RE: RANDOM comments -
Jane - 03-14-2020
(03-14-2020, 12:00 PM)Skyon Archer Wrote: Quote:side,,no footy for THREE weeks
What is that?
Sorry lol. Football. yayyyyy. :bow:
RE: RANDOM comments -
Sandy - 03-14-2020
(03-14-2020, 03:25 AM)Helena Wrote: Sandy Wrote:Trump can at present vetoe both senate and congress as well as make other drastic measures like the new travel bans from a lot of European countries..
It's all about checks and balances, Sandy.
Yes, the president can veto, but congress can override it with enough votes.
I'm glad he doesn't have to go through congress to take quick action to protect our people and our borders. It could take months to get everyone on the same page, if you even can. Not very efficient when there is a looming threat.
I agree it's good he can act promptly if something like the coronavirus comes along, he does seem to have been a little.. slow calling a national emergency IMO.. IF say senate and congress were combined into one group, what would stop say Pelosi from being an overseer of sorts and have the power to make sure there was checks and balances in the system? I realise Pelosi is only the Speaker, but if things were combined, couldn't things go through someone like her, or someone neutral before it goes to the current president for signing off?
RE: RANDOM comments -
Skyon Archer - 03-15-2020
Well, IF is really a big word. Basically, that's the part of having representatives and senators to vote on items. The Speaker of the House does not have final word on items. Much like the President doesn't either.
How's the coronavirus in Australia/New Zealand. I heard you all have a few cases but with it's really not that big of a deal.
RE: RANDOM comments -
Jane - 03-15-2020
Evening.
Piddled with rain all day...people going mad stock piling...pasta ,tinned stuff and toilet rolls!
People fighting in the isles..queueing outside supermarkets before they open,complaining...sigh
RE: RANDOM comments -
Sandy - 03-15-2020
(03-15-2020, 02:29 PM)Skyon Archer Wrote: Well, IF is really a big word. Basically, that's the part of having representatives and senators to vote on items. The Speaker of the House does not have final word on items. Much like the President doesn't either.
How's the coronavirus in Australia/New Zealand. I heard you all have a few cases but with it's really not that big of a deal.
Could they not have someone who oversees a new type of combined setup so things can't be done before going through that persons hands and getting the nod or thumbs down?
Covid 19, at present we have about 6 cases, all were only mild symptoms, as far as I'm aware they're in self isolation and have to report to hospital if things deteriorate.. Our PM has tried to enforce a self isolation on tourists coming into the country, not sure how it's to be policed though, IMO the government should've blocked flights from the affected countries.. I'm not sure about Australia, as far as I know there's not been any deaths yet, just a number of infections.. We seem to have got off fairly lightly so far, possibly because the governments had the info out there pretty quickly and had thoe folk who are infected checked bt doctors.. touch wood it won't get much worse..
RE: RANDOM comments -
Sandy - 03-18-2020
Is it my imagination or has Britain and the US been a little.. slow getting things done to protect the public against Covid 19? I know there's other countries like Italy that were slow off the mark, but going by our news it's only been in the last week or so Trumps got the ball rolling..
RE: RANDOM comments -
Skyon Archer - 03-18-2020
Any action is better than no action.
I'd hate to be the leader of any country, state, town that has to make decisions on shutting down life as we know it.
To shut down a country (state/town) and disrupt commerce and way-of-life is an intensive decision to make.
RE: RANDOM comments -
Jane - 03-19-2020
Morning.
Well...the prime minister has ordered the shut down of all schools from Friday,(tomorrow). Exams either postponed or cancelled. Plus more draconian measures to enforce self isolation including using the army, and giving the police more powers to arrest people who refuse to comply. A bit like marshal law I suppose. Scary times.
Weather is dull and damp...bit like the news lol. Stay safe everyone.
RE: RANDOM comments -
Skyon Archer - 03-19-2020
If we remove all the people, then the virus will only have animals to infect.
We leave some of the people, then they can remove all the animals. The remaining people can then remove themselves.
Of course, there will be a few that remain hidden and in isolated locations. We would then need to release some form of toxin into the atmosphere to spread around the world.
Yet, there will be those "leaders" that hide in bunkers and such so they won't be taken down by the airborne toxin.
I'm sure there will be a janitor in the underground bunker that has six kids who didn't listen to the quarantine order and hung out with their friends. Their friends had the virus and gave it to the janitor's kids. They, in turn, infected the janitor. Now the janitor is locked up in an airtight bunker with the leaders. The leaders now have become infected, and subsequently, most die from the virus.
So the remaining few will come to the surface when they feel the air is clear to breath again.
Yet the disease from all the corpses has filled the air and those survivors are overcome and soon die from disease and starvation. Starvation due to nothing to eat since all animals are dead and crops died due to no one tending to them.
So, in the end, the world is a dead place despite the greed of the few who thought they could cheat death.
As such, it's probably a simple solution that we quarantine ourselves for a month or two and wait out the end of coronavirus to happen.
Then we can move forward with our lives since we are all alive still. At that point in time, we need to find out exactly who released the virus onto us all and bomb those suckers off the face of the earth
RE: RANDOM comments -
Sandy - 03-20-2020
(03-18-2020, 10:35 PM)Skyon Archer Wrote: Any action is better than no action.
I'd hate to be the leader of any country, state, town that has to make decisions on shutting down life as we know it.
To shut down a country (state/town) and disrupt commerce and way-of-life is an intensive decision to make.
There's little point in taking action if2/3 of the countries dead and the rest are on their last legs.. Italy had 460 deaths in 24 hours the other day, while they've taken action now, for every person that gets infected, 3 more get it from that one person, it's almost a case of to little to late IMHO..