1 minute ago, Ipiggles said:

BLAH BLAH BLAH.....  More excuses on voting for Biden.  Yes both sides gave us bad candidates for the past 8 or so elections.  And yet one was more about freedoms, and the other a cog in the socialist machine. Yeah bad candidates, and they keep getting worse. Each one is worse than the President before.  Sad part is the damage is done, the country is divided, and I dont think there is any hope. 

There are those who are constitutionalists, who believe in freedom, and then there are those who want their Government to do everything for them. And the candidate that promises the most free stuff, WINS. 

 

Idiocracy at it's best. But it's ok you saved us from Trump and handed us over to a real authorotarian. To hell with the constitution you say. 

 

Egg Zachary

But its cool...the MSM doesnt annoy them with constant Trump stories now.  So they can eat their frosted flakes and go back to not caring again

joe is trying to save these idiots' lives & they're chanting f him. they're so dumb.

 

26 minutes ago, we_gotta_believe said:

Yeah and I'm pretty sure at one point IronEagle said Trump was God's plan or something to that effect. 

Right. I'm not going to argue that the viewpoint was widespread, but Trump as a Holy Warrior was definitely out there.

Hey you want advice on ivermectin, talk to your doctor. I dont take anything without talking to my doctor. 

I dont drink, smoke, use drugs, I dont do coffee, I drink only uncaffinated products,  I avoid taking OTC stuff,  like pain meds etc or cold remedies. The last time the doctor gave me some prescribed pain meds for a broken leg, I threw them out. I watch what I eat, I am fairly active and fairly healthy for a boomer. 

That being said, if your doctor prescribed IVERMACTIN, and you trust them, sure go ahead, but geebus, dont be a complete and utter idiiot and take something just because some joe blow on the internet said so. My god Darwinism at work here. 

 

And I also have no problem with those that are uncomfortable taking the vaccine. I still recommend getting it, but if you choose not to, I can respect your decision not to. 

 

22 minutes ago, we_gotta_believe said:

To be fair, he's probably referring to the OSHA requirements for businesses with more than 100 employees, but even then, I have my doubts it'll be struck down by the SCOTUS because there is plenty of precedent for the federal government regulating interstate commerce and workplace safety.

While you may be right that it won't be overturned, IMO it should be. Using OSHA as a backdoor to force this on private employers crosses the line for me.

12 minutes ago, mr_hunt said:

joe is trying to save these idiots' lives & they're chanting f him. they're so dumb.

 

Oh ish...Bidens trying to save them

They better keep their eyes peeled for a random drone and hop on the nearest C130 they see

Just now, Mike31mt said:

Oh ish...Bidens trying to save them

They better keep their eyes peeled for a random drone and hop on the nearest C130 they see

I don't think we're at drone the unvaccinated level yet...but let's put it on the backburner. 

FYI. with the report some 3 months ago that only around 36% of people are happy and engaged with their job, and the report that came out last month that over 55% of people will change jobs this year. Look for a major shift for workers to fill those positions at smaller companies, especially those who are against the unconstitutional vaccine mandate, where companies who have more than 100 employees are required for all employees will have the vaccine. People will leave and shift to smaller companies that have under 100 employees..

This will cause more disruptions in supply chains from larger companies, and causing profits to fall. That is a slippery slope. 

5 minutes ago, Mike31mt said:

Oh ish...Bidens trying to save them

They better keep their eyes peeled for a random drone and hop on the nearest C130 they see

Yeah he is doing a great job saving their lives by letting in tons of unvaccinated imigrants, and giving the taliban a massive haul of weapons and $$$$$

 

Yeah if thats trying to save us, I'd rather he would stop trying. 

1 minute ago, Ipiggles said:

FYI. with the report some 3 months ago that only around 36% of people are happy and engaged with their job, and the report that came out last month that over 55% of people will change jobs this year. Look for a major shift for workers to fill those positions at smaller companies, especially those who are against the unconstitutional vaccine mandate, where companies who have more than 100 employees are required for all employees will have the vaccine. People will leave and shift to smaller companies that have under 100 employees..

This will cause more disruptions in supply chains from larger companies, and causing profits to fall. That is a slippery slope. 

I’m a little bit confused by this… are you predicting a huge surge in the number of small businesses that have under 100 employees or are you suggesting that those small businesses are all going to suddenly grow to just under 100 employees?

1 minute ago, Ipiggles said:

FYI. with the report some 3 months ago that only around 36% of people are happy and engaged with their job, and the report that came out last month that over 55% of people will change jobs this year. Look for a major shift for workers to fill those positions at smaller companies, especially those who are against the unconstitutional vaccine mandate, where companies who have more than 100 employees are required for all employees will have the vaccine. People will leave and shift to smaller companies that have under 100 employees..

This will cause more disruptions in supply chains from larger companies, and causing profits to fall. That is a slippery slope. 

The big corporations will use bailout money as non-skid to make that slope far less slippery....for them.

5 minutes ago, mr_hunt said:

I don't think we're at drone the unvaccinated level yet...but let's put it on the backburner. 

How about vaccinate them with a tranquilizer dart shot by a drone?  

1 minute ago, Ipiggles said:

Yeah he is doing a great job saving their lives by letting in tons of unvaccinated imigrants, and giving the taliban a massive haul of weapons and $$$$$

 

Yeah if thats trying to save us, I'd rather he would stop trying. 

your BDS is showing. 

