Page 785 of 929 FirstFirst ... 780 781 782 783 784 785 786 787 788 789 790 ... LastLast
Results 19,601 to 19,625 of 23206
  1. #19601
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    Libtardia, NW Alterrastan
    Posts
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by ml242 View Post
    Quickly, go delete your comments of calling everyone sheeple groupthinkers or whatever so it can't be proved!
    It will be deleted eventually. I think you're still struggling with what ad hominem actually means. Good luck to you.

  2. #19602
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Posts
    11,145
    Like when someone says you are cunting up a thread and you cry about someone calling you a cunt.

    I get that this it is really hard for you to see the distinction - but your personal struggle doesn’t make it ad hominem.

  3. #19603
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Beaverton, OR
    Posts
    1,337
    Quote Originally Posted by juanrogera View Post
    A bit of supposition on my end too, I realize. "The Court may announce opinions on the homepage beginning at 10 a.m. If more than one opinion will be issued, they will post in approximately ten minute intervals. The Court will not take the Bench." https://www.supremecourt.gov/. Babcock v. Kijakazi was announced at 10AM local time at https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/slipopinion/21. Sufficient time has passed that one could likely assume no further announcements today. https://www.scotusblog.com/ seems to echo that sentiment.
    SCOTUS made its decision and released already...

    Curious to find out why Roberts/Kavanaugh felt one was ok to proceed but not the other. On the surface seems inconsistent when applying LAW (not intentions of law).

  4. #19604
    Join Date
    Sep 2020
    Location
    Neuvo Mex
    Posts
    357
    Quote Originally Posted by sirbumpsalot View Post
    SCOTUS made its decision and released already...

    Curious to find out why Roberts/Kavanaugh felt one was ok to proceed but not the other. On the surface seems inconsistent when applying LAW (not intentions of law).
    Color me corrected! Thanks for posting that.

    In National Federation of Independent Business v. Department of Labor, the court blocked the federal government’s vaccine-or-test requirement for workplaces of 100 or more employees.


    In Biden v. Missouri, the court allowed the government’s vaccine mandate for workers at federally funded health care facilities to take effect nationwide.

  5. #19605
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Big Sky/Moonlight Basin
    Posts
    14,412
    Quote Originally Posted by sirbumpsalot View Post
    SCOTUS made its decision and released already...

    Curious to find out why Roberts/Kavanaugh felt one was ok to proceed but not the other. On the surface seems inconsistent when applying LAW (not intentions of law).
    How is it constitutional to mandate vaccines for one group of workers, but it is unconstitutional to mandate vaccines for another group of workers ? I’m curious how they reconcile that.


    Sent from my iPad using TGR Forums
    "Zee damn fat skis are ruining zee piste !" -Oscar Schevlin

    "Hike up your skirt and grow a dick you fucking crybaby" -what Bunion said to Harry at the top of The Headwaters

  6. #19606
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    2,036
    Yawn. We tried to tell you Joe was oversteppin.

  7. #19607
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Making the Bowl Great Again
    Posts
    13,779
    Quote Originally Posted by Harry View Post
    How is it constitutional to mandate vaccines for one group of workers, but it is unconstitutional to mandate vaccines for another group of workers ? I’m curious how they reconcile that.


    Sent from my iPad using TGR Forums
    The thing about the Supreme Court is that they don't care. They just do whatever they want. That's why it's not even really a court.

  8. #19608
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Posts
    19,201
    Quote Originally Posted by Harry View Post
    How is it constitutional to mandate vaccines for one group of workers, but it is unconstitutional to mandate vaccines for another group of workers ? I’m curious how they reconcile that.


    Sent from my iPad using TGR Forums
    Maybe skip a gummy or two and read the opinions?
    Is it radix panax notoginseng? - splat
    This is like hanging yourself but the rope breaks. - DTM
    Dude Listen to mtm. He's a marriage counselor at burning man. - subtle plague

  9. #19609
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    The Mayonnaisium
    Posts
    10,467
    The gummies are the only way the opinions make sense.

  10. #19610
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Making the Bowl Great Again
    Posts
    13,779
    Quote Originally Posted by MakersTeleMark View Post
    Maybe skip a gummy or two and read the opinions?
    Gummies don't make libertarian-flavored arguments about the nondelegation doctrine any less stupid.

  11. #19611
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Beaverton, OR
    Posts
    1,337
    Quote Originally Posted by Harry View Post
    How is it constitutional to mandate vaccines for one group of workers, but it is unconstitutional to mandate vaccines for another group of workers ? I’m curious how they reconcile that.


