There should be a national dialogue in getting back to work

[shoshin]

1 hour ago, IDBillzFan said:

 

 

People need to stop that schitt. Right and left. Stop with the hyperbole BREAKING crap. You lose credibility faster than AOC at a junior high spelling bee.

 

 Everything is always BREAKING. Makes me mental too. 

1 hour ago, IDBillzFan said:

 

 

In fairness, KTLA is reporting it is likely to be extended. It isn't final yet.

 

Story here.

 

What they also are saying is that things will be gradually relaxed. The 3 months is more for the expected window for some version of the orders to be in place, which is probably true for most places.

 

I see the Cal State U system will be online in the fall. That sucks. My daughter is a high school senior--she and her classmates are watching those decisions with a lot of apprehension. They already missed Senior year and graduation--first year of college is looking unlikely to be on campus though the risk is so low that it makes me nuts. Good for my pocket to save 20K in housing expenses, bad for the college experience. 

Edited May 13, 2020 by shoshin

[IDBillzFan]

1 hour ago, Magox said:

Who me?

 

No, not you. The Tweeters who launched BREAKING headlines on Twitter and purposely omit a word like "likely."

 

[Reality Check]

 

[Bockeye]

5 hours ago, Chef Jim said:

 

I'm as cynical as the next guy but I'm thinking it's more of they just don't have the balls to make a decision.  Hand wringing at it's finest.  

This could be it Chef Jim, esp with elected officials not wanting blame for anything as it could mean their careers.  I may be wrong, but I think by in large, its a political football for them - trump = bad, and anything he says they must be contrarian. 

 

I do know this, we need to open businesses.  At this point, I am all for splitting the country into two - liberals/conservatives or making each state independent. 

 

I've owned/own a ton of business, paid millions of dollars in taxes and have hundreds of employees.  I'm at wits end seeing what this is doing to employees and business owners alike. 

[shoshin]

I was having a conversation with a fellow business owner the other day. One of his biggest concerns is liability. He is "essential" as an accountant and wants to reopen his office but he's afraid of getting sued if someone gets sick and dies. I imagine his concern is widespread. 

 

There has been some talk about business protections from liability but I haven't seen much progress on that front. It could be a really important piece of reopening. 

 

My business can be remote and we're not essential so I am not supposed to open until phase 2 (green) in our area. Since we're still at phase 0 (red), I haven't given this much thought yet. 

 

An article on the debate. On one side, businesses want protection. On the other, you want to make sure businesses are taking some precautions. There's a middle ground to get this passed. Congress should have been pushing for this in first two funding rounds. 

Edited May 13, 2020 by shoshin

[Bockeye]

14 hours ago, MILFHUNTER#518 said:

It is already beginning here in the suburbs of Albany. Had an attempted break in at 8AM a couple weeks ago down the street, and busted a guy casing my house Saturday. Also, a week ago an attempted break in while me and my daughter were turkey hunting. They knew I wasn't there because my truck was gone, luckily my alarm went off, my wife was home alone in bed. Again, about 8AM.

Sorry to hear MH.  At least they haven't taken your guns yet and some turkey 5 shot works well for self defense. 

[Bockeye]

2 hours ago, shoshin said:

I was having a conversation with a fellow business owner the other day. One of his biggest concerns is liability. He is "essential" as an accountant and wants to reopen his office but he's afraid of getting sued if someone gets sick and dies. I imagine his concern is widespread. 

 

There has been some talk about business protections from liability but I haven't seen much progress on that front. It could be a really important piece of reopening. 

 

My business can be remote and we're not essential so I am not supposed to open until phase 2 (green) in our area. Since we're still at phase 0 (red), I haven't given this much thought yet. 

 

An article on the debate. On one side, businesses want protection. On the other, you want to make sure businesses are taking some precautions. There's a middle ground to get this passed. Congress should have been pushing for this in first two funding rounds. 

Great point Shoshin.  I didn't think about this until I just saw a WSJ article about it.  McConnell is trying to insert language to afford some protection to businesses.  

