taliban taking over afghanistan.. is not the disaster as a consequence to a spontaneous withdrawal
taliban taking over afghanistan.. is america's signed and declared and allowed plan as part of the withdrawal

US president trump and pentagon signed a deal with the taliban over a year ago to allow the taliban takeover


the disaster after withdrawal would be if al-queda took over.
the taliban run afghanistan way way before america invaded afghanistan. so its pretty much putting things back as they found it in 2001

yes leaving equipment, weapons and vehicles behind looks like a silly thing to do. but i bet if you look deep enough that there was probably a deal like: 'let american troops leave peacefully and here is your compensation, weapons and vehicles we'll leave behind'

after all once they fire a couple rockets at hills, learning how to use the equipment. the afghans will need to purchase more rockets from.. yep you guessed it.. the US.
which is another plan. rather than letting russia or china supply afghanistan, knowing afghanistan would let al-queda take over if russia/china were fueling afghanistan with weapons and other deals

its all part of a bigger more extended plot. to US pentegon. this months events is inevitable 'drama' that needs to happen to get the next phase in line. 'diplomatic trade'

america running afghanistan wasnt doing much trade with afghanistan because its literally paying itself.
but now america is out. america can make money from afghanistan.

..
just as fast as they got troops out. they are already last week organising sending NGO's back in. calling it 'support, aid and diplomatic missions"

grab active emails. put them into a database.. sell the database to scammers..

wait 6 months and soon you will have
A. a nigerian friend tell you that he has been hospitalised and needs bitcoin to pay medical bills.
B. someone prompting you about a bitcoin business/ico/project they want you to invest in
C. use your name/fame as a chairmen of their HYIP/ICO scam

nothing new here.

miners income is more relational to the bitcoin price
if it cost people $2 you mine gold in their backyard they would happily sell it for $6 and 3x their investment. and gold around the world would average $6 on markets
because it costs over $1000 to mine gold they are selling it for $1600+

same with bitcoin. the PRICE is more of a factor than the sat amount they can grab
even as the reward halves or if the fee's halve the miners would just hoard until the PRICE satisfies the cost.

transaction count has absolutely no relationship to security.
a 500byte block. a 5kb block, a 0.5mb block. a 1.5mb block or even a 4mb block. changes nothing for asics.
they just receive a 256bit hash. and thats what they compute.

the desire to increase transaction count is not about security. its about utility.
actually making bitcoin useful

bitcoin in 2014-15 was doing great, thousands of businesses were accepting bitcoin. but now its at a point where hardly any business wants to adopt bitcoin and instead are adopting other altnets

there has never been any campaign or group defined as "bigblocker", yes there has been social drama promoted by conservatives..
but most people actually want more transactions.. its only those wanting their altnets to be popularised that dont want bitcoin to prosper

the group that defined the term 'big blocker' are the social drama queens that dont want more transactions
these conservative types started the scripts and memes of "gigabytes by midnight" just to deflect away from the actual community desire of more transactions

segwit did not actually offer more transactions..
even satoshi in 2010 mentioned that bitcoin as it was then, able to offer upto 4200 tx per block. but due to transaction bloat(weighted scripts and new tx formats being added) it never achieved that.

if bitcoin stayed as a 1 input 2 output lean payment system. we would have more transaction averages. without any blocksize changes
yet by adopting lengthy script stuff to pander to custodians businesses. its hurt individual users ability to transact by bringing the transaction average to under 3000

this years average transaction size is not ~250bytes.. but instead its about 576bytes. thus halving the transaction potential of satoshis estimates 11 years ago

so while devs have pandered to offer "bigger blocksize". they still have put some cludgy code in to stifle the amount of transaction throughput that new weight allowance can actually utilise.
'bigger blocks, but only to fit the lengthy weight of cludgy scripts.. not for more transaction multiplying'

no one has ever advocated for more blocksize just to fill it with useless data at same transaction count average.. and yet.. thats whats resulted from segwit

the 'upto 4mb weight".. but then cludge to avoid upto 4x transaction count. making segwit NOT a scaling solution..
. also everyone knows the real purpose of segwit is a gateway transaction format compatible for the use of offramping users to other networks.

