The Wuhan virus—how are we doing? - Page 150 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Provision of the two UN HDI indicators other than GNP.
Forum rules: No one line posts please.
#15194874
……unless they have family who are over 50, work with people over 50, have friends who are over 50, or in any way interact with people over 50 in such a way that they could possibly infect people over 50.

Also, Covid causes blood clots far more frequently and severely than the vaccine.
#15194902
QatzelOk wrote:**cars are immediately made illegal**
Stop posting childish reactionary idiocy. The only reason you can live in a city is because we have motor vehicles to transport food, water and everything else you live on, you sanctimonious twat. Use that small level of intellect that you might still retain, and think about it.

Cars are not infectious, either. :knife:

Pants-of-dog wrote:Also, Covid causes blood clots far more frequently and severely than the vaccine.
Blood clots are more frequent and severe in people who have NOT had a vaccine, too. They neglect to mention that tidbit of knowledge.


No, @Igor Antunov, you're still a fool peddling lies.
#15194904
>privately owned cars kill more people than any disease every year
>privately owned cars are not necessary - public transport and professional drivers are available, expensive but cost should not be a factor after all we spent trillions fighting covid - the government should be paying for our taxis and metros.
>cars are definitely infectious, car ownership has spread faster than any disease and they are openly advertised and there is a car culture drilled into youths that they must drive cars

I'm peddling information. It's up to you to use it wisely.
#15194905
I completely support bans on cars.

Now, since people can no longer accuse me of being inconsistent, I will assume these same people now support my stance on vaccines; i.e. people do not have the right to risk the health of others.
#15194907
Pants-of-dog wrote:Now, since people can no longer accuse me of being inconsistent, I will assume these same people now support my stance on vaccines; i.e. people do not have the right to risk the health of others.


What about a person's body autonomy?

You supported a person's right to body autonomy in regards to a woman's right to abortion, even if it risked the health of the unborn child (their death).

Why does "my body, my choice" apply to abortions but not vaccine mandates? It seems to me that most progressives with pro-choice, pro-vaccine mandate views don't have consistent ethics on body autonomy and simply support policies that they want and/or is in their interests without much regard to the ones they are imposing this violence on.

If only women could get COVID, would you support vaccine mandates for them and thus support "controlling women's bodies"?
#15194909
Unthinking Majority wrote:What about a person's body autonomy?

You supported a person's right to body autonomy in regards to a woman's right to abortion, even if it risked the health of the unborn child (their death).

Why does "my body, my choice" apply to abortions but not vaccine mandates? It seems to me that most progressives with pro-choice, pro-vaccine mandate views don't have consistent ethics on body autonomy and simply support policies that they want and/or is in their interests without much regard to the ones they are imposing this violence on.

If only women could get COVID, would you support vaccine mandates for them and thus support "controlling women's bodies"?


Well, they don't believe fetuses are people, so it's not that inconsistent.

Banning cars is ridiculous though. You can take proper measures not to harm anyone when driving, but giving COVID to anyone is not something you can truly prevent except by wearing masks and social distancing - and even then, it's not guaranteed.
#15194911
Igor Antunov wrote:>privately owned cars kill more people than any disease every year
Cars are not diseases. There are many laws, policies and safety procedures involved in car use, and their use cannot be compared to a disease. :knife: A stupid comparison that has been dismissed by reason and logic thousands of times, already.

33,000 people died in the USA in 2019 in ALL car related deaths.
700,000+ died from Covid(alone) in 2020 .

You're still peddling lies and falsehoods, @Igor Antunov. Stop making yourself look like a fool.

The difference, as you can see, is much different, and you are spouting lies when you state that disease kills less people than cars.

USA 2019
Heart disease: 659,041
Cancer: 599,601
Accidents (unintentional injuries): 173,040 (cars are included in this, and they were @33,000)
Chronic lower respiratory diseases: 156,979
Stroke (cerebrovascular diseases): 150,005
Alzheimer’s disease: 121,499
Diabetes: 87,647
Nephritis, nephrotic syndrome, and nephrosis: 51,565
Influenza and Pneumonia: 49,783
Intentional self-harm (suicide): 47,511

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/deaths.htm

Igor Antunov wrote:privately owned cars are not necessary - public transport and professional drivers are available, expensive but cost should not be a factor after all we spent trillions fighting covid - the government should be paying for our taxis and metros.
Yes. Public transportation should exist but not all cities were designed around them. Not all cities have proper public transport, and the price cannot be compared to the money spent on disease prevention(which never even approached the MADE-UP number you pulled out of your ass). The money involved in public transportation infrastructure would exceed trillions, in the USA, alone.

