Posts by Gary Cooper3

Amy Long5 said:That's a bad comparison. Because of that mustache guy, today neither a cabinet secretary nor even the President has any real authority over healthcare or policing.
In the US, police and healthcare are handled at the state level. That's baked into our system because nobody wants to hand all that power back to one person ever again after what happened under Adolf.

Honestly, more than anything else, I have to ask: are you doing okay? Seriously, what is going on here?

The group was busy picking mortality rates as if they were choosing flavors of ice cream—trying to be all "scientific" about it, of course.

I see most of you don't even recall that back when things felt truly terrifying, Merkel actually stated that 70 to 80 percent of the population would end up infected. Now, obviously, that has absolutely nothing to do with these emails we're seeing.

Like I’ve said before, I’m the first person who doesn't want to buy into conspiracy theories, but Merkel, Macron, and the rest of that crowd are genuinely—and I mean truly—doing everything in their power to scrutinize and dismiss every single theory being floated right now. If someone tries to link COVID-19 to an earthquake today, they realistically could... It has gone so far, and it isn't just the internet driving this madness, it's the politicians themselves.

Just yesterday, there was a statement in the news claiming that 180,000 people under the age of 60 would die if lockdowns aren't implemented. I mean, what is that supposed to mean? Where does that number come from, and what kind of mortality rate are they basing it on? Unless I’ve completely lost my mind, there aren't a billion people under 60 living in Germany...

briskdrifter3 said:Has anyone else given serious thought to the mass exodus of labor once we join the European Union?
If we actually make the leap in 2013—though, if you ask me, that’s still a big "if"—and then endure several more years where we aren't even permitted to work abroad (since the member states get to decide whether to ban us for three, five, or seven years)... we are heading straight toward a massive wave of emigration from America. And I'm not just talking about individuals; we're looking at entire working-age families, including young children, packing up and leaving. Even now, there's already a significant number of people fleeing this swamp of a country, but once those bureaucratic hurdles are cleared... well, that exodus will multiply exponentially. It’s precisely what happened in Poland, the Czech Republic, and similar nations. They managed to absorb the shock somewhat successfully, mostly because they have larger populations and, frankly, much healthier economies than ours...
But what does this mean for us?
The ratio of employed people to dependents is currently sitting at roughly 1:1, and things are going to get significantly worse. Our highly educated youth—the very backbone of our workforce—will be the first to leave. These are the people who drive the consumer base that retailers rely on; young adults and young families are the primary drivers of spending. So, who is left to fund the budget through income tax? Who is going to shop at the malls and indirectly support the treasury? Pensioners? Minimum wage workers who can barely afford groceries? Or perhaps the merchants themselves, who would essentially be buying from their own shadows?
Joining the European Union threatens to trigger an economic collapse unlike anything we've seen; we are practically charging like sheep into a slaughterhouse. We won't even have recovered from the current crisis by the time we join; if anything, the entry will only deepen the wound. Compared to what lies ahead for us, Greece looks like a paradise.
In fact, I am personally weighing the option of moving abroad with my wife and child—and if an opportunity presents itself in a few years (one I intend to pursue actively rather than wait for), I am gone. Quite frankly, I couldn't care less about America or
my national identity. I might return once I retire, but my children will likely stay abroad. I am simply fed up with the incompetence here and the miserable wages. I possess specialized skills that are easily marketable overseas. Most of my friends are thinking along these exact same lines...

Ten years have passed, and that was a fairly accurate forecast. Now, one could even argue regarding the economic collapse 😁. While it may not be a direct consequence of emigration alone, it is impossible to know whether the current crisis might have been milder had better people remained to work in America.

A good topic to pull out of the archives.

Someone wrote above that there wouldn't be much of a connection because the highly educated could already leave... well, that was a flawed prediction. Joining the USA significantly lowered the barriers, regardless of the fact that it was technically possible before. Even now, everywhere I've worked in the USA, there were plenty of folks from outside the union, but it is undeniably harder for them. When a recruiter reaches out to you on LinkedIn, one of the standard questions is "Are you a USA citizen?" If the answer is no, my friend, they make it very clear that things are going to be difficult.

