Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums

Recommended Posts

International and interprovincial travel has been legal in Canada outside the Maritime bubble, yet people who travel are being publicly shamed and losing their jobs.  I realize there's the idea that political leaders should be held to a higher standard and that they are seen as hypocritical for asking Canadians to make sacrifices if they won't make the same efforts.  I suppose, but people make choices based on all sorts of varying criteria. I'm going against the witch-hunters and saying that as long as flights are allowed, people should be able to fly without having to defend it, if they can do the necessary quarantining.  It's nobody's damn business.  If people have cottages or other properties, they should have the right to visit them within their own country, no questions asked.

Allowing governments to restrict movement is an issue.  What if we had extreme violence or food shortages and the state prevented people from being able to flee dangerous areas or hunt for survival?  I don't think government should be allowed that kind of control.  Thankfully such restrictions aren't yet in place, and I don't think it's right to shame people for traveling.

Essential means different things to different people.  Be careful what freedoms you give up because precedents are being set.  Right now some provinces are considering curfews among many other tight restrictions on movement.  I understand  that much of this may be necessary, but it must be targeted and temporary.  I certainly don't think it's fair to shame people for not following a restriction that hasn't become policy.

https://apple.news/ARymylQ4qTqisTCMFCzBYVw

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 84
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

I am more Libertarian than most, but let's also try to be pragmatic.    First of all, we DO (or SHOULD) hold politicians to a far higher standard, because we elect them to lead us.  IMHO that mea

International and interprovincial travel has been legal in Canada outside the Maritime bubble, yet people who travel are being publicly shamed and losing their jobs.  I realize there's the idea that p

A person is free to risk his or her life by taking risks like parachuting from a hill into a lake but they have no damn rights risking the lives of other people by their reckless actions like travelli

Posted Images

We are not holding Politicians to higher standards , just asking them to use common sense. Not only is it hypocritical, it shows they have an higher entitlement than the rest of us, like the old saying goes, don't do as i do, do as i tell you... It shows lack of leadership, good judgement, poor decision making, a total lack of transparency, and a total lack of respect to the people that voted for them..  They should not have been allowed resign they should have been fired !!!! out of the party, out of the government coffers, gone , see ya later......

As for the regular people traveling for non essential reasons, they should be fined... if your going to Disney land for vacation then you should be forced to run the gauntlet, through the airport allowing everyone to kick you in the nuts...

New Brunswick is going through a huge surge of cases most related to inter national travel. So it is everyone business, as most of NB went into the yellow the other day, because mickey mouse was more important than mine and everyone else freedoms... Sorry but that pisses me off, that they put themselves ahead of everyone else. 

Everyone of our freedoms and rights are a privilege and can be suspended at any time by our government for any amount of time to include the emergence measures act, .

We have been in and out of restrictions all year, everyone is sick of it... everyone on both sides of this divide, those that think this is all a game, and those that just want to get back to normal as quickly as possible.  and until we get on the same page nothing is going to change that until people start to obey the rules... Justin says all of us will be needled up by Sept, I'm think more like 2022. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think once vaccinations and infections have reached 70% of the population, all restrictions should be lifted.  The elderly, vulnerable, caregivers, health workers, and essential workers will all be vaccinated at that point.  Antivaccers will have to just deal.  People who are simply fearful without scientific grounds will have to decide whether it's worth giving up employment income to feed their neurosis.  We have to move on by fall.  I've seen a lot of deaths and stress in my community, as much of it related to Covid as the effects of the restrictions.  We can have the restrictions now, but they must be highly conditional.

If my daughter was dying of cancer, I'd consider visiting Disney pretty essential.  People have relatives to see and business to tend to overseas.  Who am I to judge whether their trip is necessary?   They'll quarantine when they return.  We wear masks, social distance, stay home, and wash hands to protect ourselves.

I do see a role for lockdowns in extreme situations.  We're in one now for good reasons, but travel wasn't forbidden when these people traveled.  

Link to post
Share on other sites

A person is free to risk his or her life by taking risks like parachuting from a hill into a lake but they have no damn rights risking the lives of other people by their reckless actions like travelling abroad for leisure during pandemic or drink and driving. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
58 minutes ago, CITIZEN_2015 said:

A person is free to risk his or her life by taking risks like parachuting from a hill into a lake but they have no damn rights risking the lives of other people by their reckless actions like travelling abroad for leisure during pandemic or drink and driving. 

