Thanks for the info about the masks; yeah, well we are circling towards some productive discussion. Perhaps some posts could be made prepping for wildfire smoke again for those affected by it and about the masks that would enable people to be outside more (I don’t support a mandate there really but you can taste the smoke in your lungs if you’ve been in those kinds of areas)…
Well I guess with the grocery delivery guy, they could be expected to clean everything as they deliver it. This is probably also worth thinking about because probably pandemics (or faking them) will likely “happen” again.
Ehhh, I don’t think people need to be forced. They can be “free” to become sick (or not, as most people are still alive). Those who don’t want to risk things should be accommodated to isolate from the people willing to risk exposure. I feel like this situation should mostly be able to be “win-win”: maskers mask among maskers, unmasked associate among unmasked.
The problem with your logic is that masks are more effective when the sick people wear them, and most effective when both people wear them. So if I have to be somewhere, and you have to be at the same place, me not wearing a mask despite being sick puts you at risk. If it was 100% effective when only the wearer wore the mask then there wouldn’t be an issue. Put yourself at all the risk you want. But when you put other people at risk and refuse to take simple and easy steps to prevent it, then you’ve shown that you’re not empathetic, caring, or smart enough to make your own decisions. It’s the same reason why you can’t drive 150 miles per hour through a residential neighborhood, even if you think the fun of it is worth the risk.
Thanks for the info about the masks; yeah, well we are circling towards some productive discussion. Perhaps some posts could be made prepping for wildfire smoke again for those affected by it and about the masks that would enable people to be outside more (I don’t support a mandate there really but you can taste the smoke in your lungs if you’ve been in those kinds of areas)…
Well I guess with the grocery delivery guy, they could be expected to clean everything as they deliver it. This is probably also worth thinking about because probably pandemics (or faking them) will likely “happen” again.
Ehhh, I don’t think people need to be forced. They can be “free” to become sick (or not, as most people are still alive). Those who don’t want to risk things should be accommodated to isolate from the people willing to risk exposure. I feel like this situation should mostly be able to be “win-win”: maskers mask among maskers, unmasked associate among unmasked.
The problem with your logic is that masks are more effective when the sick people wear them, and most effective when both people wear them. So if I have to be somewhere, and you have to be at the same place, me not wearing a mask despite being sick puts you at risk. If it was 100% effective when only the wearer wore the mask then there wouldn’t be an issue. Put yourself at all the risk you want. But when you put other people at risk and refuse to take simple and easy steps to prevent it, then you’ve shown that you’re not empathetic, caring, or smart enough to make your own decisions. It’s the same reason why you can’t drive 150 miles per hour through a residential neighborhood, even if you think the fun of it is worth the risk.