Vaccine

[dad4]

The Bay Area already has too many refineries. And the gas prices are always high.

Chevron Richmond

Chevron Richmond Refinery is a vital part of the local community.

richmond.chevron.com

San Francisco Refinery

San Francisco Refinery excels in renewable fuels and finished petroleum products. Learn about our Rodeo and Santa Maria facilities’ operations today!

www.phillips66.com

Actually, I’d say the Bay Area uses too much gas. We seem to have a decent supply of refineries for the amount of gas norcal uses.

But that high gas usage is being driven by the land use decisions made by local Democrats. You want to know why so many people burn gas while driving into SF? Go ask Mayor Feinstein, Mayor Brown, and Mayor Newsom. They’re the ones who passed the zoning laws which caused the long commutes.

But then we’d be admitting that kids in Richmond suffer asthma because chardonnay liberals are too important to live near apartment buildings.

 

[Desert Hound]

The price would be reflective of the costs to operate and how much you can get away with. If gas stations in AZ could get away with $5 per gallon, they would.

It is reflective of the costs. The costs of regulations/taxes imposed by the various gov entities in CA. They make it expensive. Not just on gas, but on everything.

The reason AZ stations cannot get away with $5 gas is the guy across the street will offer it for a better price. Competition is what prevents AZ stations charging higher than market prices.

 

[what-happened]

Experts have been willing to discuss the scenario of breakthrough infections. This board just doesn’t like what they have to say:

There are breakthrough infections. These are more likely and more dangerous among people whose immune response is weak, even after vaccination. If you want to protect such people, improve protections at nursing homes and reduce cases in the surrounding community.

But, as soon as you talk about reducing cases in the surrounding community, people here attack whoever said it.

I agree with you in principle. Protection in nursing homes and other measures have always been in place. The reality is that breakthrough infections weren't even a topic of discussion during the marketing phase of the vaccine until breakthrough infections started happening. Sure, many within the fold expected waning. Some were suprised as to the extent. My point is the talking heads don't talk about things until they become broadly more public.

I know some on this board don't like the idea of being vaccinated. They are the minority, a small minority. And they have valid reasons to be anti this vax. You may disagree, but it matters not.

 

[watfly]

Personality is important though. You can't just dismiss it. When you have a someone
- that starts his campaign with the murderers and rapists comment.
- is clearly misogynistic
- who enabled/encouraged/empowered white supremacists ("good people on both sides")
- who lied daily through his campaign and presidency
- who's whole political strategy is division.

Its not the presidency of some local jack&jill club. This is meant to be the leader of the nation.

WRT policy, I agreed with many things that were done. I did fine under his presidency and the economy was doing very well. He inherited something healthy and helped it get healthier. That's a good thing. Obama inherited a shit show, and Biden likewise.

I have voted both R & D, but there is zero chance I would have voted for trump. Clinton was a shit candidate, but I held my nose and voted for her. Biden is not a lot better, but again better than trump. Neither of those were policy based choices on my part.

I can ignore much in a politician, because they are politicians, but trump is a despicable excuse for a human being, imo, and I could never do anything to enable or encourage (by voting for) that as an example of our country.

I'm being a bit facetious, but I have trouble pinning a distinct "ist" label on Trump, he seems to me he was dick to anyone he didn't like regardless of race, religion, creed, gender, physical ability. Not condoning it, just saying.

 

[kickingandscreaming]

Experts have been willing to discuss the scenario of breakthrough infections. This board just doesn’t like what they have to say:

There are breakthrough infections. These are more likely and more dangerous among people whose immune response is weak, even after vaccination. If you want to protect such people, improve protections at nursing homes and reduce cases in the surrounding community.

But, as soon as you talk about reducing cases in the surrounding community, people here attack whoever said it.

So, what would you mandate differently to reduce cases in the surrounding community and what difference will it actually make? How will you determine when the mandates end? For perspective, over 10,000 people a year are killed by drunk drivers in the US, and driving drunk is against the law. Whatever you mandate, you will not get anywhere close to 100% participation.

 

[watfly]

Experts have been willing to discuss the scenario of breakthrough infections. This board just doesn’t like what they have to say:

There are breakthrough infections. These are more likely and more dangerous among people whose immune response is weak, even after vaccination. If you want to protect such people, improve protections at nursing homes and reduce cases in the surrounding community.

But, as soon as you talk about reducing cases in the surrounding community, people here attack whoever said it.

"Experts" have not been willing to discuss breakthrough infections relative to previously infected immunity and the discrimination against unvaccinated. but previously infected. That's what many on the board don't like. It's also the manner in which vaccination has been politicized. We're not anti vaccination, just pro-truth about vaccinations and previously infected immunity.

You're on record as saying previously infected immunity should be considered as an equivalent to vaccinated immunity (generally speaking, I know those aren't your exact words.) Most "experts" aren't willing to discuss any level of equivalency, and instead remain silent when it comes to get the shot or get fired.

 

[Desert Hound]

Racism is why VA turned red.

But they ignore the fact that those racists voted for a black Lt Gov and a hispanic AG.

