| Barozi said: About the video: Seems like a classic apples vs. oranges comparison. Whatever was set up for the movie crew has nothing to do with her bar or that her outdoor section is "dangerous". There are two things to keep in mind: 1. A lot more people would visit her bar compared to a fixed movie crew. She would also serve lots of different guests each day whereas the movie crew consists of pretty much always the same people. Much more potential to spread the virus. 2. Her place is purely for leisure. The more places like that are open, the more people will crowd the streets and use public transportation in order to get to those places, thus increasing the spread. Should she get financial aid from the city, state, federal gov? Depending on the length of the lock down, certainly. Can she get something? Idk I can't keep up with everything. |
Not really sure what you're trying to tell me. Kind of sick of responses that take pieces of my general point and go "AHA, YOU'RE WRONG HERE". and?
But even then:
1. I think at this point it's clear that any gathering can turn into a superspreading event, the movie crew will go home to their families and visit their friends and transmissible cycle won't be as small as you make it out to be.
2. Her place is for leisure and the movie crew is saving lives?
and I agree it's apple vs oranges comparison, but the point wasn't to validate her claims or invalidate them anyway. There is an argument to be made that not enough is being done worldwide to stop the virus, you need drastic measures and restrictions free stimuli to be able to fairy ask people to stay home. Otherwise, big businesses will go grow bigger and the majority will go poorer and the fuck all attitude will continue to be as mainstream as it is now.
Essay Pro