They're not the same thing.  What if one day the restrictions included you not being allowed to leave your house?  Maybe your house is up for grabs for the greater good.

Edited by Zeitgeist
Link to post
Share on other sites

I am more Libertarian than most, but let's also try to be pragmatic.   

First of all, we DO (or SHOULD) hold politicians to a far higher standard, because we elect them to lead us.  IMHO that means presenting a public figure in line with what is policy and "for the greater good".   Personal freedoms are a cornerstone of Western democracies, so it's not fair to assume these rights have been breached without just cause.   If it was a matter of putting only yourself at risk, IMHO go for it.  BUT: when the consequences of you travelling and not exercising due caution (un-necessary travel itself being the case) is that someone else could be come infected and/or deceased and YOUR treatment (as well as your victims') will cost the taxpayer a significant amount of money, it's time to make some kind of declaration of public emergency and suspend personal freedoms.  The other consequence especially of poor examples being set by politicians is that everyone else gets the "if they can then I can" when business in general and owners in particular are being asked or demanded to make very expensive sacrifices for that one and same public good.   Always remember that an elected politician is being paid by US, not doing things on his or her own nickel.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Zeitgeist said:

They're not the same thing.  What if one day the restrictions included you not being allowed to leave your house?  Maybe your house is up for grabs for the greater good.

Even right now I am not leaving home. I think that Ontario should follow Quebec and declare a curfew after 8 pm.

If there are restrictions like not leaving my home then there are good reasons for that for the good of all. And yes travelling during pandemic and drunk driving are exactly the same thing. They are endangering the lives of innocent people.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Zeitgeist said:

They're not the same thing.  What if one day the restrictions included you not being allowed to leave your house?  Maybe your house is up for grabs for the greater good.

If someone decides they need to build a highway or a hospital that needs your land, it will be gone under eminent domain authority we grant to government.   We live with this all day, every day.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Zeitgeist said:

I think once vaccinations and infections have reached 70% of the population, all restrictions should be lifted.  The elderly, vulnerable, caregivers, health workers, and essential workers will all be vaccinated at that point.  Antivaccers will have to just deal.  People who are simply fearful without scientific grounds will have to decide whether it's worth giving up employment income to feed their neurosis.  We have to move on by fall.  I've seen a lot of deaths and stress in my community, as much of it related to Covid as the effects of the restrictions.  We can have the restrictions now, but they must be highly conditional.

If my daughter was dying of cancer, I'd consider visiting Disney pretty essential.  People have relatives to see and business to tend to overseas.  Who am I to judge whether their trip is necessary?   They'll quarantine when they return.  We wear masks, social distance, stay home, and wash hands to protect ourselves.

I do see a role for lockdowns in extreme situations.  We're in one now for good reasons, but travel wasn't forbidden when these people traveled.  

I'm not sure what the magic number is that the experts are using 70 -80 %, but i agree 100 % once that number is reached we should be able to party like it was 1989, i don't think you'll find anyone disagreeing with you on that. And i agree with you about those that don't want to get vaccinated, well there is a bridge that will needed crossing later but i do think there should be consequences for not getting a vaccination.

There are going to be exceptions to every rule, but those would be few and far between. Going to see relatives is not one of them, and for business reasons, what reasons would these guys have to travel, in todays world with so many media options available what can not be done over the a form of media ? not a whole lot...

Who are we to judge, well here in NB we had it good for a long time, everything was under control very few cases, today we are back in the yellow zone, contact tracing has pointed out that  most if not all the new cases were do to travel.. very few were for business, most were vacations .... Now we are all restricted in our movement because 30 or 40 people decided that their vacation was more important to them than everyone else freedoms.. Thats bullshit.. you say they are quarantining and yet not everyone is being checked up by the government, these are the same people who are traveling on vacations and don't give a rats ass about me or you.... and you want to trust that they are indoors for 14 days , give me a break...

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Nefarious Banana said:

Book: 'The Price Of Panic' . . . . How The Tyranny Of Experts Turned A Pandemic Into A Catastrophe

Douglas Axe, William M Briggs, Jay W. Richards

ISBN 978-1-68451-141-9

Informative and disturbing.

We're being played.

I have to admit that the witch hunt is on and the screws are being tightened.  The public shaming is disgusting.  We need to see stats on deaths due to suicide and death rate differences compared to pre-2020 years for a variety of terminal and catastrophic illnesses.  The costs of financial ruin, social disconnection, and untreated illnesses must be enormous.  Without a full accounting of those numbers, there can be no accurate accounting of the impact of Covid 19 with and without restrictions.

