I guess since Curry's not being ranked among the absolute greatest players of all time, he maybe has more freedom to avoid being scrutinized quite so intensely.
Susan Kim2 said:Not even close, if you ask me. Whether you're looking at the chaos in the city, the region, or just the massive scale of everything else—it doesn't matter. This franchise was barely relevant for a three or four-year stretch in its entire history before LeBron James showed up.
I see what you mean, but I guess the Cavaliers are a professional squad playing at the highest level of global basketball, based out of one of the major metropolitan hubs in the US. So, maybe compare them to somewhere like Budapest or New York rather than just some tiny town of 5,000 people.
It used to be about bringing a major trophy to the city (which actually happened), but I guess my colleague got a little carried away and dropped a few zeros regarding Cleveland.
I wonder if LeBron James will still be stirring up drama on forums like this in 20 years. I guess he won't. Jordan was a Brand and he stayed a Brand. Maybe if he wasn't so intense and blunt toward everyone else in this documentary, we wouldn't be seeing this, so perhaps we should show a little more gratitude. 🍿
Jacob Kern2 said:https://lider.media/poslovna-scena/t...kaznica-131120
What are your thoughts on this development?
To provide some context, Bill Gates actually mentioned on Reddit a while back the concept of "personal" identifiers in the form of a digital chip. The idea was that these would act as a sort of verification for vaccination status or digital immunity—essentially a system without which citizens might find themselves denied the fundamental right to work or travel.
Here is an excerpt from the article:
The ID2020 alliance launched a program in late 2019 aimed at securing digital IDs alongside vaccinations in Bangladesh, working in tandem with the Government of Bangladesh and GAVI. As they described it, the program views immunization as a unique opportunity to establish digital identities, which in the case of Bangladesh, would be utilized to track those who have received their shots.
Would you be willing to accept such a system?
Before anyone begins applying labels or resorting to mockery, it is worth noting that everything mentioned in this text is quite easily verifiable through the official websites of the organizations cited, as well as the previously mentioned Reddit discussion.
I feel similar about this as I do about the whole virus situation. I guess the severity of this virus doesn't really justify these kinds of measures or ideas that make normal life so complicated. If Corona were definitely going to kill 100 million people—then sure, maybe pursue that idea. But as long as it isn't a bigger threat than the flu, malaria, HIV, or other diseases, it seems unnecessary to give it special treatment that ends up stigmatizing people. We don't even have digital ID cards for HIV. Generally, I don't have any issues with vaccines; I've gotten plenty for travel, and I make sure my kids are fully vaccinated, including extras. But being tracked globally and having a "plus" or "minus" attached to me because of a sickness that 90% of people get through? No thanks. It feels like all these radical ideas are swirling around in people's heads right now, with some even saying we won't shake hands anymore. In a year or two, I suspect most of this will vanish, things will return to normal, and people will just move on from Corona. Since there's a forum archive, I guess it's fine to leave this here.
Even though he tends to go wherever the wind blows (though he did handle himself pretty well during this crisis), he’s provided a really solid overview of the whole situation. I found the second half of his piece particularly interesting, especially how he places this virus within the broader context of other health threats—things that are more about lifestyle choices than just being an illness.
I guess I should point out that a few of us were saying much the same thing right at the start. It's not that anyone is denying that Corona exists as a disease; rather, we seem to be questioning its historical significance for public health and the socio-economic landscape. Maybe we're just questioning if the apocalyptic scale of it all is justified, given the unprecedented fear that swept the globe. It feels like just another new threat that might eventually be forgotten or ignored by the general public. If we accept the millions of annual deaths caused by other infectious diseases, smoking, obesity, car accidents, or even extreme sports (basically anything that could be slowed down by similar quarantines or government mandates), then I suppose we'll eventually accept Corona too. And maybe we'll accept it because, after only a month, it seems clear that the cost of certain socio-economic experiments is just too high. I suspect the disease isn't quite dangerous enough to justify all the hype, and if measures are truly needed, then it's up to the government to find a way to let daily life continue in parallel. That's why we pay them, I guess—to find solutions that benefit everyone.
Matthew Young35 said:I disagree. Personally, I wouldn't be raising any objections—far from it. But make no mistake, there would be plenty of people who would.
It's a mess. These political appointees are organized into unions, making them one of the most powerful groups out there. Imagine announcing a reduction in the number of bureaucrats in the education system. And I don't mean actual teachers; I mean the administrative bloat. Take some tiny school in the middle of nowhere: you might have two teachers, but then you've got a principal, two secretaries, an accountant, a PR rep, two janitors, and two security guards. If you cut those positions, you'd have 100,000 people protesting in Times Square instantly. The same logic applies to various utility companies, the railroads, and everything else.
That's exactly it. There are just too many of them, and by using their unions, they can basically suffocate any attempt at reform. Plus, there isn't really a single meaningful political party actually willing to take them on. That's why I told restlesssurfer97 that poll numbers don't really matter much; a poll would only be relevant if there were a candidate actually playing that hand. Neither the Democratic Party nor Škoro are touching that issue. In fact, they seem to go against it. I guess Škoro is mostly just a player for foreign interests who can only stay afloat locally by providing jobs to the people he's managed to gather around him.
restlesssurfer97 said:Look, this whole thing is a marathon, not a sprint, and if you ran a poll on this even a decade ago, the numbers would look completely different, no question about it. People are finally waking up to what's happening, a critical mass is starting to form, and honestly, change is going to happen simply because the pressure is becoming too much to ignore. Nothing is ever going to be fixed overnight, we all know that, and we shouldn't be sitting here expecting some kind of miracle to solve everything by tomorrow morning.
I see what you mean, but I feel like the employment structure hasn't really changed much. So many people are still working for the government, and by default, those types of roles tend to resist major shifts. They often blame the state for everything, though it's mainly because their pay is so low. I suppose we really need more foreign investment in the private sector to increase the number of actual private-sector jobs; that's pretty much my main take on the domestic economy. Once political appointees become a relatively small minority, maybe then things can truly change. Until then, they just have too much influence over who gets elected.
restlesssurfer97 said:Does anyone else get the feeling that Ribić and those other self-important pharaohs have been acting way too hysterical over the last year or so? It’s honestly not just me thinking this.
Quick poll for everyone here: it feels like people are overwhelmingly calling for massive cuts to the federal bureaucracy, taxes, and all those bloated local government offices and counties.
I suspect it won't be that easy to actually get rid of them. So far, any cuts have just been superficial, or maybe a "2-for-1" reduction that eventually turns into a "2-for-3" situation anyway. I guess it might actually help him right now, since he can drum up support by backing healthcare workers and then just tuck everyone else under that same umbrella.
brightpilot6 said:So, I’m curious—which specific event from 1995 onward do you all believe posed a greater socio-economic threat than what we're facing now, enough to make that statement incorrect? I would genuinely love to hear your reasoning.
And where exactly are you getting the idea that this statement implies an "apocalypse"? When someone says "since the war," they clearly mean something less severe than a full-scale war, and since even the war itself wasn't an apocalypse, I can logically deduce that this won't be one either. What kind of logic are you actually applying here?
To give you a quick rundown, there are several pressing issues on the table. The current administration actually has rough estimates regarding casualties and property damage if a 6.2 magnitude earthquake were to hit Washington, D.C. There was an article published about three years ago on this exact topic, which basically concluded that absolutely nothing is being done to prepare. It’s a constant threat to about a million people, especially the roughly hundred thousand living in the historic downtown area. Then you have the risk of flooding, like what we just saw happen in Gunj. There's also the general threat of terrorism, the possibility of conflict in Canada, or even a disaster at the nuclear plant near Krško (which could also be triggered by an earthquake). We can look back at the economic collapse of 2009, the Walmart situation, and so on. Or the wildfires along the coast, using the recent fires in Split as an example. Add in the 2009 swine flu crisis, and we could go on forever. These are all potential events that could result in thousands of deaths, yet we live with them as permanent, looming catastrophes. And with a baseline mortality rate of nearly 1.4%, I guess just breathing gives you a chance of passing away this year.
I guess if COVID was actually going to justify all this hype, it would have had to take out 100 million people worldwide. It’s kind of like how FC Barcelona wouldn't pay 140 million for Coutinho just to get five goals.
Why would you assume the leaders of those organizations are any smarter than you are? Maybe you're just expecting too much from them. It seems like someone sold them a bit of a fantasy, too.
Andrej Plenković said on TV that this is the biggest threat we've faced since the war. Honestly, that feels like such an inaccurate and irrational thing for a national leader to say. I guess I wonder what world he's living in or who convinced him of that narrative. Where is this apocalypse everyone is talking about? I don't see any sign of it, neither locally nor globally.
I don't really subscribe to conspiracy theories, but I am aware that the authorities seem to have very little information right now, which seems to be proven true every single day. I also have some sources suggesting that the medical community might be among those most resistant to adopting modern analytical solutions. It doesn't happen all that often for the entire socio-economic system to shut down just because we lack information; usually, such drastic measures are taken when there is 100% certainty about something. That’s why I think the Swedes are leading the way with their cautious approach. They aren't necessarily "ahead of the curve," they were just prepared to pause and actually study the problem in detail. They aren't superheroes, but when it comes to science and technology, they definitely hold a respected place in the world. Their official websites for COVID updates have been calming people down from day one, reassuring the majority that they will be fine. I've been getting my information from those sites rather than our local news portals.
ZZ, we were actually talking about this in person, and you know I’ve been saying from the jump that they aren't doing nearly enough. You mentioned that people might end up saying they did too much, but right now, it feels like my take is looking a bit more accurate, though I guess my stance hasn't changed since then. That's just how nature works, I suppose; if things worked differently, we wouldn't even be here. It's hard to tell if that 5% is actually going toward ventilators, and when you deal with percentages like that, it seems a bit too easy to just spread it thin while everyone is stuck in fear. To be honest, the experts have really messed things up during this crisis. Every single day brings a new theory or a new way to spin the story.
If the whole world goes into lockdown and America doesn't, the same damn thing happens anyway. You don't need to be an economics expert to figure that out.
I personally think the global lockdowns are unnecessary. Spain is under lockdown and they had over 3,500 new cases yesterday; Italy had about 1,800.
So Sweden is also going to face an economic downturn. But for some reason, people are dragging Sweden through the mud over their measures, while Italy and Spain are somehow considered fine?
And just a month ago, everyone was claiming Corona kills 30 times more than the flu. I'm starting to think it kills less than the flu.
brightpilot6 said:True, that was the last point. Let’s just say, suppose this sickness started spreading without any government intervention—though we’ve already seen how that plays out in several other countries. But let's take it a step further: imagine that even after things escalated, there were no official lockdowns on transportation, retail, or even grabbing a coffee at a local shop.
Can anyone actually guarantee—and on what basis, really?—that we wouldn't face a spontaneous economic shutdown? Wouldn't people eventually just say, "Forget this, there's some unknown disease out there, hospitals are overflowing, the government isn't doing a damn thing, I see what's happening in Italy, and honestly, screw my shitty job as a cashier, a driver, a teacher, a daycare worker, a maid, or a waiter; I'm staying home until this blows over"? Or perhaps, "I'm not going to bars, I'm not going away for the weekend, I'm going to hoard every single dollar because who knows when I might need it"? Or even, "I'll just call my doctor to get me on medical leave, because what is this madness even for?"
I’ve asked this before: what would your actual economic plan be for those one or two months where the elderly and the vulnerable are being wiped out, while everyone else is gripped by panic over the unknown and losing all faith in "the system"? What would you communicate to the public? And more importantly, how would you talk to the most essential business owners?
Back in 2015, there were 4,000 excess deaths in the US, yet the system didn't Collapse. When there isn't an extreme focus on it, these kinds of things can slide through the system "on their own" without most people even noticing. That's just how these types of illnesses behave, I guess.