Probably cause them racists got confused and thought those other 2 were white or something. I don't know...that would be my best guess as to their argument about racism being the driving force But then again the ones peddling this are not too bright.

 

[dad4]

So, what would you mandate differently to reduce cases in the surrounding community and what difference will it actually make? How will you determine when the mandates end? For perspective, over 10,000 people a year are killed by drunk drivers in the US, and driving drunk is against the law. Whatever you mandate, you will not get anywhere close to 100% participation.

I am not convinced that mandates are the answer.

I think we all need to improve our personal behavior. Get our shots, wear our masks, move our gatherings outside, and stop being such whiny little bitches about it.

 

[Grace T.]

I am not convinced that mandates are the answer.

I think we all need to improve our personal behavior. Get our shots, wear our masks, move our gatherings outside, and stop being such whiny little bitches about it.

More preaching. Again, not policy.

 

[dad4]

"Experts" have not been willing to discuss breakthrough infections relative to previously infected immunity and the discrimination against unvaccinated. but previously infected. That's what many on the board don't like. It's also the manner in which vaccination has been politicized. We're not anti vaccination, just pro-truth about vaccinations and previously infected immunity.

You're on record as saying previously infected immunity should be considered as an equivalent to vaccinated immunity (generally speaking, I know those aren't your exact words.) Most "experts" aren't willing to discuss any level of equivalency, and instead remain silent when it comes to get the shot or get fired.

If your goal is to protect elderly people from breakthrough infections, then you vaccinate recovered patients, too. Double protection is stronger than single.

If you officially exempt all recovered patients, you run the risk is that vulnerable people will avoid vaccination because they think they already had it. (“I know I had it, I just didn’t get tested”). They’ll be wrong, but they won’t know it until they’ve already spread it to 2 or 3 other people.

 

[watfly]

How much does it cost to build, buy, lease or rent a gas station the Bay Area? I would expect with property prices (& taxes probably) there being off the charts, that it is expensive and that prices are reflective of that.

The higher costs of individual gas stations is not reflected in the price of gas at that station, or at least not reflected to a significant extent. Individual gas stations only have a few cents of wiggle room in its markup. The higher prices would be reflected in the items sold in the store. This is where gas stations make their money. Gas is the lure to get them in the store.

You could argue that the cost at the refinery level may be the issue, but Yuma and Phoenix get the majority of their gasoline from California refineries.

 

[MacDre]

Actually, I’d say the Bay Area uses too much gas. We seem to have a decent supply of refineries for the amount of gas norcal uses.

But that high gas usage is being driven by the land use decisions made by local Democrats. You want to know why so many people burn gas while driving into SF? Go ask Mayor Feinstein, Mayor Brown, and Mayor Newsom. They’re the ones who passed the zoning laws which caused the long commutes.

But then we’d be admitting that kids in Richmond suffer asthma because chardonnay liberals are too important to live near apartment buildings.

No argument from me on this. In the Hercules/Rodeo area locals feel that the Rodeo Housing Projects & Trailer Parks are enough. Hercules has banned apartment development and stopped the Bart from expanding to the area. I’ve heard rumors of a Ferry/Amtrak station but nothing has materialized.

 

[Grace T.]

If your goal is to protect elderly people from breakthrough infections, then you vaccinate recovered patients, too. Double protection is stronger than single.

If you officially exempt all recovered patients, you run the risk is that vulnerable people will avoid vaccination because they think they already had it. (“I know I had it, I just didn’t get tested”). They’ll be wrong, but they won’t know it until they’ve already spread it to 2 or 3 other people.

again, your assumption is that breakthrough infections are sufficiently rare and the reduction in infection time is sufficiently large that you'll be able to maintain some semblance of herd immunity. We are reasonably certain now vaccine immunity is declining with time, probably to much lower levels. You can't get there, then, without either: a) boosters, or b) everyone getting infected. Hey why not 4 boosters. Quadruple protection is stronger than single! I have news for you: it ain't going to happen that everyone agrees to line up for a booster every 6 months.

 

[MicPaPa]

Rather than making my point to multiple specific individual posts regarding personality over policy, especially since a mother has been cited as an example, I’ll stick with a general point and if the shoe fits……

Context matters - congratulations for living in the most exceptional country and achieving the type of lifestyle that makes personality one’s top issue in a presidential election. It is clear when your main concern is presidential personality/manners that the consequential policies, issues, and decisions have very little if any effect on your status and lifestyle. Consider yourself fortunate that gas & food prices, open borders, and pathetic national security decisions barely, if at all, hit home.

When comfortable, it’s easy to forget that all presidential elections actually have real life-changing consequences for many. So next time your primary issue and argument is personality, be grateful that it wasn’t your loved ones blown to bits or abandon in a hostile foreign country due to pathetic decisions.

I’ll close with a historical example. When the country needed Patton on the battlefield, yet one's top issue is his repulsiveness to their sensitivities and how’d they’d never invite him to a fancy dinner party – maybe the point is not the manners, but the fancy dinner party.

 

[Grace T.]

