No, PA. We don't get the Cuomo chips, we have the Pennsylvania Liquor Control Board who expect bar'restaurant owners to enforce the rule that no alcohol can be served without a meal, even when they themselves can't state what counts as "a meal". Last time my wife and I were at our favorite brewpub we ordered the burger and fries, and just left a few fries on the plate. The fuhrer's latest rule is that when you have finished your meal you can't order any more alcohol (because, you know, you become contagious once you eat the last few fries) but for as long as there are a couple of fries on the plate you haven't technically finished your meal. As the staff said, they've tried to keep up with and follow all the rules but this one is just stupid.
Lol. Yeah I think NY is the worst. When Cuomo isn't busy making up new rules, he's bashing the police for the rising crimes rates that were totally predictable when they made taking police action a criminal act.
From what I can see de Blasio is even more fun. I read an article the other day written by someone who was born and raised in NYC who is of the opinion that the city is dead and probably won't ever recover.
Yeah Diblasio is an idiot. The problems are not unfixable in my opinion, but it requires a change in voting patterns that is probably not forthcoming. The next mayor will probably be even more to the left than Diblasio is.
Even with a change in voting patterns I can see the concerns about damage that has already been done. If people aren't going to work as companies figure they don't need staff in a hugely expensive central office, and restaurants are closing at a horrendous rate because of a combination of the fuhrer's orders and people not being in offices, that means the staff who once worked at the restaurants are going to leave town because they can't afford to live there and are unlikely to work there any time soon. Then there's the problem of precedent - it would be a very brave person who opened a new restaurant knowing the rents are very high and they could be shut down with no more than a few hours' notice, while still being expected to pay rents not to mention being expected to absorb the cost of perishable food that ends up either given away or thrown away despite being bought in at full price. Frankly it would be a brave person who opened any business that was reliant on operating out of a fixed premises, knowing they could be shut down with a few hours' notice while their staff were paid more by the Feds to not work than their regular wage would pay them to work. Maybe the virus knows what the minimum wage is and will stop being dangerous if it gets raised to $15/hour. Or maybe if you're really lucky you'l get AOC as the next mayor, and she can be the one who left bartending behind to join Congress and for her encore puts bartenders out of work across the city.
Well the problem is that the mayor has this delusion that things he does have no effect on what happens in the city. Look, he was given he city that functioned perfectly. I mean like a Swiss watch. Crime was low, city revenues were high, there was tourism, there were new companies moving in all the time... and he wrecked it. The major, major mistake he made was to assume that because crimes rates were low, they would remain so forever. So he took away the police department's tools for fighting crime, one by one, until he literally criminalized taking police action. If while effecting an arrest against a noncompliant individual, a police officer applies any pressure to the perp's torso, that is now a criminal offense. To avoid getting arrested for doing their job, police will not engage suspects who may resist arrest. Combine this with Diblasio emptying city jails "because inmates might get Covid", and you have a major situation on your hands. As of today, NYC has almost double the shootings it had all of last year- and the year still has four months to go. Now, I worked on crime control strategies, and the problem is fixable. But it requires the political will to make it happen, which neither Diblasio nor his likely Democrat successor have.
In fairness you have to release all the murderers and rapists from jail in order to make room for the dangerous people who don't wear bits of cloth over their faces.
Or store owners who open up because their business is going under. Why must socialists always punish the productive people?
I suspect they don't go after the workshy for the same reason sharks don't bite lawyers.... professional courtesy.
Just kinda felt the urge to resurrect this thread, given the mask mandates are now giving way to vaccine mandates. The vaccine that doesn't even have full FDA approval as yet, but without proof of having taken the experimental drugs you're apparently pretty much excluded from society in NYC, with presumably more places to follow. I wonder if people who are allergic to ingredients in the vaccines will be exempted or if they will simply be increasingly excluded from society.
I find it increasingly alarming that a vaccine that hasn't even received full FDA approval is becoming a precondition of something as simple as going out to dinner. It raises all sorts of spectres relating to variations of "papieren, bitte" and the rather absurd situation where you need papers to have dinner out but don't need papers to vote. I can't help thinking that if this thing really were in my best interests there wouldn't be the endless pressure. But when the government bribes, cajoles, pressures and endorses what's little more than blackmail and then talks about making it mandatory, I can't help thinking it probably isn't in my best interest. Of course if there were clear liability in the event (however unlikely) of severe side-effects that would help. At present it seems society wants the benefits even though they are limited as far as the new delta variant is concerned, but if anything goes wrong society wants to wash its hands and leave the affected individuals to deal with the consequences alone.
Right. And the legality issues are getting wanky while the courts appear ambivalent. Can the Feds finally demand a vaccine in this particular pandemic?
If people are legally mandated to take something regardless of their views on the matter it clouds all sorts of other issues. It would be interesting to see the lawsuits if the feds were simultaneously mandating a vaccine with unknown long-term side effects and prohibiting marijuana that has been used for centuries. It would be interesting to see how liability issues were resolved, and how many people suddenly became members of obscure religions with creative interpretations of holy texts that say our bodies are temples. I'm sure more than a few people would develop allergies to specific ingredients. On top of that, since the vaccine doesn't appear to prevent transmission of the delta variant it seems there's a pretty solid case to be made that the societal benefits of vaccination are far from clear in any event and, if the vaccine is a matter of personal protection, it should therefore be a matter of personal choice.