    Sent from my iPad using TGR Forums
    Seems they left the door open for brandon to now have OSHA mandate employers that take FEDERAL $ to enforce. However must see the reasoning write up to see if thats the reasoning behind their split decision...otherwise I am just speculating from a hunch.

  12. #19612
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    truckee
    Posts
    23,111
    Apparently it's ok to be exposed to a hazard at work if it's also a hazard of daily life. I don't get it. The difference between work and daily life is that at work you do what your boss tells you to. If you don't have the ability to work from home your boss can make you work all day a few feet from a sick person on a meatpacking line for example. Outside of work I have a choice who to spend long periods of time close to. I can have my groceries brought out to the car. I can avoid public gatherings etc. Yeah you have a choice not to work--you can be starving and homeless.

    At home I am free to get up on the roof and fall off and break my neck--a hazard of daily life. But OSHA mandates that at work I wear a harness and clip to a safety line.

    But since when did the SCOTUS pay any attention to common sense, the law, and the Constitution. Every time they issue a ruling they lose a little more of what little credibility they have. The idea that it's about the law and not politics is as credible is the idea that a politician isn't influenced by people that give them money or doctors aren't influenced by drug companies that send them on luxury trips.

  13. #19613
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Making the Bowl Great Again
    Posts
    13,779
    I am sure actually working a real job was the furthest thing from the minds of 7 attorneys who all went to Yale and Harvard Law.

  14. #19614
    Join Date
    Aug 2016
    Location
    关你屁事
    Posts
    9,530
    Quote Originally Posted by RootSkier View Post
    The thing about the Supreme Court is that they don't care. They just do whatever they want. That's why it's not even really a court.
    and they don’t much care about dressing up the bullshit anymore. gorsuch thinks freezing to death at work ain’t a big deal. Hey, it’s an everyday hazard!

    anyways, back to vitamin d supplements for our active getting after it livin the dream tgnars

  15. #19615
    Join Date
    Sep 2020
    Location
    Neuvo Mex
    Posts
    357
    Quote Originally Posted by old goat View Post
    The idea that it's about the law and not politics is as credible is the idea that a politician isn't influenced by people that give them money or doctors aren't influenced by drug companies that send them on luxury trips.
    Boy, isn't that the truth!

  16. #19616
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    The Bull City
    Posts
    14,003
    I'm pretty sure that many large employers will still have vaccine and mask requirements for all employees working on company property or visiting customer locations. It protects them from risk exposure and will keep their self insured healthcare costs down. It's the larger mom and pop operations that will be COVID soup. Let them eat what they serve. We'll find out how sustainable that is or isn't.
    Go that way really REALLY fast. If something gets in your way, TURN!

  17. #19617
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Making the Bowl Great Again
    Posts
    13,779
    Quote Originally Posted by SumJongGuy View Post
    I'm pretty sure that many large employers will still have vaccine and mask requirements for all employees working on company property or visiting customer locations. It protects them from risk exposure and will keep their self insured healthcare costs down. It's the larger mom and pop operations that will be COVID soup. Let them eat what they serve. We'll find out how sustainable that is or isn't.
    Sure, but multiple states (like MT) have laws banning employers from doing so. Montana even bars PUBLIC ACCOMODATIONS from imposing vax mandates. Because FREEDUMB.

  18. #19618
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    The Bull City
    Posts
    14,003
    Quote Originally Posted by RootSkier View Post
    Sure, but multiple states (like MT) have laws banning employers from doing so. Montana even bars PUBLIC ACCOMODATIONS from imposing vax mandates. Because FREEDUMB.
    That's something that even this SCOTUS won't uphold. Businesses have the right to refuse... as long as it's not some protected, marginalized minority protected by ADA or The Civil Rights Act of 1964
    Go that way really REALLY fast. If something gets in your way, TURN!

  19. #19619
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Beaverton, OR
    Posts
    1,337
    Quote Originally Posted by old goat View Post
    Apparently it's ok to be exposed to a hazard at work if it's also a hazard of daily life. I don't get it. The difference between work and daily life is that at work you do what your boss tells you to. If you don't have the ability to work from home your boss can make you work all day a few feet from a sick person on a meatpacking line for example. Outside of work I have a choice who to spend long periods of time close to. I can have my groceries brought out to the car. I can avoid public gatherings etc. Yeah you have a choice not to work--you can be starving and homeless.