55 minutes ago, Ipiggles said:

The best part is when the double down and they pretend like they didn't make a mistake with voting for Biden.   

 

24 minutes ago, mr_hunt said:

joe is trying to save these .09% of these idiots' lives & they're chanting f him. they're so dumb.

 

FYP

28 minutes ago, Ipiggles said:

 And yet one was more about freedoms, and the other a cog in the socialist machine.

 

National socialism is socialism 

2 minutes ago, Imp81318 said:

I’m a little bit confused by this… are you predicting a huge surge in the number of small businesses that have under 100 employees or are you suggesting that those small businesses are all going to suddenly grow to just under 100 employees?

No - what I am saying:  in the current envirnoment of employee shortage (more jobs available over number of candidates),  there will be a shift to smaller companies. Those jobs will be more attractive, and thus likely fill before an equivilent job at a major company. Thus leaving the major companies with even less candidates to choose from in a already extremely tough recruitment market.  There are always consequences down the line, like a domino effect.

7 minutes ago, The_Omega said:

The big corporations will use bailout money as non-skid to make that slope far less slippery....for them.

The result will still be more supply issues. Throwing extra money wont fix that issue. 

29 minutes ago, Mike31mt said:

Dont make me break out the freaking West Side Story gifs again....I swear Ill do it

"A wise warrior would never announce his opening salvo to his enemy" - Sun Tzu on starting a meme war, probably.

12 minutes ago, vikas83 said:

While you may be right that it won't be overturned, IMO it should be. Using OSHA as a backdoor to force this on private employers crosses the line for me.

Totally fair. I'm not crazy about it either, and I think private enterprise should generally be free from the federal government dictating these sort of requirements at this level. Given how regional the pandemic is affecting us, I feel like this fits more appropriately in the realm of a state or local government decision rather than a federal one. That being said, sometimes legislation falls into the category of a necessary evil (e.g. anti-discrimination laws with protected classes). So if I lived in a state like Texas that seems hellbent on infecting every last vulnerable citizen, I'd see this in a different light than if I lived in a state where I could be more confident that similar policies would be put in place by the state dept of health or the companies themselves.

15 minutes ago, 4for4EaglesNest said:

Yep.  Don’t forget someone who has to chime in on discussions between two others posters so you can defend another Biden boot licker.  You all should try to have your own opinions, not just the ones the looney leftie guide book tells you to have. 

Chiming in to defend a boot licker? No way, man. You've never done that. That's totally beneath you of all people.  

4 minutes ago, rambo said:

FYP

Sad but true.

 

Saw an article on NPR about a patient who died after being rejected to 43 hospitals due to no room in the ICU. First thats an awful lot of Hospitals to not have room, and I had to ask myself, why didn't they have room?

After 1 1/2 years to prepare for the worst that COVID can bring, after 55% of the population being vaccinated, and yet we are still woefully underprepared to handle it?  

Just now, we_gotta_believe said:

Totally fair. I'm not crazy about it either, and I think private enterprise should generally be free from the federal government dictating these sort of requirements at this level. Given how regional the pandemic is affecting us, I feel like this fits more appropriately in the realm of a state or local government decision rather than a federal one. That being said, sometimes legislation falls into the category of a necessary evil (e.g. anti-discrimination laws with protected classes). So if I lived in a state like Texas that seems hellbent on infecting every last vulnerable citizen, I'd see this in a different light than if I lived in a state where I could be more confident that similar policies would be put in place by the state dept of health or the companies themselves.

While I appreciate the sentiment, I just can't support government overreach in the name of "extraordinary circumstances." That justification was used for things like Japanese Internment and the Patriot Act. The strength of our Republic has to come from its adherence to its principles. 

I don't mean to be a broken record, but there are much easier, effective and Constitutional ways to do this. Only award government contracts to employers that mandate vaccination, and stop having Medicare/Medicaid pay for treatment for the unvaccinated. Both are perfectly Constitutional and likely more effective.

36 minutes ago, Ipiggles said:

BLAH BLAH BLAH.....  More excuses on voting for Biden.  Yes both sides gave us bad candidates for the past 8 or so elections.  And yet one was more about freedoms, and the other a cog in the socialist machine. Yeah bad candidates, and they keep getting worse. Each one is worse than the President before.  Sad part is the damage is done, the country is divided, and I dont think there is any hope. 

There are those who are constitutionalists, who believe in freedom, and then there are those who want their Government to do everything for them. And the candidate that promises the most free stuff, WINS. 

 

Idiocracy at it's best. But it's ok you saved us from Trump and handed us over to a real authorotarian. To hell with the constitution you say. 

 

Trump got 3 of his justices in, so will you defer to the SCOTUS on the constitutionality of this or are they also a bunch of TDS libs bending to the will of Biden's authoritarian tyranny? 

3 minutes ago, vikas83 said:

While I appreciate the sentiment, I just can't support government overreach in the name of "extraordinary circumstances." That justification was used for things like Japanese Internment and the Patriot Act. The strength of our Republic has to come from its adherence to its principles. 

I don't mean to be a broken record, but there are much easier, effective and Constitutional ways to do this. Only award government contracts to employers that mandate vaccination, and stop having Medicare/Medicaid pay for treatment for the unvaccinated. Both are perfectly Constitutional and likely more effective.

I agree there are better ways to go about it, for sure. I just don't think this is unconstitutional based on past precedent and I think a conservative SCOTUS would agree given the circumstances.