..
anyway.. another excuse conservatives want to ignore progressing bitcoin. is that some think more transactions will result in more spam of mixers bloating up the blockspace.
yet there is actually a solution.. yep code. thats the great thing about computers. you can make rules

the simple solution is to make it super super expensive for idiots to just spam the network re-spending 1confirm utxos, block after block.
adding a fee formulae thats NOT just foolish capitalism of "freemarket" (which is aimed at causing everyone to pay premiums). but base it on multiplying sat/byte by the lack of confirms

EG set it at 100 confirms.
and so if you have 1 confirm. you pay (1/100) = 100x
and so if you have 50 confirms. you pay (50/100) = 2x
and so if you have 100 confirms. you pay (100/100) = 1x

that way if your trying to spam a block every block you pay 50x more then someone that makes a tx every 8 hours 20mins. pays 100x more then someone that does a transaction every 16 hours 40mins.

they pretend that making fee rules is impossible.. yet real hard blockchain data shows that a legacy transaction is more expensive than a segwit transaction. thus proving they can make rules to treat certain transactions different than others

there are many ways you can make fee mechanisms to avoid spam, my example is just a small thought on all the possible measures to create a spam prevention fee structure
there are also ways you can make bitcoin more friendly to users to use regularly without the false narrative crap speach of "gigabytes by midnight" /bigblockers. by which more people will use it regularly to then want to invest and protect bitcoin.

..
oh and one last funny part of the conservative game plan.
they cry soo soo much that they dont want bitcoin used for coffee amounts (0.00005000)($2.50)
yet they want to break the most secred law of bitcoin.. the supply amount
they want to produce 1000x more units, purely to make bitcoin more compatible with an altnet because the altnet is broke unless they can break bitcoin to fit.

these altnetters are absolutely lunatics in all their motives to break, stifle and make bitcoin utility drop purely to offramp people onto their network.. and that stuff needs to stop.
bitcoin needs to progress.

anyway..
back to the topic.
if people are concerned about miner income of the transaction fee's.
offramping utility will kill miner income from transaction fee's
less people transacting=less fee's to consume
if they try to make fees more expensive per tx.. even less people will use btc. heck people will stop close sessioning their own altnet tx back to bitcoin and instead swap to altcoins as their altnet exit just to avoid bitcoin fee's. thus popularising altcoins and making bitcoin look like a crap coin no one wants to use

by off ramping utility away from bitcoin  is going to break bitcoin
because
1. less people using bitcoin daily = less people monitoring bitcoin(fullnode) daily.
    yep i said it people that only use bitcoin once every few months are not going to run a full node everyday

2. less transactions on bitcoin = more fees per user (repeat point 1) which also means less pool income

3.the way you word it. you want less transactions onchain so that there is no reason to protect the security of bitcoin. your wording it as if you want no one to use bitcoin and then say that bitcoin cant be secured because no one is using it enough to secure it

4. you also word it like scaling up bitcoin requires gigabyte blocks by midnight tonight.

(why oh why are the same altnet adoration brigade still promoting the outdated scripts(facepalm))

sorry but 20 years ago floppy disks were a thing. people were using floppy disks easily and thought that a 1tb hard drive was unimaginable.
yep i had a PC in 1998 that had a max hard drive capacity of 4gb. and a floppy drive for portable storage
now i have a 4 terrabyte hard drive and a 512gb usb stick, and i can now think that 1.44mb floppy is unimaginable to be useful in todays life

thats just a difference of 23 years

it has been 12 years since satoshi implemented the first laws of bitcoin. and even then he was estimating 4200tx a block.. yet in those 12 years we have never even achieved a whole day averaging 4200tx

so stop pandering to the altnet promotion of offramping utility to then have even more excuses not to progress bitcoin. and actually discuss bitcoin progress..(ill repeat. discuss bitcoin progress without advertising altnets like LN)

there is no need to drop security.
no need to mess with difficulty
no need to pressure users to pay more per tx.

