Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
☕ DaasYochid ☕Participant
Then why 90% instead of 100%?
☕ DaasYochid ☕ParticipantI see the Cuomo bashers can’t resist. I wonder whether there is a 12 step recovery program for that addiction.
As Syag said, there’s a supreme irony in someone who can’t see a single thing good about Trump making that comment.
BTW, as of today I saw New York ranked 25.
☕ DaasYochid ☕ParticipantI understood him to mean that he’s uncertain whether he’d have the courage.
If you had, you wouldn’t have compared it to שילוח הקן.
☕ DaasYochid ☕ParticipantAll moot, because it’s nowhere close to that.
☕ DaasYochid ☕ParticipantI don’t think you understood his answer.
☕ DaasYochid ☕ParticipantNo, because according to most, it’s not applicable today for several reasons, besides what you referred to.
From Din.org.il:
המצוה להלחם בעמלק ולהכרית את זרעו, נחלקו בה ראשונים: יש סוברים, שהיא מצוה המוטלת על כלל הציבור, ואין כל יחיד ויחיד מישראל חייב בה (ראה: סהמ”צ לרמב”ם סוף מנין מצוות עשה; רי”פ פערלא ח”א עשה נט [דף רסא] בדעת הרס”ג). ויש סוברים, שהיא מצוה המוטלת על המלך (ראה: רמב”ן שמות יז טז; יראים סימן תלה; רד”ק שמואל א טו א; תועפות רא”ם על היראים שם בדעת הסמ”ג). לדעות אלו, הואיל וקיומה של מצוה זו הוא בדרך של מלחמה, הנעשית מעצם טבעה על ידי הציבור כולו ותחת הנהגתו של מלך, לא ניתן לצוות על כך כל יחיד מישראל (הר אפרים על המכילתא סו”פ בשלח. וראה חדושי הגרי”ז עה”ת [סטנסיל] אות קח, שאף הציבור אינם מחוייבים להלחם בכל עת, אלא על פי הוראת נביא). אחרים סוברים, שמלבד המצוה המוטלת על הציבור להלחם בעם העמלקי ולכלותו, יש חיוב לכל יחיד מישראל להמית מזרעו של עמלק, אם יזדמן לו הדבר שלא בדרך מלחמה (ראה: ספר החינוך, והר אפרים שם בדעתו; ישבב סופר סנהדרין [עמ’ קעז וקפא]).
☕ DaasYochid ☕ParticipantThat dodged the question, didn’t answer it.
January 29, 2021 3:21 pm at 3:21 pm in reply to: why is there such a cover up about these problems? #1943684☕ DaasYochid ☕Participantsolve this issue be separating them before shabbos
Then you might as well buy the regular paper on a roll and tear off sheets before Shabbos
January 25, 2021 11:09 pm at 11:09 pm in reply to: Supreme Court Dismisses Case Creating a Laughter #1942493☕ DaasYochid ☕ParticipantAlso, it should be noted that there was no dissent.
January 25, 2021 11:09 pm at 11:09 pm in reply to: Supreme Court Dismisses Case Creating a Laughter #1942492☕ DaasYochid ☕Participantif he took money as president, he still has it
It has nothing to do with the money, the idea is not to allow a foreign government to influence policy.
January 25, 2021 10:57 pm at 10:57 pm in reply to: Anyone remember coke blak (coke infused with coffee) #1942490☕ DaasYochid ☕ParticipantThey will try to market it so that people will think it tastes right
January 25, 2021 6:16 pm at 6:16 pm in reply to: Anyone remember coke blak (coke infused with coffee) #1942407☕ DaasYochid ☕ParticipantNo, they’re going to market it differently.
January 25, 2021 6:14 pm at 6:14 pm in reply to: Supreme Court Dismisses Case Creating a Laughter #1942408☕ DaasYochid ☕ParticipantHmm?
☕ DaasYochid ☕ParticipantIt’s not just you, it’s anyone whose browser is used for encounters. Google knows your browsing tendencies and shows ads of similar content.
I get lots of ads for coffee.
☕ DaasYochid ☕ParticipantHamodia
☕ DaasYochid ☕ParticipantIt’s not a given, because perhaps there could be regression, but it’s not a very ambitious goal to merely maintain the same rate.
January 21, 2021 9:12 pm at 9:12 pm in reply to: Explain why you were sure Trump would get a second term even after the election. #1941342☕ DaasYochid ☕ParticipantCharlie, you are overlooking Warp Speed.
Yes, he messed up on messaging, but overall I think saved more lives than he cost.
You make it sound like he’s responsible for all 400,000 deaths, as if nobody would have died of we had a different president, which is totally disingenuous of you.
And I don’t like (understatement) how he acted after the election, but it doesn’t negate all the good he did. Only someone with a huge liberal bias like you would ignore all of the positives.
