Conavirus......

[ToomuchStuff]

Getting really annoyed at all those who keep asking when will we open internally. When they learn the owner is on dialysis, many have made the comment, oh why doesn't he just skip a day and go to (x county, or Y store, etc) and get the vaccine, so we can open.
Friday, we are allowing a group from a former police chief friend, to come in internally, from a funeral. Max 30 people was my restriction. This is the second group attempt the other owner wanted to do (first was a charity he is associated with). I expect this will end up no better then the first, and go back to closed internally.

[jp1]

I think it joined a dozen or more other states without mask mandates, but it's Texas and a red state so somebody's bound to notice. Personally I think it's appropriate for states to leave that sort of thing for localities to decide but I understand the desire by some to make everyone subject to top down, one size fits all governance. I don't agree with it but I understand it.

So are you upset that asshat governor Abbott is not allowing local mask mandates?

[Alan]

So are you upset that asshat governor Abbott is not allowing local mask mandates?

I'm not familiar with that, and it doesn't sound like something he would do or say to me. If it's true, I'd be disappointed.

[jp1]

https://news.google.com/articles/CAI...S&ceid=US%3Aen

“But officials lambasted the latest order because it does not allow local leaders to enforce their own mask mandates. The latest order also removes a previous option available to local leaders: compel businesses to require that customers wear face masks.“

[Alan]

The order also establishes that nothing “precludes businesses or other establishments from requiring employees or customers to follow additional hygiene m[/FONT]p1;377161]https://news.google.com/articles/CAI...S&ceid=US%3Aen

“But officials lambasted the latest order because it does not allow local leaders to enforce their own mask mandates. The latest order also removes a previous option available to local leaders: compel businesses to require that customers wear face masks.“

The order also establishes that nothing “precludes businesses or other establishments from requiring employees or customers to follow additional hygiene measures, including the wearing of a face covering.”

So it appears the complaint is that no one can criminalize not wearing a mask in public spaces while retaining private businesses and establishments right to enforce their own mandates. That sounds like good governance to me.

[jp1]

I think it joined a dozen or more other states without mask mandates, but it's Texas and a red state so somebody's bound to notice. Personally I think it's appropriate for states to leave that sort of thing for localities to decide but I understand the desire by some to make everyone subject to top down, one size fits all governance. I don't agree with it but I understand it.

So you have changed your mind in the past couple of days?

[GeorgeParker]

The order also establishes that nothing “precludes businesses or other establishments from requiring employees or customers to follow additional hygiene measures, including the wearing of a face covering.”

So it appears the complaint is that no one can criminalize not wearing a mask in public spaces while retaining private businesses and establishments right to enforce their own mandates. That sounds like good governance to me.

The mask mandate wasn't legally enforceable anyway.

A woman was arrested for keeping her business open in defiance of the Covid shutdown order, because she refused to close when the police warned her she would be arrested if she didn't. That caused such a brouhaha that the governor issued an order that no one could be arrested for violating the Covid mandates. That effectively put an end to the mandates being enforced. Everyone was expected to respect the mandates because they were the law, but all the police could do was ask you to comply. Mask enforcement thus fell to the local health departments under their power to issue citations to businesses for violations of hygiene rules. IOW there was basically no enforcement by anyone except businesses enforcing their own rules requiring masks.

The latest order by the Governor closed the loophole that let local health departments issue mask mandates for enclosed spaces, so even that small enforceability is now gone. And most businesses other than bars and restaurants are unhappy about it. With no official mask mandate, people who were only wearing a mask because of the mandate are now refusing to comply with store rules that require customers to wear masks, and that's causing a lot of conflicts between businesses trying to be safe and customers refusing to wear a mask.

[Alan]

So you have changed your mind in the past couple of days?

No, I've always been in favor of less top down governance, preferring everything to be as local as possible, and if you can avoid any level of government it's even better.

[jp1]

No, I've always been in favor of less top down governance, preferring everything to be as local as possible, and if you can avoid any level of government it's even better.

Ah, so when you said leave it for the localities to decide you meant for us to define locality as each individual business. Got it. You’ll have to forgive me for not understanding it originally. Republican logic sometimes baffles me.

[Alan]

Republican logic sometimes baffles me.

It's pretty simple actually, it's just an individual freedom sort of outlook on life. I guess it's only downside is that it's constantly under attack by those who'd rather use government force to control, restrict and demonize, but I think that may also be one of it's most endearing and noble characteristics.