 

https://www.wsj.com/articles/house-delays-return-to-capitol-amid-uncertainty-over-next-round-of-coronavirus-stimulus-11588091849

 

[Chef Jim]

2 hours ago, shoshin said:

I was having a conversation with a fellow business owner the other day. One of his biggest concerns is liability. He is "essential" as an accountant and wants to reopen his office but he's afraid of getting sued if someone gets sick and dies. I imagine his concern is widespread. 

 

There has been some talk about business protections from liability but I haven't seen much progress on that front. It could be a really important piece of reopening. 

 

My business can be remote and we're not essential so I am not supposed to open until phase 2 (green) in our area. Since we're still at phase 0 (red), I haven't given this much thought yet. 

 

An article on the debate. On one side, businesses want protection. On the other, you want to make sure businesses are taking some precautions. There's a middle ground to get this passed. Congress should have been pushing for this in first two funding rounds. 

We have started letting people back voluntarily as of this week. We have provided (with training) strict protocols such as social distancing, hand washing and proper sanitation. I have posted signs throughout the office stating the protocol. I assume seeing they have been trained, it’s voluntary and they have acknowledged this we should be ok.  Will this keep people from suing?  Of course not. Would they win?   Hard to say. 
 

By the way half of my staff has chosen to work from home. 

[Buffalo_Gal]

2 hours ago, shoshin said:

I was having a conversation with a fellow business owner the other day. One of his biggest concerns is liability. He is "essential" as an accountant and wants to reopen his office but he's afraid of getting sued if someone gets sick and dies. I imagine his concern is widespread. 

 

There has been some talk about business protections from liability but I haven't seen much progress on that front. It could be a really important piece of reopening. 

 

My business can be remote and we're not essential so I am not supposed to open until phase 2 (green) in our area. Since we're still at phase 0 (red), I haven't given this much thought yet. 

 

An article on the debate. On one side, businesses want protection. On the other, you want to make sure businesses are taking some precautions. There's a middle ground to get this passed. Congress should have been pushing for this in first two funding rounds. 

 

4 minutes ago, Bockeye said:

Great point Shoshin.  I didn't think about this until I just saw a WSJ article about it.  McConnell is trying to insert language to afford some protection to businesses.  

 

https://www.wsj.com/articles/house-delays-return-to-capitol-amid-uncertainty-over-next-round-of-coronavirus-stimulus-11588091849

 

For a while now, Trump has been saying it is needed (if you watched the pressers...) I hope they do have some sort of limited-liability for businesses (COVID-19 related, only).

 

[MILFHUNTER#518]

17 minutes ago, Bockeye said:

Sorry to hear MH.  At least they haven't taken your guns yet and some turkey 5 shot works well for self defense. 

Speaking of which, Federal Flite Control No. 5 1 3/4 oz Turkey is my go to, but cannot find it so had to settle for Rem Mag.

 

Have since moved 9mm from gun safe to drawer in living room with extra mags, 45 in night stand, and my 12 gauge is loaded with buck shot with open choke in front hallway. If anyone wants to come in uninvited, I sincerely hope they have health insurance  because there is a very good chance they will have a very bad case of lead poisoning. 

[Buffalo_Gal]

So in Oregon where the Governor wants to keep the state in perpetual lockdown a lawsuit was filed last week by some churches (for the rule against 25+ people meeting). Here is the interesting part:

Churches, individuals file suit in Baker County Circuit Court against Gov. Kate Brown seeking injunction to block coronavirus executive orders

</snip>
 

In the lawsuit he cites the section of the Constitution — Article X-A — that authorizes the governor to declare a state of emergency due to a public health crisis.
 

Hacke said the plaintiffs don’t dispute that Brown has such authority due to the pandemic. The governor declared the state of emergency on March 8.
 

But Hacke points to a section in Article X-A which states that the governor’s emergency powers can extend for no more than 30 days unless the Legislature, on at least a three-fifths vote of both the House and the Senate, agrees to extend the governor’s emergency powers.
 

Brown has not convened the Legislature since declaring the emergency.
 

“Because governor failed to avail herself of the constitutionally prescribed procedure, her initial executive order declaring the public health emergency, issued on March 8, 2020, terminated by operation of law on April 7, 2020, and all subsequent executive orders implementing or extending the original order are legally null and void,” the lawsuit states.
 