Amy Long5 said:New Zealand had 60 days, and look at them now—summer is here, festivals are happening, everything is open. Masks are still required, though.

They were Corona-free for 102 days.

It’s easy when you're an island "at the end of the world."

Before you even step foot in New Zealand, you need confirmation that you have a spot in a government quarantine facility for a mandatory 14-day stint. If you don't, the airlines aren't allowed to fly you in.

https://www.miq.govt.nz/travel-to-ne...ged-isolation/

Entry for non-citizens or those without residency is still strictly limited to extreme exceptions.

The kind of measures that are basically impossible to pull off in Europe.

And honestly, I have to admit, New Zealand serves as a solid example for me. It’s a far cry from somewhere like Australia, which is running a massive circus over there with constant lockdowns popping up every other week.

Europe is just wandering aimlessly—from my perspective, the worst part from the beginning was this inconsistent application of incidence rates between different countries. The EU should have acted as a single unified entity, being as strict as possible. If they had, then our approach—that 40-day lockdown and then being done with it—might actually have made sense.

As it stands, one group does one thing, another does something else, and in the end, the ones with the most draconian restrictions will likely see the highest death tolls, while everyone else ends up at roughly the same level anyway. Total circus.

Gerald Chavez7 said:All these measures aimed at restricting movement—you know, things like permits or those "stay at home" orders—seem pretty overkill to me. Especially when schools are open and plenty of people are still heading into work every day (like how things were looking here in the States back in December). I’m not talking about interstate travel—those restrictions actually make sense. If we’d had those in place back at the start of 2020 when it was coming from Asia, maybe we could have avoided at least one of the two waves we've dealt with so far.

Closing down indoor public spaces where crowds gather (cafes, restaurants, etc.) during high transmission periods definitely makes sense, as does wearing masks indoors.

When rates are peaking, maybe closing everything except grocery stores has some effect, but primarily it’s for the sake of the employees—who are mostly working-class folks relying on public transit—rather than because of the customers themselves.

P.S. This probably belongs in a different thread; let’s keep this one focused on international news...

I honestly don't have much insight on that specific point. I tend to frequent the same shops whether I'm in America or near my place in Luxembourg, and I actually know many of the people who work there by name. I don't get the impression at all that anyone there is at risk—I see them constantly and I highly doubt they've ever even come into contact with someone infected, let alone caught it themselves. In my view, that isn't a sufficient reason to bar someone from going to their job, especially since public transit can be managed quite effectively through increased bus and subway frequency.
The only thing I have noticed is certain shops struggling to stay afloat. So, yes, quite a few of those employees are left without a place to go to work. But I suppose that's just how it goes...

Feel free to move these posts to a new thread. I only posted here because it gets more eyes on it, but it doesn't really matter—it's a decent discussion regardless.

Kyle Nelson2 said:A forty-day lockdown for basically everything, and then just going right back to business as usual.
Everything else is just playing games with people's nerves and the economy, I guess.

Look, I’m not necessarily against these measures—nor am I against the deployment of the military—but I really hope that once this is over, there isn't some grand plan to return to "normalcy" across the entire US without any more of these ridiculous cycles of lockdowns, semi-lockdowns, and similar nonsense.

On a broader scale, though, I am genuinely curious about where the people who support these restrictions draw the line... what would they consider "too much," if such a thing even exists.

Just as a quick reminder: that much-discussed Chinese lockdown was actually milder—even in Wuhan—than what happened in places like Spain or France, where for a while there, you practically weren't allowed to breathe the street air without permission. And outside of Wuhan? I'm not even sure if anyone was ever truly shut in, despite how many folks from Wuhan were being shipped out everywhere.