ASICS do not touch/handle/process/compute transactions.
the amount of transactions per block do not affect asics in anyway
more transactions does not require more asics.. nor less asics.

trying to say the mining cost is impacted by transaction amounts is FALSE

anyone can set up a pool and their desktop computer does the transaction computing..
they can then open their bandwidth to hundreds of thousands of asics to mine a hash for them
thats right asics only mine hashes. not transactions.
a pool manager does not have to run asics to make block templates
an asic does not need to make block templates to compute hashes

transactions and block fee's are not relational. they are just statistical after the fact.
so to all those trying to link a transaction as 'costing' $100 due to the block reward/transaction. you are creating a false narrative, as an after the fact statistic

..
now with that said. there are ways to get pools to continue on the same $$ income or increase their $$ income
without messing with security, difficulty, less hashrate. or other stupid idea's mentioned in this topic

a. bitcoin price doubles
    ai. if users pay half sat, pools get same $ income(users pay same $)
    aii. if users pay same sat, pools get double $ income(but users pay double $)
b. double transactions per block
    bi. if users pay half sat with twice amount of transactions, pools get same $ income(users pay less $)
    bii. if users pay same sat with twice amount of transactions, pools get double sat income(users pay same $)
c. make average transaction size less bloaty/more leaner
    ci. if users pay same sat/byte, with less bytes/tx(more tx per block), pools get same income $, users pay less $

we should not mess with network security. nor mess with reward supply. and also not mess with making bitcoin too expensive for people to transact.

promoting other networks is not the solution. as thats just breaking bitcoin, making bitcoin useless just to make a altnet fashionable.

the real solution is to allow more utility ON bitcoin. so that it dilutes the individual cost. ensuring bitcoin stays popular and desired.

its a political distraction campaign

if they can get people looking in the left empty hand but convince people there is a gun in that hand and people need to disarm the gun.. they are too oblivious to see the hammer in the right hand swinging to break some numbskulls

the wording of the bill in relation to crypto is about businesses offering services of custodianship. where they take responsibility of funds to then pass onto others.
no where in it does it describe software developers. nor nodes nor pools, nor miners

trying to get amendments of meaningless significance/no change. then allows for the real harms/changes to not be affected

its like saying pretend software developers take responsibility of someones value and give it to someone else. but dont discuss retailers or businesses that actually do take funds and move it about for someone else

heck most of the campaign sheep spammers in the other thread of same topic are LN router fans but they are not even talking about how they could be PERSONALLY affected as routers if LN went up in channel value of $10k plus payments. they just want to repeat the campaign word for word. like they are on autopilot, thinking they can win some dev idol merit points for defending a dev that doesnt need defending.. (very weird strategy)

so while the campaign begs people to say "exclude developers" (meaningless) its not saying exclude retailers or small businesses. or businesses outside the US.

the bill is about MSB businesses. but for some stranger reason. campaigners and sheep spammrs have social drama'ed it into being about something unrelated to custodian services and fund transferers.

and news outlets just publicise it not due to facts or good reporting or investigating. but because its a social trend that went viral

the video is uploaded by 'stocks and cryptos' so no surprise that its financially based

but if you take out the yearly financial numbers. it just reads as if

year zero he registered a website
year one someone done 1 transaction with the inventor
year two one person bought pizza with it. inventor disappeared. gavin took control
year three foundation begun to promote development
year five wiki accepted bitcoin
year eight segwit
year nine exchange hacks
year eleven kracked gained more customers
year twelve tesla/paypal accept bitcoin

..
seems boring and missed alot of action/detail .
its missing the mining aspects..
like year 4 the transition to asics
like the year nine and eleven and twelve prices due to the mining changes(hashrate drops)
there is also no big detail about the THOUSANDS of businesses adopting it. and just reads as if 4-5 businesses use bitcoin

it also reads as a biography of a business where there are ownership changes rather than an open network

well atleast i can now see some people breaking out of the box of the 'developer assist' campaign and now actually discussing real issues such as foreign jurisdiction

the current wording(laymans interpretation) does not limit:
US gov seeking foreign exchanges/MSB's to report to the IRS on US customers
US exchanges/MSB's from reporting to foreign governments on their foreign customers
'coz not excluded'