    At home I am free to get up on the roof and fall off and break my neck--a hazard of daily life. But OSHA mandates that at work I wear a harness and clip to a safety line.

    But since when did the SCOTUS pay any attention to common sense, the law, and the Constitution. Every time they issue a ruling they lose a little more of what little credibility they have. The idea that it's about the law and not politics is as credible is the idea that a politician isn't influenced by people that give them money or doctors aren't influenced by drug companies that send them on luxury trips.
    Read the SCOTUS writeup. Its more about the constitutionality of the executive branch using OSHA to do congress's dirty work....

    The Medical Industry mandate is tied to federal funding. If Medical facility refused to accept Medicare/Medicaid I suppose the mandate wouldn't apply to them...

  20. #19620
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Big Sky/Moonlight Basin
    Posts
    14,412
    Andy of Mayberry dealt with these anti-vaxx bumpkins back in 1962




    Sent from my iPhone using TGR Forums
    "Zee damn fat skis are ruining zee piste !" -Oscar Schevlin

    "Hike up your skirt and grow a dick you fucking crybaby" -what Bunion said to Harry at the top of The Headwaters

  21. #19621
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    truckee
    Posts
    23,111
    Quote Originally Posted by sirbumpsalot View Post
    Read the SCOTUS writeup. Its more about the constitutionality of the executive branch using OSHA to do congress's dirty work....

    The Medical Industry mandate is tied to federal funding. If Medical facility refused to accept Medicare/Medicaid I suppose the mandate wouldn't apply to them...
    Congress did the dirty work--it created OSHA. The reason that we have regulatory agencies is because even in the best of times (whenever they were) Congress doesn't have the expertise or the time to write laws that deal with every aspect of a regulated industry, let alone rewrite the laws as new information becomes available, and still less ability to foresee contingencies, like Covid.

    This is a decision that has huge implications far beyond Covid. There is a movement on the right, largely bankrolled by corporations, which isn't much talked about --a movement to basically dismantle the federal regulatory apparatus and require Congress to specifically enact every detailed regulation. How many ppm of a carcinogen in your water, what pesticides can be used and what precautions have to be taken to use them. How much reserve a bank has to have. What information has to be disclosed to potential stock buyers. All of this would require legislation.

    The current regulatory apparatus, where Congress creates agencies and tasks them with writing rules to carry out certain ends--like protecting workers--has served us pretty well for many decades, flawed as it is. We take it for granted but we shouldn't. The reason the corporate right wants Congress to have to write the actual rules is obvious--it won't happen.

    The vaccine mandate decision is the first one I've heard about carrying out this agenda. It won't be the last. If you are a fan of DDT and having to bail out banks to prevent financial catastrophe you should be happy. Otherwise you should be very scared.

  22. #19622
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Location
    Libtardia, NW Alterrastan
    Posts
    0
    The NCAA updated guidance to consider athletes as "fully vaxxed" within 90 days of an infection. The short time frame seems strange considering natural immunity is widely reported to be more robust than vax especially longer term (4-6 months+), but it's encouraging that some common sense is starting to show up in policy at a national organization.

  23. #19623
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Portland
    Posts
    17,475
    Quote Originally Posted by SumJongGuy View Post
    I'm pretty sure that many large employers will still have vaccine and mask requirements for all employees working on company property or visiting customer locations. It protects them from risk exposure and will keep their self insured healthcare costs down. It's the larger mom and pop operations that will be COVID soup. Let them eat what they serve. We'll find out how sustainable that is or isn't.
    It'll be dictated by the free market... meaning if it's more costly to do something then nothing will be done. That's worrisome for so many health issues outside of COVID.

  24. #19624
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    The Bull City
    Posts
    14,003
    Quote Originally Posted by Dumb0ldDad View Post
    The NCAA updated guidance to consider athletes as "fully vaxxed" within 90 days of an infection. The short time frame seems strange considering natural immunity is widely reported to be more robust than vax especially longer term (4-6 months+), but it's encouraging that some common sense is starting to show up in policy at a national organization.
    There is nothing factual in everything above.. 2Vax+Boost+COVIDD>2Vax+Boost>>2Vax>COVID
    Go that way really REALLY fast. If something gets in your way, TURN!

  25. #19625
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Geopolis
    Posts
    16,083
    doesn’t matter he’s just going to delete it anyway
    j'ai des grands instants de lucididididididididi

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •