurt in the next election. However his supporters understand that he's making decisions, and while not perfect, it's better than the disasterous leadership we've seen in other jurisdictions.


 ... yes, I would give Ford brownie points on this. Actually I'm surprised how well he's holding up. As compared to other jurisdictions, do you mean Alberta and Quebec ... I'm saving my comments for a later time on those.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

sags said:


> We stay home unless to buy food or something we really need. We are stocked up and only need a few items from time to time.
> 
> It is a pain in the butt.........we can't see our son and grand kids, but we don't control where they go all the time.
> 
> ...


 ... always the exception ... *some people* just have to be special. 

I wonder how many of these protests are going to occur in TO for the next 28 days ... or until getting the TPS really pizzed.

Police disperse crowd of anti-lockdown protesters in downtown Toronto


----------