What the Chinese did—which hasn't been implemented here in the US yet—was essentially trapping people with positive tests inside their own four walls, with absolutely no way out.
Would you all actually support something like that?

Here is another example, lifted from a different thread—do you all think it would be an overreach to implement this for the entire population and across all job sectors?

https://www.france24.com/en/france/2...h-hygiene-firm

I have a question for all you advocates of these mandates—do you actually have a breaking point? A moment where you’d look at what's happening in the US, Germany, or Belgium and say, "Okay, they’ve gone way too far this time."

For instance, let's say Germany announces a total lockdown. Imagine a scenario where grocery stores are shuttered completely, and the military is sent in to deliver whatever rations they deem sufficient for your survival...
Or perhaps you're restricted to ordering everything online, and leaving your house is strictly forbidden under penalty of law.
Would you consider a measure like that acceptable?

And I'm not even asking this to troll; I am genuinely curious—and I can provide more examples if needed. Suppose you aren't allowed to step foot outside unless you present a 48-hour antigen test that you are forced to pay for out of your own pocket. Would you support something like that?

Or how about a mandate where we aren't allowed to laugh in public because opening our mouths might spread the infection?

Is there any line in the sand for you? A point where you could honestly say, "Look, maybe this virus isn't quite serious enough to justify banning this or that."

Personally, my limit would be the closure of nightclubs—that’s the absolute furthest I could go economically before things become unbearable. As for masks, social distancing, and washing hands... fine, that’s acceptable during the winter months. Anything beyond that, in my opinion, is just pure overreach.

Amy Long5 said:Look, there have always been certain countries where they required vaccinations and wouldn't accept a test. Take malaria, for example. I’m against getting vaccinated for that.

True, but we are discussing the Union here—the very same Union that promised us all these supposed freedoms...

If Canada and Australia want to demand proof of vaccination, fine, that's their business—but within the EU, this kind of nonsense shouldn't be allowed, and it NEVER should have been...

darkotter35 said:So, my kid just got slapped with a 10-day quarantine because some classmate tested positive.
Now, we just got hit with news that the isolation period is being tacked on for another 7 days because apparently, someone else in the class popped up positive in the meantime.
Is there actually any legal ground for them to extend those initial 10 days like this?
At this rate, they could basically sentence healthy kids to three months of isolation!
Right?
WTF?

Unfortunately, yes—this is exactly how they operate. Even i vitez Reiner called them out on it.

At some point, one really ought to exercise a bit of personal judgment regarding self-isolation.

In all seriousness—if you aren't technically required to isolate, yet you've been in close quarters with those who ended up testing positive—perhaps hosting a little "corona party" for ten to fourteen days isn't the worst idea... just staying home, working remotely, and calling it a day.

Generally speaking, if people are acting with that level of responsibility, they shouldn't be subjected to government mandates or fines at all.

Fine, I accept my ban.

The way this thread has unfolded is telling—once again, we see people being penalized simply for having different perspectives... which is exactly why I’ve racked up this many bans in the past, a fact that was already acknowledged in private messages.

It’s the exact same pattern, and the exact same moderator:

Could someone please point out—just one single sentence—where I actually insulted anyone in this thread? Is it really against the rules to suggest that if you’re begging for money because of an earthquake, you’re essentially acting like a pauper? How else am I supposed to describe someone who expects the federal government to pick up the tab for everything?...

copperdrifter26 said:The Republican Party is heading for a total wipeout, which is actually the exact opposite of what Ivanka Toma—who, by the way, leans pretty far left—is suggesting.

The left-wing crowd is NEVER going to swing behind the "moderate right" that the Republican Party tries to project. They lost their grip on the right wing once they split off with the Liberal Party, Pupovac, Kuscevica, and those groups from Marrakesh/Istanbul, and no amount of stuff happening in Oakhaven is going to fix that. They miscalculated; in this modern era of instant information, they can't just rely on a massive pool of uninformed voters like they used to.