however the reality is knowing how MSB's are registered. this law will as worded now definitely affect
us customers using foreign exchanges. but not really affect US exchanges with foreign customers

look back to the bitlience. which was meant to only be the NY jurisdiction. and yet it affected businesses outside of NY. simply because they are servicing NY residents as their customer
authorities ran 'honeypot traps' by actually being a SEC agent living in NY and using services outside of new york and if the service allowed their custom. that business got in trouble

but a NY business did not need to do much for its foreign customers. which is why many NY businesses IP banned NY customer IP's and only served customers outside of NY. because the other countries did not adopt a similar policy

to actually make it so american businesses have to report on foreign customers. the foreign government needs its own laws to seek/retrieve/require that data. and have a policy and platform that allows american businesses to file reports to foreign governments. requiring the business to register with each country it wants to serve.

so american government cant force US businesses to report on foreign customers. because foreign governments are not forcing/set up to receive reports.

(though some governments are adopting their own policies such as the UK declining binance from operating in the UK)

100% agree. and has always been my thought. early religion was government. the bible is the lawbook of ancient times.
as an example back before condoms. the laws stopped gay-sex, out of wedlock sex to prevend STI's/STD's

these days those old rules dont apply as technology and knowledge and stuff have taken over those barbaric laws of promoting death for having sex under those conditions.

modern religion is more psychological. for those that cannot understand nature and random events. people that become anxious/depressed over things they cannot understand. religion fills that gap by putting a face to the event. kind of like shift the blame to the special entity you cant sue.
EG if you feel guilty of something, its suppose to absolve your guilt by making your subconscious believe you should blame god instead of yourself. then you can let go of your grief/guilt and lead a happy in life, free from torturing yourself

this has then become abused to then really shift the blame.. as an excuse.  and be used by idiots to actually perform atrocities and crimes thinking they can get away with it because 'special entity in space'

i dont mind the small psychological therapy methodology to get over guilt/grief for personal growth and happiness. but when its used to the extremes of being used to cause bad crap to happen, as the excuse.. then religion has steeped too far into society

firstly it does not and will not affect developers or pools or node users. (just doing those tasks*)
its a bill that affects custodian services/money services businesses(MSB)

it will on the small businesses that do coinjoins,escrows, custodian services, etc make then have to do more bureaucracy. but on the flip side if they run a legit business and can invest the time and money they can prospoer into being a business that has consumer protections like insurance to protect users value.

big businesses that are already legit dont need to change much as they already KYC customers.

with more businesses able to operate a legit operation which has consumer protections, it can cause more people to want to invest in crypto via these legit services.

the downsides as just breifly hinted is that small businesses that dont bother/didnt comply with certain regulations will need to start doing so
so expect things like other network 'bridge' services that offer fund transfers to need to up their game to stay legit.

dont worry about software developers or pools needing to KYC.
*however if those individuals also have a side hustle such as them being the 'federated' co-signer of locked up funds(custodian) then they will need to make themselves an official MSB for their custodian activities of holding users funds for the purpose of transfers
this also includes things like LN routing, (if LN ever got to a stage of transfering larger amounts more then pizza money)

this means small hobby routers that are trying to make sub-pennies per transaction for pizza money may not have to worry.. but they wont really survive in legit transactions of large amount as routes/transfers would require some KYC stuff happening on larger amounts, which involves centralising and turning routers into official businesses.

you may see some 'honeypot' traps occuring where officials do large trades to catch unregistered routers allowing large transactions. as what happened in a few cases when the bitlicence became law.

but if those wanting to be ethical service providers of large amount custodian/transfers. and are able to register as a MSB. their business, then official can prosper immensely by offering stuff the blackmarket people cant offer.

those wanting PoS are the small idiots thinking changing the algo will give them chandce to get rewards and get rich quick.
what they dont realise is that a good amount, about 20% of coins are hoarded in exchanges and so these exchanges will have the most signing/staking power. meaning the little guys with under 0.01btc wont get to be rich and wont be solving blocks

meaning a new algo wont make a difference in the rich vs poor relationship

..
ontop of that there are more flaws in block signing using PoS. and on crapcoins they are too small to bother exploiting. but on a network as valued as bitcoin it would get exploited alot.