☕ DaasYochid ☕Participantwhy aren’t you taking this seriously.
Taking what seriously?
☕ DaasYochid ☕ParticipantJackk, I’m impressed.
January 21, 2021 9:43 am at 9:43 am in reply to: The Eldest Oyster: Herd Immunity vs. Herd Mentality #1941094☕ DaasYochid ☕ParticipantI have no problem answering – Q anon are a bunch of loonies and yes, we landed on the moon – but the fact that you even ask is a deflection.
☕ DaasYochid ☕ParticipantOrange
January 21, 2021 1:43 am at 1:43 am in reply to: Explain why you were sure Trump would get a second term even after the election. #1940989☕ DaasYochid ☕ParticipantCan you answer why any religious person could ever support a rasha like Trump?
We didn’t vote for tzaddik. We voted for the person who would implement the best policies.
Not that Biden is exactly a lamed vovnik himself.
January 21, 2021 1:40 am at 1:40 am in reply to: Explain why you were sure Trump would get a second term even after the election. #1940988☕ DaasYochid ☕ParticipantMost Jews voted for Biden.
Who cares
Most frum Jews in my neighborhood voted for Biden.
Who cares
January 20, 2021 9:19 pm at 9:19 pm in reply to: The Eldest Oyster: Herd Immunity vs. Herd Mentality #1940900☕ DaasYochid ☕ParticipantFor some reason, although your positions on Covid are basically reasonable, the way you argue them, with made up facts, distortions of others’ statements, and not really addressing or listening to what others are saying, you weaken your position immensely.
January 20, 2021 9:13 pm at 9:13 pm in reply to: The Eldest Oyster: Herd Immunity vs. Herd Mentality #1940894☕ DaasYochid ☕Participantthe dangers of the vaccine pale in comparison to the dangers of allowing COVID-19 to continue unchecked.
That might very well be true but it hasn’t been proven.
☕ DaasYochid ☕ParticipantI certainly hope CA is right. If not, though…
1) Sure, why not?
2) If he’s not convicted in the Senate, it’s very likely he’ll run again. Whether he’ll win would probably depend on how the country is doing then.
January 20, 2021 9:11 pm at 9:11 pm in reply to: The Eldest Oyster: Herd Immunity vs. Herd Mentality #1940890☕ DaasYochid ☕ParticipantBefore I respond to that, can I ask a few unrelated question?
You can ask, it’s a free country, you’re allowed to dodge the comment and pretend you didn’t.
☕ DaasYochid ☕ParticipantAnytime someone can’t find a way to argue an anti Trump opinion, they go straight to the response, “there you go, listening to the left wing media, blah blah blah”.
If the debate is about facts, and the source is the media, then it’s a fair argument.
☕ DaasYochid ☕ParticipantI think that Trump pardoned himself and family privately, so when necessary, he will be able to refer to it.
Before or after he declared martial law?
☕ DaasYochid ☕ParticipantTo answer the OP, yes, I still would have voted for him.
☕ DaasYochid ☕ParticipantSince there is considerable uncertainty and disagreement among legal scholars as to whether the Trumpkopf can pardon himself, he will likely resign the morning of January 20th, fly back to Mar a Lago, and while he is in the air, President (for 3 hours) Pence will issue a full and complete pardon of the FORMER President.
That prediction didn’t play out too well.
January 20, 2021 3:18 pm at 3:18 pm in reply to: Thank You Donald Trump, the Jews’ Best Friend! #1940752☕ DaasYochid ☕ParticipantBiden appoints Jews in his cabinet, Blinken and Yellin.
As opposed to Trump who doesn’t want to have anything to do with Jews?
January 20, 2021 3:17 pm at 3:17 pm in reply to: Thank You Donald Trump, the Jews’ Best Friend! #1940750☕ DaasYochid ☕ParticipantThe Proud Boys, and lots of white supremist anti-Semitic groups, think Trump supports them. You Jews who think Trump is your friend, and those anti-Semites, cannot both be right.
Why would I care what they think? If they think Trump hates Jews they’re just delusional.
January 20, 2021 2:57 pm at 2:57 pm in reply to: Frum Man Has “Credible Information” That Trump Will Remain President #1940746☕ DaasYochid ☕ParticipantI am so glad I stocked up on pasta and tuna. I really hope this martial law is over before Pesach.
January 20, 2021 8:33 am at 8:33 am in reply to: The Eldest Oyster: Herd Immunity vs. Herd Mentality #1940570☕ DaasYochid ☕ParticipantAvereimele, you are pulling the same old schtick of ignoring my main point to focus on some narische technical inaccuracies. Fine I was wrong about Eretz Yisroel. Nu, what about the vaccination program?
I sure hope the people doing research on the vaccines didn’t make such “narische technical inaccuracies”.