Rather than making my point to multiple specific individual posts regarding personality over policy, especially since a mother has been cited as an example, I’ll stick with a general point and if the shoe fits……

Context matters - congratulations for living in the most exceptional country and achieving the type of lifestyle that makes personality one’s top issue in a presidential election. It is clear when your main concern is presidential personality/manners that the consequential policies, issues, and decisions have very little if any effect on your status and lifestyle. Consider yourself fortunate that gas & food prices, open borders, and pathetic national security decisions barely, if at all, hit home.

When comfortable, it’s easy to forget that all presidential elections actually have real life-changing consequences for many. So next time your primary issue and argument is personality, be grateful that it wasn’t your loved ones blown to bits or abandon in a hostile foreign country due to pathetic decisions.

I’ll close with a historical example. When the country needed Patton on the battlefield, yet one's top issue is his repulsiveness to their sensitivities and how’d they’d never invite him to a fancy dinner party – maybe the point is not the manners, but the fancy dinner party.

You gotta live in the real world.....

If dad4 seriously thinks people ( a huge chunk of which are extroverts) are just going to wear masks everywhere even when they aren't mandated for 2+ years and continue to live as hermits (as he given his introverted nature might prefer) and without complaining, that's simply not going to happen.

If you think the snooty people around the fancy dinner party are going to let go of their snootiness and air of superiority, let alone forego the dinner party, that's simply not going to happen.

 

[watfly]

Rather than making my point to multiple specific individual posts regarding personality over policy, especially since a mother has been cited as an example, I’ll stick with a general point and if the shoe fits……

Context matters - congratulations for living in the most exceptional country and achieving the type of lifestyle that makes personality one’s top issue in a presidential election. It is clear when your main concern is presidential personality/manners that the consequential policies, issues, and decisions have very little if any effect on your status and lifestyle. Consider yourself fortunate that gas & food prices, open borders, and pathetic national security decisions barely, if at all, hit home.

When comfortable, it’s easy to forget that all presidential elections actually have real life-changing consequences for many. So next time your primary issue and argument is personality, be grateful that it wasn’t your loved ones blown to bits or abandon in a hostile foreign country due to pathetic decisions.

I’ll close with a historical example. When the country needed Patton on the battlefield, yet one's top issue is his repulsiveness to their sensitivities and how’d they’d never invite him to a fancy dinner party – maybe the point is not the manners, but the fancy dinner party.

Some of us our greedy and want both. Great policies and great character. It's not an either or proposition as you seem to make it out to be. Forced to choose, I'm going with great policies, form over substance. However, form is still important to a degree because it does impact the effectiveness of your leadership ability. I'm not saying that fancy dinner parties are important, but there are generals that know which one is the salad fork and will still kick your ass on the battlefield. It's really not a big ask.

Personally, I'm tired of being given the options of the lesser of two evils.

 

[Grace T.]

You gotta live in the real world.....

If dad4 seriously thinks people ( a huge chunk of which are extroverts) are just going to wear masks everywhere even when they aren't mandated for 2+ years and continue to live as hermits (as he given his introverted nature might prefer) and without complaining, that's simply not going to happen.

If you think the snooty people around the fancy dinner party are going to let go of their snootiness and air of superiority, let alone forego the dinner party, that's simply not going to happen.

p.s. I think you make an interesting point that first world countries can be concerned about character. The 3rd world has had a horrible time with leaders of poor character, whether Saddam or Peron, Castro or Chavez. Character is probably a check that prevents politicians from doing things that are too extreme. While the 3rd world can't afford such niceties and as a result have a political culture which can fall into corruption. Character is a luxury of the first world leadership. It's also one of the reasons we can keep our republics.

 

[dad4]

You gotta live in the real world.....

If dad4 seriously thinks people ( a huge chunk of which are extroverts) are just going to wear masks everywhere even when they aren't mandated for 2+ years and continue to live as hermits (as he given his introverted nature might prefer) and without complaining, that's simply not going to happen.

If you think the snooty people around the fancy dinner party are going to let go of their snootiness and air of superiority, let alone forego the dinner party, that's simply not going to happen.

Me? I have absolutely no belief that you’re going to mask up and move your parties outside.

I think you all will keep having indoor events, mask up only when required to do so, and then complain when an elderly relative has a breakthrough infection.

 

[Grace T.]

Me? I have absolutely no belief that you’re going to mask up and move your parties outside.

I think you all will keep having indoor events, mask up only when required to do so, and then complain when an elderly relative has a breakthrough infection.

Then why you banging your head against the wall?:

-You have no policy prescription
-You are only preaching
-You admit people won't listen to your preaching.

What's the point? Unlike the Baptist minister, your soul won't be damned if you fail to do your duty.

or hey...you could do something useful and tell folks they should probably avoid indoor gatherings with the elderly relatives, at a minimum should get a COVID test, and never ever be around them if they are feeling the slightest bit ill? Maybe even volunteer to pick up their groceries and meds?

 

[watfly]

You gotta live in the real world.....

Dad4's song:

The rest of us:

Ironic considering the band grew up in Manhattan Beach, oh the struggles.