Obviously restrictions are necessary, but it comes down to degree.  I don't think government should ever have the right to destroy businesses or prevent people from traveling and using their property.  Where online work isn't possible, workplaces need to be able to operate.  Clearly effective treatments are available, because the rich have them.  That's where government should be spending. The anti-virals and steroids exist.  Vaccinations should also be seriously ramped up with government funding.  Instead we got socialist pogie and totalitarian restrictions.  

Edited by Zeitgeist
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, Army Guy said:

here in NB we had it good for a long time, everything was under control very few cases, today we are back in the yellow zone, contact tracing has pointed out that  most if not all the new cases were do to travel.. very few were for business, most were vacations .... Now we are all restricted in our movement because 30 or 40 people decided that their vacation was more important to them than everyone else freedoms.. Thats bullshit.. you say they are quarantining and yet not everyone is being checked up by the government, these are the same people who are traveling on vacations and don't give a rats ass about me or you.... and you want to trust that they are indoors for 14 days , give me a break...

My best bud's eldest son just returned to New Zealand for another 6 month contract.  The drill is to get a current Covid test result then apply to NZ for entry.  Once you have applied, you have 7 days to arrive (they approve or reject very quickly).  When you arrive, you are TAKEN to a quarantine hotel and kept there.  You  are tested once again and then monitored constantly.  At end of quarantine you are free to carry on.  Only exception is critical essential services (which he is) but even that takes permission and is a rare exception.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Nefarious Banana said:

Book: 'The Price Of Panic' . . . . How The Tyranny Of Experts Turned A Pandemic Into A Catastrophe

Douglas Axe, William M Briggs, Jay W. Richards

ISBN 978-1-68451-141-9

Informative and disturbing.

We're being played.

Sorry for not reading the book , How are we being played ? and what would "they" have to gain by Covid-19, and the restriction that have been forced upon us. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Zeitgeist said:

I have to admit that the witch hunt is on and the screws are being tightened.  The public shaming is disgusting.  We need to see stats on deaths due to suicide and death rate differences compared to pre-2020 years for a variety of terminal and catastrophic illnesses.  The costs of financial ruin, social disconnection, and untreated illnesses must be enormous.  Without a full accounting of those numbers, there can be no accurate accounting of the impact of Covid 19 with and without restrictions.

Obviously restrictions are necessary, but it comes down to degree.  I don't think government should ever have the right to destroy businesses or prevent people from traveling and using their property.  Where online work isn't possible, workplaces need to be able to operate.  Clearly effective treatments are available, because the rich have them.  That's where government should be spending. The anti-virals and steroids exist.  Vaccinations should also be seriously ramped up with government funding.  Instead we got socialist pogie and totalitarian restrictions.  

You have every right to question the "man" about their decisions on what to do in case of Covid-19, in fact questions are free, ask as many as you want. Shit complain as much as you want,  But when your actions start to restrict or effect my freedoms and health then I think at the very least public shaming is warranted. 

I'm sure that the cost of all of this , is going to be added up and history will judge those decisions right or wrong. And the only way to change those policies is through protest either on social media, writing your MP, or PM, start a petition, or change the way you vote.... or you can take the American route and organize a large gathering in the Parliament, Not many actions we the tax payer have to change our government minds... So if you can not change all the rules and polices, then you really don't have much of a choice except follow the rules and hope we come through the other side unscathed. 

The government power is unlimited, it can change over night, from democracy to you name the form of government....  ALL our rights and freedoms can be quickly reversed or eliminated in the matter of days if not hours.  Why so many Canadians do not know this fact is astounding..it has happened all through our history, FLQ crises, OKA, G-8 conference in Toronto during every major conflict we have been involved in, and we the people have very little say in those decisions. 

  

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Army Guy said:

You have every right to question the "man" about their decisions on what to do in case of Covid-19, in fact questions are free, ask as many as you want. Shit complain as much as you want,  But when your actions start to restrict or effect my freedoms and health then I think at the very least public shaming is warranted. 

I'm sure that the cost of all of this , is going to be added up and history will judge those decisions right or wrong. And the only way to change those policies is through protest either on social media, writing your MP, or PM, start a petition, or change the way you vote.... or you can take the American route and organize a large gathering in the Parliament, Not many actions we the tax payer have to change our government minds... So if you can not change all the rules and polices, then you really don't have much of a choice except follow the rules and hope we come through the other side unscathed. 