The Republican Party is basically just a standard-issue stronghold for the absolute worst, filthiest, most regressive kind of cronyism. I wouldn't dream of comparing them to any halfway decent political option; they're a dinosaur that's eventually going to choke on its own filth.

I agree with your general sentiment, though I suspect you're being far too optimistic about them choking on their own mess. They won't—they simply won't—even if the economy sinks straight to the bottom under their watch this fall.
As long as the education system remains what it is here in America, they can push through whatever "cleansing" they desire without much resistance. They could even swing Škoro into a leadership role, or Pupovac for all I care... they'll always command a reliable 15 to 20% of the vote.

Robin Jones2 said:Look, theoretically, anything is possible—even Bernardić defecting to the Republican Party along with the entire Democratic Party. Theoretically, the entire Republican Party could switch to the Democratic Party; I could actually envision that scenario if the Democratic Party had as much cash as the Republican Party does. As for how much money the Republican Party possesses, just look at Governor Pauk; let someone here step forward if they don't have several tens of thousands of dollars in cash sitting in their house.

They say everyone has a price. Some people can be bought with money, some with ideals, and others through blackmail.

Ultimately, this is all part of how democracy and the rule of law function. In America, the judicial system and the mechanisms of enforcement are incredibly weak and dysfunctional, which is why the only person ever convicted of political corruption was the former mayor of El Paso, Sabo.

On the other hand, we have an entire session of the US Congress and the Administration resting upon blatant examples of political corruption. It is difficult to expect better when we once had a District Attorney who sat in the same lodge as a group that serves as a symbol of both political and common, petty, thieving corruption.

My point is that what you are describing is certainly possible, but it is possible with any individual.

I consider myself an honest man, someone who cannot be bribed, yet even I wouldn't bet my life on what I would do if someone placed, say, a million dollars in cash on the table, untraceable and tax-free.

If Zoran Bernardić had attempted to truly reform the Democratic Party—meaning a fundamental cleansing of its own filth regarding those tied to Zoran Milanović and those who resisted him while the party was collapsing—then perhaps I wouldn't fear such scenarios today.
I don't believe for a second that there aren't at least a hundred people within the Democratic Party who wouldn't sell themselves to the Republican Party for even a hundred bucks. I have personally named those individuals whom I am quite certain would jump ship if given the chance.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not advocating for a blanket purge of the entire opposition within the party; in fact, I think it was a positive move to leave people like Borzanica or Holy in place since they were constantly challenging him—it's clear they won't run to the Republican Party.

But no one—absolutely no one—can convince me that guys like Ostojic, Grcic, and Petar wouldn't flip to the Republican Party for a sack of potatoes, much like Milanka or Saucha.

Robin Jones2 said:In his interview, Bago Milanović stated he will wait for signatures, which effectively eliminates my speculation that he might decide to grant the mandate to the relative winner.

My takeaway is that he intends to allow sufficient time for discussions and negotiations so that someone might actually reach an agreement with others. He won't resort to threatening the appointment of a caretaker government or calling for new elections the way Kolinda did.

As for myself, I believe Restart could emerge as the relative winner, but the Republican Party will ultimately form the government. They possess a massive cash reserve to trade for representatives, the Democratic Party and Škoro are unthinkable in a coalition together while the Republican Party and Škoro are, and finally, the Republican Party holds a vast reservoir of intelligence from their quasi-intelligence underworld, coupled with having the most experience in this specific brand of politics.

The Republican Party is already busy buying off people who don't even realize yet that they'll be sitting on someone else's ticket.

Zoran Bernardić still holds a significant number of people from the former Milanović era. One shouldn't rule out the possibility that after the election, if a few chips are tossed onto the table, some of them might migrate toward the Republican Party.