Igor Antunov wrote:cars are definitely infectious, car ownership has spread faster than any disease and they are openly advertised and there is a car culture drilled into youths that they must drive cars
No but this does show that you lack critical thinking capability.
#15194913
The proliferation of Motor vehicles during the 20th century is almost singlehandedly responsible for Climate change, both in the mining and consumption of natural resources, as well as the pollution cars cause.

If you really hated Climate change, you would buy a Tesla or other type of electric car. And you'd put in Solar panels and charge it using solar power.

Every petrol station should already have solar powered electric charging stations installed and/or source their power from a renewable energy company.

Cars are a disease on the planet, a technology that hasn't had any significant upgrades since the early half of the 20th century, and therefore still cause a shitload of pollution and climate related issues. Legit the only major upgrade in my lifetime prior to Tesla, was the removal of Lead from fuel.
#15194914
Godstud wrote:Cars are not diseases. There are many laws, policies and safety procedures involved in car use, and their use cannot be compared to a disease. :knife: A stupid comparison that has been dismissed by reason and logic thousands of times, already.

33,000 people died in the USA in 2019 in ALL car related deaths.
700,000+ died from Covid(alone) in 2020 .

You're still peddling lies and falsehoods, @Igor Antunov. Stop making yourself look like a fool.

The difference, as you can see, is much different, and you are spouting lies when you state that disease kills less people than cars.

USA 2019
Heart disease: 659,041
Cancer: 599,601
Accidents (unintentional injuries): 173,040 (cars are included in this, and they were @33,000)
Chronic lower respiratory diseases: 156,979
Stroke (cerebrovascular diseases): 150,005
Alzheimer’s disease: 121,499
Diabetes: 87,647
Nephritis, nephrotic syndrome, and nephrosis: 51,565
Influenza and Pneumonia: 49,783
Intentional self-harm (suicide): 47,511

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/deaths.htm

Yes. Public transportation should exist but not all cities were designed around them. Not all cities have proper public transport, and the price cannot be compared to the money spent on disease prevention(which never even approached the MADE-UP number you pulled out of your ass). The money involved in public transportation infrastructure would exceed trillions, in the USA, alone.

No but this does show that you lack critical thinking capability.


Cars cause excess deaths FAR beyond direct accidents. Pollution, both Co2 and chemical/material from fueling factories. From tertiary support industries (petroleum/oil/plastic/rubber), obesity due to sloth/lack of walking etc. The excess deaths are in the millions every year worldwide, just because cars exist.

In fact cars are so deadly most produce highly toxic carbon monoxide which will 100% kill you in under 5 minutes. Meanwhile only 5% of covid positive people even experience any symptoms.
#15194916
:lol: You're a fool, @Igor Antunov. You can live in the city because of motor vehicles, not despite them. Why don't you go live with QatzelOk, in a fucking cave, and eat grubs?

The benefits of cars balance out the negatives to a great degree. That doesn't mean we shouldn't phase them out for more pollution free things, though. Many other things cause more pollution, but with less benefits.

Cars are not comparable to a disease, though, so your idiocy from your last post stands. Even attempting the comparison shows how desperate you are. :lol:

Igor Antunov wrote:In fact cars are so deadly most produce highly toxic carbon monoxide which will 100% kill you in under 5 minutes. Meanwhile only 5% of covid positive people even experience any symptoms.
Water will kill you in under 5 minutes if you try to breath that, too.

Stop lying about Covid. The lies are easily refuted and you only look like an even bigger idiot than you already are!

edit: Spelling
Last edited by Godstud on 19 Oct 2021 07:04, edited 2 times in total.
#15194917


Lol. He's done this like 10 times already on video.

Godstud wrote::lol: You're a fool, @Igor Antunov. You can live in the city because of motor vehicles, not despite them. Why don't you go live with QatzelOk, in a fucking cave, and eat grubs?


You realise Igor lives in Australia right?

We have Trams, Trains, Buses, Public Bikes and Country services.

He doesn't need a car, and neither do I. All you need to do is work near a Public Transport station of any kind. All Australian cities have major PT networks.