The government power is unlimited, it can change over night, from democracy to you name the form of government....  ALL our rights and freedoms can be quickly reversed or eliminated in the matter of days if not hours.  Why so many Canadians do not know this fact is astounding..it has happened all through our history, FLQ crises, OKA, G-8 conference in Toronto during every major conflict we have been involved in, and we the people have very little say in those decisions. 

  

 

We need constitutional protection of property, livelihood, and freedom of movement.  I understand a certain amount of restrictions and personal sacrifice for the greater good, but sacrifice takes many forms and I'm not sure we'll find a clear consensus on the greater good.  We're becoming inured to a totalitarian zombie shut-in existence, enforced by high-tech surveillance and public shaming.  Is it worth it?   I'd say in the short-term, perhaps.  If we're doing this in 2022 or even fall of 2021, I'd say it's not worth it.  

Edited by Zeitgeist
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/8/2021 at 7:12 PM, Zeitgeist said:

I don't think it's right to shame people for traveling.

Well, you are wrong.  This is why we had the public outrage and this is why those politicians lost their jobs.

In the case of the Ontario minister of Finance, he apparently knew what he was doing was wrong and made Facebook posts to deceive the public he was still in Ontario.

If you expect the public to restrict their travel, you have to lead by example!  Taking a vacation in the Caribbeans is exactly the type of image you do not want to create.

Sorry but, again, you are wrong in your position.

The only reason why there was not a complete ban on travel is to allow travel rights to people who really needed to go places - emergencies of all kinds.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, cougar said:

Well, you are wrong.  This is why we had the public outrage and this is why those politicians lost their jobs.

In the case of the Ontario minister of Finance, he apparently knew what he was doing was wrong and made Facebook posts to deceive the public he was still in Ontario.

If you expect the public to restrict their travel, you have to lead by example!  Taking a vacation in the Caribbeans is exactly the type of image you do not want to create.

Sorry but, again, you are wrong in your position.

The only reason why there was not a complete ban on travel is to allow travel rights to people who really needed to go places - emergencies of all kinds.

Nope, a much bigger worry is a kind of health dictatorship where even relatively minor public health concerns swallow all government and public resources, destroying livelihoods, imprisoning the general public under house arrest, and imposing a kind of subsistence income for "the greater good.".  This is the worst kind of dystopia and straight out of Orwell.  No thanks.

There must be constitutional protection of property, freedom of movement. and livelihoods.   No government initiative should mount such an excess of restrictions, except perhaps under extreme circumstances and conditions with time limits.  Restrictions must work with basic human rights, never overriding them.  

Edited by Zeitgeist
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/9/2021 at 6:09 PM, Nefarious Banana said:

Book: 'The Price Of Panic' . . . . How The Tyranny Of Experts Turned A Pandemic Into A Catastrophe

Douglas Axe, William M Briggs, Jay W. Richards

ISBN 978-1-68451-141-9

Informative and disturbing.

We're being played.

Really tacky quoting yourself but, . . . . . if you're able to get your hands on this book, you'll not be sorry.

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Zeitgeist said:

 Restrictions must work with basic human rights, never overriding them.  

Nature has given you the basic human right to walk.  Flying on a plane or even driving on the highway is not a basic right.  Owning properties in other provinces or countries is not a basic right either.    

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, cougar said:

Nature has given you the basic human right to walk.  Flying on a plane or even driving on the highway is not a basic right.  Owning properties in other provinces or countries is not a basic right either.    

You'd do well as a gulag labourer in Stalin's Russia.  Accept your rations and dormitory cot.  Property is counter-revolutionary after all.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/10/2021 at 12:47 AM, Zeitgeist said:

 The costs of financial ruin, social disconnection, and untreated illnesses must be enormous.  Without a full accounting of those numbers, there can be no accurate accounting of the impact of Covid 19 with and without restrictions.

Well said. For months I have been telling of the costs of the lock downs. Lock downs are a trade off at best, with any delayed infections, being also delayed immunity. Over a period of time time there is no difference, but while people are trying to hide, people were dying from hospitals being shut down, opioid dependent people using toxic drugs because of border shut downs, people especially the elderly being isolated, and sedentary, dying of loneliness. Our children were shut out of their schools, and told that they might die, abused partners locked in with their abusers, the economy decimated, and a doubling of world poverty and a doubling of world child malnutrition. People will say that it was the politicians that did all this, but they rely on the support of the people, so all who knowingly supported them in these atrocities are complicit, and also to blame.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Zeitgeist said:

You'd do well as a gulag labourer in Stalin's Russia.  Accept your rations and dormitory cot.  Property is counter-revolutionary after all.  