..
ontop of that PoW has a stronger security. needing ~100,000 special machines to create the block sequence that locks its content.
something PoS cant offer

.. ontop of that
the cost of mining offeres an underlying value of the block reward. where it costs
$170k a block for 6.25 btc for chinese miners
$220k a block for 6.25 btc for american miners
$340k a block for 6.25 btc for germany/japan

this gives underlying value of $27k - $54k which makes people feel the price is worthy
PoS does not actually have underlying costs to help produce an underlying value
PoS 'values' are purely speculative based on emotion and feeling and hope and prayers.

PoW has some actual cost and value of economic logic backing it up. and then some amount of speculative hype above that

changing bitcoin to PoS will be like having gold initially needing expensive mining costs. to then become easily minable in backyards for penny costs. sending gold prices down to crappy low prices

..
if PoS became a thing. little penny guys will need to syndicate(pool) their funds into large staked addresses and have the address owner then split the reward down..  
pretty much the same pool scenario as PoW but without the large security of PoW

so the real question is.. WHY SHOULD it change to PoS.. the answer.. no reason.. no benefits

liberty is the ability under privilege of allowance by law/lack of law.. rule of property owner

freedom is just the natural function of your own ability

i have the freedom to move my arms and legs without anyones permission, because muscles and brain function
i have the liberty to move my arms and legs because the law doesnt say i cant

laws can restrict someones liberties of 'travel' but your body still has the freedom to move your legs to walk.

EG laws about 'right to travel' nothing stops you from walking so laws about requiring a drivers permit and a registered and mechanically safe vehicle does not impede your freedom to travel(walk) but you dont have the liberty to drive on a road without a permit/mechanically unsafe vehicle unimpeded

a right/freedom to travel is only about your human body. it does not extend to property of others being violated by tresspass.
they may give certain liberties/allowances. but they can also limit those allowances. which is why government roads have government rules.
if you dont like governments rules for their roads in regards to driving rules.. you can always walk
you are still free to travel.. still free to walk

when using a business or service. you are entering their property. and without their authorisation you are tresspassing.
retailers dont care much about ID but they do request face masks/ not getting into other peoples personal space. which is more about asking to respect other people.

airplanes are more strict because your sat in a metal cylinder breathing in the same air for many hours. so they can request even more info to evaluate the risk to other people using their property.

after all if someone got sick directly due to using a businesses property people would sue the airline owner.

this is not about government this is actually about mitigating not only health risk but financial risk

so yea dont expect to get randomly stopped on the street and be demanded to provide ID.
but if your on someone elses property and they want something from you to give you authorisation to be on their property. comply or leave the property.

its like traffic stops. the roads are government property. so they have the right to request that people driving on the road have a drivers permit and to not drive too fast or recklessly. thats their right. so if you drive to fast. expect to be stopped and asked for ID and receive a punishment if they deem it necessary

its not actually communism.. its capitalism

a bit like conspiracy idiots trying to get everyone to swallow anti-parasitic medication saying its good for viruses(facepalm)

some numbers

if there are 250million adult population. (200mill vaccinated)
and unvaccinated there are a 20% chance of getting a more then mild infection
and vaccinated there are a 0.25% chance of getting a more then mild infection

simple math. if everyone was infected all at the same time

50mill unvaxxed = 10mill symptoms worse than mild
200mill vaxxed= 500,000 symptoms worse then mild

but here is the thing. what you find is the unvaxxed people are still hiding in basements and avoiding infection, they openly admit they dont know the situations of retail store admission and transport freedom

so there is only like 5mill unvaxxed actually getting infected by venturing out in public
(yep 90% of antivax do not know what its like to go out in public hense their conspiracies)

which makes the unvaxxed results more like 1mill symptoms worse then mild

which results in the 1:2 (one in 3) result

in more of a reality. its not a 100% everyone infected at the same time. its more like 1.5% infected at the same time
so the unvaxxed 1mill:500k vaxxed. is more like:
unvaxxed 15k:7.5k vaxxed per 1.5% population infected


..
as for the death and ill health
there are more results of sickness, symptoms and cell damage and death caused by the virus, than caused by the vaccine