“She’s giving herself powers to infringe on constitutional liberties in perpetuity,” Hacke said. “And she can’t do that.”

He also contends that because Brown’s initial executive order was for 60 days, rather than the 30 days specified in the Constitution, it was unconstitutional from its inception.

Oregon voters added Article X-A to the state Constitution in 2012 when they passed Measure 77 in the November election. Almost 59% of voters approved the measure. Prior to that, the governor had statutory authority to declare emergencies, but not constitutional authority.

</snip>

 

[Buffalo_Gal]

 

[PelotonBillsFan]

May the odds be forever in your favor

 

Railway Ticket Worker Dies From Coronavirus After Passenger's Spit Attack London ticket office worker Belly Mujinga died two weeks after she was spat at and coughed on by a man who claimed he had COVID-19.

[Boatdrinks]

37 minutes ago, Buffalo_Gal said:

 

For a while now, Trump has been saying it is needed (if you watched the pressers...) I hope they do have some sort of limited-liability for businesses (COVID-19 related, only).

 

Agreed, it is needed. Reasonable standards need to be met, but that’s it. You can take every precaution and it’s still possible someone could contract a virus. It would be very difficult to prove where someone contracted a virus, and even if they did it doesn’t imply negligence. Perhaps all employees in any communal setting should be required to sign a type of waiver as a condition of employment. While even best practices are being followed, there is still some risk and the employee is voluntarily participating by choosing to work there or not. 

[RochesterRob]

37 minutes ago, MILFHUNTER#518 said:

Speaking of which, Federal Flite Control No. 5 1 3/4 oz Turkey is my go to, but cannot find it so had to settle for Rem Mag.

 

Have since moved 9mm from gun safe to drawer in living room with extra mags, 45 in night stand, and my 12 gauge is loaded with buck shot with open choke in front hallway. If anyone wants to come in uninvited, I sincerely hope they have health insurance  because there is a very good chance they will have a very bad case of lead poisoning. 

  No hand gun but 12 gauge in the house and 222 in location that I am not disclosing here.

[Koko78]

9 minutes ago, Buffalo_Gal said:

 

 

Interesting: 'comply or starve'.

[daz28]

18 minutes ago, Koko78 said:

 

Interesting: 'comply or starve'.

I watched it, and he didn't say that, but why wouldn't anyone comply??  Could anything be stupider than running around KNOWING your ill, and could infect/harm/possibly kill other people?  I mean when I'm drunk I'm not allowed to drive, because I could hurt other people.  Why is this different than that?  It is also very misleading to leave out that he gave assurances that they will be checked in on daily, and they will receive the groceries and medicine they need if they had no outside sources.

Edited May 13, 2020 by daz28

[MILFHUNTER#518]

2 minutes ago, daz28 said:

I watched it, and he didn't say that, but why wouldn't anyone comply??  Could anything be stupider than running around KNOWING your ill, and could infect/herm/possibly kill other people?  I mean when I'm drunk I'm not allowed to drive, because I could hurt other people.  Why is this different than that?  

So you agree the government should be able to come to your home and involuntarily subject you and your family to invasive medical testing on a hunch that you could, possibly, maybe have a virus that has a .1% mortality rate?

[daz28]

1 minute ago, MILFHUNTER#518 said:

So you agree the government should be able to come to your home and involuntarily subject you and your family to invasive medical testing on a hunch that you could, possibly, maybe have a virus that has a .1% mortality rate?

Did you even read it, or watch the video?  It's if you test positive.  Also, please don't throw numbers around about something you really don't understand.  

[SectionC3]

26 minutes ago, Boatdrinks said:

Agreed, it is needed. Reasonable standards need to be met, but that’s it. You can take every precaution and it’s still possible someone could contract a virus. It would be very difficult to prove where someone contracted a virus, and even if they did it doesn’t imply negligence. Perhaps all employees in any communal setting should be required to sign a type of waiver as a condition of employment. While even best practices are being followed, there is still some risk and the employee is voluntarily participating by choosing to work there or not. 

 

A case like that probably would be very tough to prove absent a cluster and a very diligent plaintiff who otherwise could establish that he/she took stringent precautions outside the area in question.