Last edited by colliric on 19 Oct 2021 07:44, edited 1 time in total.
#15194918
Godstud wrote::lol: You're a fool, @Igor Antunov. You can live in the city because of motor vehicles, not despite them. Why don't you go live with QatzelOk, in a fucking cave, and eat grubs?

The benefits of cars balance out the negatives to a great degree. That doesn't mean we shouldn't phase them out for more pollution free things, though. Many other things cause more pollution, but with less benefits.

Cars are not comparable to a disease, though, so your idiocy from your last post stands. Even attempting the comparison shows how desperate you are. :lol:

Water will kill you in under 5 minutes if you try to breath that, too.

Stop lying about Covid. The lies are easily refuted and you only look like an even bigger idiot than you already are!

edit: Spelling


Image

Privately owned Cars are good for boosting workplace mobility and productivity-in places where metros are shit or public transport sucks. As for boosting public health? Um, no. Not even close. You're basically trading people's health for economic benefits. Tsk tsk tsk. Didn't think you'd go there, of all people I thought you godchud had people's health as no.1 priority.

I've consistently shown with government data sources that vaccinating younger people is utterly irresponsible. Now that the goalposts have again been shifted, and now that the primary argument is 'but vaccines reduce spread this will protect the vulnerable' I can give you a million examples of what else will protect the vulnerable far more effectively from death, without resorting to jabbing perfectly healthy young people with mystery juice. Like banning private car ownership or at least gas guzzlers, for example. Worldwide pollution causes more respiratory illness and deaths than any singular respiratory disease. And privately owned cars are responsible for a big bulk of it.
#15194934
Unthinking Majority wrote:What about a person's body autonomy?

You supported a person's right to body autonomy in regards to a woman's right to abortion, even if it risked the health of the unborn child (their death).

Why does "my body, my choice" apply to abortions but not vaccine mandates? It seems to me that most progressives with pro-choice, pro-vaccine mandate views don't have consistent ethics on body autonomy and simply support policies that they want and/or is in their interests without much regard to the ones they are imposing this violence on.

If only women could get COVID, would you support vaccine mandates for them and thus support "controlling women's bodies"?


Because the virus does not create a situation where one person is using the body of another, this is not comparable.
#15194940
Godstud wrote:Cars are not infectious, either.

Blood clots....


Cars are not infectious

Induced demand

Blood clots

The everyday use of cars causes obesity and social alienation, but not blood clots. The blood clots come from other techno-miraclesTM.

Will our brainwashed societies ever stop bowing to multinational corporations and worshipping their poison products?

You can live in the city because of motor vehicles...Why don't you go live with QatzelOk, in a fucking cave, and eat grubs?

I've lived in a large city my entire adult life, and have never needed or desired a car. So you are noticably wrong here.

When I lived in "ruralish" suburbia, a car was absolutely essential, just like a lawnmower and driveway shovel were.
#15194973
Pants-of-dog wrote:Because the virus does not create a situation where one person is using the body of another, this is not comparable.

LOL total cop out.

You're the king of bad faith debating.
#15194974
Unthinking Majority wrote:LOL total cop out.


Not really.

I pointed out a significant qualitative difference between being unvaccinated and getting an abortion: the former has no instance where one person is using the body of another without the consent of the person whose body is being used, and the latter does.

This is a true and relevant fact.

If you wish to dismiss this fact as a cop out, feel free.

You're the king of bad faith debating.


Ad hominem. Ignored.
#15194979
Pants-of-dog wrote:Not really.

I pointed out a significant qualitative difference between being unvaccinated and getting an abortion: the former has no instance where one person is using the body of another without the consent of the person whose body is being used, and the latter does.

This is a true and relevant fact.

If you wish to dismiss this fact as a cop out, feel free.


Do women have body autonomy or not? Yes or no?

Obviously they are different situations, but they both involve the right of a woman to have control over her body and control what goes inside her body and who or what can be put inside and stay inside with her consent. Is this true or not?
  • 1
  • 148
  • 149
  • 150
  • 151
  • 152
  • 161

In practice rights are whatever the courts decide[…]

Did You Get Vaccinated?

The term Fish has validity because it is has a de[…]

"Whether we like it or not"

No it hasn't. All you proved is that you don't h[…]

Decriminalization of sex work is a proven harm red[…]