13,600 deaths out of 208,000,0000 vaccine (0.0065%)
637,000 deaths out of 38million virus infections (1.67%)

yep virus=1.67% death rate
vaccine=0.0065% death rate

making the vaccine 250+x safer

if you had 2 walls and lined up 1,000,000 people on each wall
and each wall had a firing squad with guns..
one wall of soldiers had 16700 bullets to fire
one wall of soldiers had only 65 bullets to fire

which group of 1million people would you prefer to be stood beside
im pretty sure you would want to be at the wall of only 67 bullets and take the chance the bullet misses you

pre-vaccine(december 2020)
there were many variants
alpha beta gamma delta(all found pre december 2020)
yet due to vaccines. delta had been halted from further mutation for 9 months.
and lamda has only just become a thing.

so it shows that vaccines has helped delay spread/mutations.
think about it.
if there were 4(ABGD) mutations of notoriety in the 11 months from january to november 2020
and only 1(L) mutation of notoriety in the 9 months from december to august

then thats nearly a 4 to 5x benefit of vaccines of stalling the mutation rate

oh look at the social drama
ognasty ignores the points about the topic just to cry about the personal attack. EG defending a point that the person that got scammed is not his friend.. a meaningless detail unrelated to topic but ognasty spend the effort to emphasise it.
funnily enough. the other guy that got scammed must not have been a complete stranger, otherwise there would have been no conversation between the two people.. because strangers dont talk. hense defined as strangers
so there was a common sense reason to assume friendship because he was interacting with another human.
by the way. saying friend/buddy does not mean you have sleep overs together and do each  others hair. it just means that you have some knowledge of the other person to atleast have a FRIENDLY conversation with.



anyways. the assumption that i am obese by someone else in the topic is another bit of drama causing loyalism. certain people jump on other peoples defense and sling out insults because their buddy is getting into debates. .. boring.

i dont sling insults and start debates to get merit. i dont care about people kissing my ass. i never have.
if you lot have that mindset to think thats my motive. its more likely in your mindset because its YOUR motive.
seems more people get on the defense about a topic not due to the facts of the topic, but due to loyalism of social groups. you would rather repeat being wrong just because its the group rhetoric you have to be loyal to. rather than break away from the group rhetoric to actually be right.

there is a big conspiracy group of idiots that want to remain idiots just to have some notoriety and prominence in their little loyalty social groups.(EG flat earthers, 9-11ers)  and by obviously showing signs of having that certain rhetoric, automatically deems you as an idiot be default.

so dont think im calling you an idiot for merit. think that im calling you an idiot because of the rhetoric you say being the same boring uninformed scripts i hear from conspiracy lunatics. yep if you sound like an antivaxxer, you instantly earn the title of idiot by default.

if you want to break free from being called a idiot. stop pandering to the social groups of stupid conspiracy lunatics

....
now to the topic
covid is a new thing. something the immune system does not recognise. so the first infection is going to be the worse. as your body is not yet on the instant defense.
its why there is no runny nose symptom. no sneezing. because runny nose and sneezing is a trigger immune response when it can recognise the pathogen at the entry way and try to expel it at the entry way before it gets to the lungs.
again covid has not become common and isnt recognised by immune systems to actually activate this immune trigger.
and thats why covid is not a common flu/cold. because its not common.

the reason why the symptoms are:
loss of taste/smell - because your immune response at the entryways are not triggered. so the virus gets to attack the nose and mouth damaging the smell and taste receptors
persistant cough. this is not caused by throat flem. its caused by cell damage in the throat/lung that is causing irritation and pain.

fever. this is the later symptom that is finally a sign your body is reacting and trying to fight off the virus.. but this immune response is like the last resort.