☕ DaasYochid ☕ParticipantThat is a big difference and argues for vaccinating 60something minorities before 70something whites
Ok, so you’re suggesting a combination of variables be taken into account.
As long as the goal is to save the most lives, I’m all for it.
Agav, I’m also in favor of prioritizing those at higher risk because they’re smokers. I’m not at all advocating for smoking, but saving lives should be the goal, not punishing people.
☕ DaasYochid ☕Participantyou are discussing as if there is perfect data to decide what is better and there is a perfect way to implement a policy.
Not at all. I’m discussing whether to prioritize minorities in theory even if that would cost more lives. I’m not necessarily disagreeing that it might actually save lives.
☕ DaasYochid ☕ParticipantBasically, whoever said that is cherry picking a statistic which would make one think Trump won, although it does not really indicate that he did.
☕ DaasYochid ☕ParticipantIs this true, if so how could he lose?
The election is not won by the victor of most counties…
So if more populous counties tend towards Biden (which makes sense, since urban areas tend to be Democrat-leaning), the overall vote could still go to Biden.
January 19, 2021 11:12 am at 11:12 am in reply to: The Eldest Oyster: Herd Immunity vs. Herd Mentality #1940241☕ DaasYochid ☕ParticipantI don’t think a pregnant or nursing 28 year old with no antibodies should rush to get it.
I understand the concern, but isn’t covid a concern too?
☕ DaasYochid ☕ParticipantI will once again quote Schmidt:
“Ethical, epidemiological, and economic reasons demand that rationing approaches give priority to groups who have been structurally and historically disadvantaged, even if this means that overall life years gained may be lower.”
(Whether we should measure in life years gained or number of lives saved is also something I disagree with him about, but that’s perhaps a different discussion).
☕ DaasYochid ☕ParticipantCharlie, you are not arguing with my answer, you are denying the question.
You are claiming prioritizing minorities will save lives. If that is true, then I agree that they should be vaccinated first.
The question was should they be vaccinated first even if that policy will cost lives. So I ask once again: do you agree with that?
It’s not a moot point, because there are experts who say prioritizing minorities over older people will cost lives, yet some think it should be done anyway.
January 19, 2021 9:11 am at 9:11 am in reply to: The Eldest Oyster: Herd Immunity vs. Herd Mentality #1940194☕ DaasYochid ☕ParticipantI think anyone with antibodies should wait, and anybody without antibodies should get it as soon as they can.
I don’t understand why this isn’t the standard recommendation.
☕ DaasYochid ☕ParticipantAAQ is right. If we are already giving a million doses per day, 100 million doses in 100 days isn’t a very ambitious goal.
☕ DaasYochid ☕ParticipantTo Daas Yochid. And you think there is something wrong with taking account of segments of the population who don’t have good access to health services and who have suffered a disproportionately high rate of infection and death?
If that will save lives, no. If it will cost lives, yes.
They are advocating for prioritizing minorities for the sake of social justice even if it will cost lives.
Don’t you agree that there is something wrong with that?
☕ DaasYochid ☕ParticipantYou are responding to the wrong question.
The question was, “How would we know if there was fraud?”
The question you are answering is, “How do we know that there was no fraud?”
☕ DaasYochid ☕ParticipantVaccine Rationing and the Urgency of Social Justice in the Covid‐19 Response
HARALD SCHMIDTAdditional article information
Abstract
The Covid‐19 pandemic needs to be considered from two perspectives simultaneously. First, there are questions about which policies are most effective and fair in the here and now, as the pandemic unfolds. These polices concern, for example, who should receive priority in being tested, how to implement contact tracing, or how to decide who should get ventilators or vaccines when not all can. Second, it is imperative to anticipate the medium‐ and longer‐term consequences that these policies have. The case of vaccine rationing is particularly instructive. Ethical, epidemiological, and economic reasons demand that rationing approaches give priority to groups who have been structurally and historically disadvantaged, even if this means that overall life years gained may be lower.☕ DaasYochid ☕ParticipantGH, you’re being careful to not say the priority should be based on social justice, but official CDC recommendations barely hide that it’s a consideration.
From the CDC website:
The recommendations were made with these goals in mind:
Decrease death and serious disease as much as possible.
Preserve functioning of society.
Reduce the extra burden COVID-19 is having on people already facing disparities.☕ DaasYochid ☕Participantwith the exception of current smokers since they show disregard for their own health.
What about diabetics? Same thing?
January 17, 2021 4:24 pm at 4:24 pm in reply to: Last Chance for Trump: accept responsibility for Jan/6 violence; alologize for f #1939585☕ DaasYochid ☕ParticipantYou know it won’t happen, but anyhow, why is it his last chance? Do you think he can’t once he’s no longer president?
-
AuthorPosts