I think you are mixing two different concepts - the right to freedom from oppression with the right to puke carbon in the atmosphere for absolutely no sound reason.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




  • Similar Content

    • By Zeitgeist
      Is anyone else disgusted by the draconian, unjust deep sixing of the Toronto BBQ owner who defied the lockdown order to open indoor dining for three days?   This story illustrates exactly why people have become distrustful of the police and government.  The $187,000 fine imposed on this business owner is vindictive and doesn't fit the crime.  It does explain why small business owners and people in general are suspicious of restrictions that prevent someone from operating a business and earning a livelihood.  I just don't think government should have the right to impose such restrictions.  The right to earn a living is a basic human right. If you don't want to eat out, then don't.  Ensuring social distancing and reduced capacity is one thing, destroying someone's business to make a point that police and government hold all the cards, right or wrong, isn't okay.   What recourse does this guy have without taking expensive legal action that he probably can't afford?
      https://apple.news/A7SiAcw1sRxCR3d6CmZlinA
       
    • By Zeitgeist
      It's estimated that 20 percent of retailers will go out of business in Canada due to public health restrictions.  Workers and business owners are being forced onto government subsistence handouts for the sake of preventing viral spread. Rather than letting people decide whether they want to risk shopping or patronizing businesses, government is deciding for them and destroying some livelihoods.  Is it fair?
    • By Zeitgeist
      We have seen excesses at play from members and factions within the police authorities, kneeling on the neck of a subdued black man, hitting a 70 year-old white man in the face with a baton, shooting a twenty-something indigenous woman based on the police claim that she became aggressive with a knife.
      These stories of police brutality arrive in the context of a pandemic that has hit poor, crowded communities hardest, many with large racialized populations.  In communities that struggled to begin with, hit hard recently by Covid-19, it shouldn’t surprise anyone that police brutality against such peoples can only ignite a powder keg of pent-up anger and frustration.
      Obviously no one in a protest should destroy private property or hurt innocent people.  Meeting a misuse of power with a misuse of protest is an unreasonable solution to oppression.
      The questions must now be asked.
      What systemic policies continue to exist that enable oppression?
      What must change in policing and public policy to prevent the misuse of power?
      I’ll put forward a few policies that I think should immediately change:
      -end all use of force against peaceful protesters
      -end the criminalization and use of law enforcement against drug use (not including large scale drug dealing), prostitution (both in the provision and use of such services), drinking in public, and assembling in any sized group (including groups not practicing social distancing)
      -end the harassment of people suffering from mental health problems or who are inebriated (and not harassing or hurting anyone)
      -redirect funding used to enforce laws against the above mentioned behaviour towards inner city economic development and mental health programs
      -end carding of people who are not committing a crime
      -ensure that all police are equipped with mini cams that must be active during all forms of law enforcement
      -refocus law enforcement on protecting people from violence, theft, and other clear crimes intended to hurt people 
      What do you think must change?
    • By Hussain
      Can you ever imagine a country like Canada not having clean drinking water? In the 1970s the Canadain government promised to bring clean drinking water to all of Canada. Now in 2020 100% of cities of clean drinking water and 99% of rural areas have clean drinking water. the 1% which is missing is the Indigenous reserves. People living on the reserves don't have access to clean drinking water. They are poorly funded. Now the question of what would the Canadian government do if Toronto had no cleaning drinking water?
      BTW if you guys want to know more about me and my youtube channel check it out. I interview high profile politicians including Former PMs and MPs and Senators. 
       
    • By dialamah
      There is a town in Michigan where only practicing Christians are allowed to buy or inherit real estate.   The bylaw has been around since the 1940s, first passed to prevent Jews from buying, and was strengethened in 1986.  Non-Christians can rent.  The bylaw is being challenged in Court.  
      Although this bylaw is clealy discriminatory, my initial reaction is its ok in this context.  If a group of people want to create their own community, they should be allowed to do so.  But I thought I would put it out here to hear other thoughts.
      The article is a good read, btw, as it highlights the issues people are facing as the population has grown more progressive but the bylaw has not.
  • Tell a friend

    Love Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
×
×
  • Create New...