so instead of forcing yourself to get covid for that initial infection which can be deadly, painful, irritating. many smart people would prefer to have a introduction to get the body to recognise the pathogen spike. without having the risks that accompany the health risks of the virus itself

then later if they do get the infection. they can avoid the bad symptoms listed above. and then have the 'boost' from the virus infection as a second introduction.
so technically yes the best approach is to get the vaccine and then get covid within like 6 months of a vaccine. to then have the least harm method of immunisation

vaccines do not multiply. so you avoid the risk of replication and cell damage caused by this
vaccines do not pass person to person. so you dont pass it to someone else that might be more vulnerable
vaccines dont cause suffocation. so having an injection in the arm is better than an infection in the lung
vaccines do not modify DNA/RNA. they are not gene editing.
they use mRNA to create proteins using the bodies normal mechanics without changing the mechanics
it goes to the ribosome(protein factory) not the nucleus(dna warehouse)
mrna lacks the sarna and trna required to do things conspiracy idiots think a vaccine does


if you can actually take the time to step away from the conspiracy loyalist social groups rhetoric and actually try to do some independent research. you not only learn what is real. but you also get a chance to step away from being cast as an idiot because you are willing to dis-associate yourself from idiots.

so do yourself a favour and stop repeating stuff you heard from your friends/associates/people you talk to who are idiots, and actually spend some time learning some real stuff.
not only for personal learning. but to save yourself from being cast as an idiot

if you take 10 people suffocating with covid and needing hospital treatment.

if you put 5 on a ventilator and 5 not on a ventilator.
the 5 not on a ventilator will die.. because they are suffocating.

the other 5 on a ventilator get more oxygen and have a better outcome.

what badecker does not realise is that ventilators have a dial. where the oxygen pressure can be adjusted.
he is just reading some article that thinks ventilators just have a on/off switch of 0 or max.

he has no clue that ventilators are only dialed up to full of the sick persons lungs are damaged by covid so much that they need the extra pressure to try and get as much oxygen into the lungs and passed the damage.

badecker has no clue about how things work in the real world. he doesnt realise
he doesnt realise facts or common sense

one thing he should learn is that the real controversy is not in hospitals. but in care homes where people are put on 'do not resuscitate' orders or 'no intervention' orders due to other(comobidity) conditions which some medical reviewer deems the person to be unlikely to survive anyway and so refuses to give treatment when they do get covid.. basically allowing them to die untreated.

yep thats right there a big amount of people dying due to covid because they simply dont even get offered a chance to be ventilated becasue some reviewer deems them unlikely to survive even with treatment.

my snide comments are about conspiracy nutters too afraid to snap out of delusions. and so i speak aggressively towards them by highlighting their insanity

as for the "government is attempting a level of control".. well yea. they want to reduce the infection rate to reduce the death rate.. much like gun controls. we shouldnt just let any random idiot have a gun and fire it randomly at people..
thats kinda the whole purpose of a government. to control the dis-order that causes negative impact on peoples lives
as for thinking that its too much control.
from what i can see in america. you can still go to bars, get food, clothes, whatever, eat at restaurants. drive around. walk around, cycle around. heck you can play golf and all other sports.
you can even get on a bus train, plane.

funny part is planes are not a public service funded by government. its actually a private business.

maybe some government want to just ban all inbound flights for the purpose of infection prevention at the border.
but its then the private business flight companies that are then saying they would like some kind of way to validate someones vaccination status.. not to prevent more passengers... but to allow more passenger flights

as for the US. well you can get on a plane in NYC and fly to california without a care in the world and without any proof of vaccine
in the US you can fly to dozens of countries even the UK without the need of proof of vaccine

so instead of crying about some vaccine passport which today you just realised is a scribbled business card and nothing more.
instead of crying over your fear the government has over extended its control of everything..

how about talk a walk out of your house. and enjoy the fact that there actually isnt military on your streets..
let that be the first surprise to break your fantasy
actually realise that you can drive around freely without random police stops.
actually realise there is no security guards at grocery stores ID checking people
if you think your a true american. then go to many stores. and buy your self a keg of beer, a cowboy hat and a gun and realise you can buy now what you could buy 2 years ago

then if you can get over your fear of homesickness. get on a plane and travel and realise that plane travel also excludes a military presence
yep no military no FBI no secret service. just standard airport staff, same as a couple years ago.


so instead of crying over the fantasy 'control' you read on some site. actually SEE the reality with your own eyes outside your house and then come back and tell me how things have been affected by your REAL LIFE. not how you fear affects due to something you read on a conspiracy site