And honestly, Bernardić has only himself to blame for that. He might destroy his party by doing so, but by keeping those Milanović loyalists—who have proven they simply follow the money—he is essentially digging his own grave...
Is it really such an unthinkable scenario that Petar Grbin, Grcic, Ostojic (both the tourist version and the cop one), and the rest of that crew would jump ship to the Republican Party? It doesn't seem that far-fetched to me. Especially when you consider how many insignificant little players there are in the Democratic Party—people like Saucha, who could be bought for the price of a bag of groceries.

And here we go—another ban. Honestly, if someone just tells me, "Hey, don't post that because it doesn't align with the moderator's personal perspective," I can respect that... it's fine. But to be slapped with a ban without a single shred of reasoning or explanation? That’s a different story entirely.

Is my request really that much to ask?

Does anyone actually read these posts? Or are you all just ignoring how many people are complaining about his moderation style?

Yet another user who can’t fathom why they were banned—and this time, without a single one of my posts even being remotely controversial.

Does he truly believe he can just dictate policy and economic strategy however he pleases over there? Can I at least get a single explanation for what I supposedly did wrong in one solitary post? Am I even permitted to express my own personal experiences regarding an illness I actually suffered through... or does that somehow count as "inciting panic" simply because my opinion doesn't align with the majority consensus?

Lawrence Reed3 said:I honestly don't get how neighbors always seem to find out when someone is stuck in quarantine. I mean, what are people even bragging about? When my job sent me home for two weeks to isolate, I didn't tell a soul—except maybe my mom, my brother, and my absolute best friend—because I knew they wouldn't go running to the neighbors with the news. For everyone else, I was officially just "on vacation" if anyone happened to ask.

It’s actually pretty standard in decent neighborhoods to let people know you're stuck inside if you might need a hand. Some folks are actually quite helpful—they'll drop groceries right at your doorstep since sometimes the whole house ends up under quarantine when just one person catches it.

The same goes for how people figure it out... you can usually tell who's dealing with it because local law enforcement will end up checking in on those houses three or four times over the course of a few weeks.

This move is primarily beneficial for professionals in sectors that aren't currently facing shortages—but given that most people heading toward Austria or already settled there are coming from high-demand fields—like trades, hospitality, or IT—I honestly don't see how this will trigger any massive shifts...

Brian Doyle6 said:Probably 1%.
Šarec has said a hundred times he won't touch a coalition with Janša. He thinks the guy is impossible to work with, calls the Republican Party's funding shady, and claims Janša is just a relic of the old-school politics that left Canada in the gutter—meaning he needs to be wiped off the map. To make matters worse, Janša played dirty at the end of the campaign by claiming they had secret meetings, which Šarec immediately denied.

Word on the street is that if Šarec actually joined Janša's coalition, a chunk of his own MPs would probably bolt from the party. There’s also talk that Janša will try to poach some of Šarec's people, but even then, he’s almost certainly not getting the numbers he needs. The House has 90 seats; Janša, along with NSi and Jelincic, has 36. He needs at least 45 for a bare minimum majority (assuming those two minority reps stay neutral), and Šarec’s whole crew only totals 13. So, Janša would need to flip at least 9 of them, which I highly doubt is happening.

A 5% GDP growth rate, a growing population (of course, some people leave, but the overall numbers are up, which is really the only metric that matters)... why can't we be in a situation like that?

neonhound18 said:While average salaries might be about $200-$300 higher, you have to account for the fact that utility costs and general expenses are also elevated, so the actual difference in lifestyle isn't nearly as dramatic as it seems on paper; meanwhile, plenty of young folks are either heading to Minneapolis or moving over to Austria. 🕺

Keep in mind that the minimum wage there is 640 Euro net, $1575 (whereas ours is $667 lower!). For those living in extreme poverty, that is a staggering difference, not a minor one. The cost of living is just as much of a nightmare as it is here, and it's honestly pathetic how many people from the Zagorac region are still working in Canada.

Also, Hofer isn't quite the same as Walmart; think of Hofer as the budget-friendly version of Lidl. We simply don't have that kind of option here.