Wisconsin Supreme Court strikes down stay-at-home order that closed businesses • Hacker News Board

Re: Wisconsin Supreme Court strikes down stay-at-home order that closed businesses

#541

Post by leetcrew » Thu, May 14, 2020, 7:53 PM UTC

apacheCamel wrote: post #525

leetcrew wrote: post #502

Earlier quoted context omitted.

of course it's subjective. it depends on local norms (many of are unwritten and/or implicit) which vary a lot from place to place. a lot of it just boils down to treating other people the way (you think) they want to be treated. do you think there are a lot of cart attendants that are grateful for people scattering carts all over the parking lot?

No, I can't imagine a single cart attendant would appreciate the extra work. What I am trying to say is: yes a good portion of people probably do follow the rules, despite the possibility of not having any negative consequences but that doesn't mean we should get rid of the rules. There are people who "just want a haircut despite my cough, what could possibly happen" and will infect people along the way. Sure, they w…

I don't necessarily think we should get rid of the rules either, but for a somewhat different reason. I do believe that free citizens who a.) trust their government officials and b.) can do so without severe economic stress will generally follow official recommendations without the threat of force. at least, enough of them will follow it that the outliers don't really matter.

unfortunately, we don't have a good system to support barbers, who would prefer not to risk catching/spreading the virus but need the money, or barbershop owners, who would prefer to stay closed but need to pay rent. so I do actually support the lockdown as a somewhat dirty hack to trigger benefits for these people.

Re: Wisconsin Supreme Court strikes down stay-at-home order that closed businesses

#542

Post by sterlind » Thu, May 14, 2020, 7:57 PM UTC

nelaboras wrote: post #194

sterlind wrote: post #47

Both sides: courts are supposed to apply the law to the facts. Lawyers guide judges in their arguments, and the court weighs each one, resolving conflicts through tests and precedent. Read the text of the decision before bringing politics into it. IANAL, but browsing the text: - The ruling cites the Wisconsin constitution. - Governors can issue emergency orders (and maybe rules?) effective for 150 days. - There's a d…

> Republicans who brought the lawsuit had asked the justices to side with them but to stay their ruling for about a week so legislators and Evers could work out a new plan to deal with the pandemic. > The justices declined to do that and had their ruling take effect immediately. This is ignoring reality in favor of principle||partisan positioning (choose your preference). Nothing rational or legally sound in throwing…

Yikes, I didn't know they did that. That sucks, and is more indefensible.. there's no rational reason why the court shouldn't grant a stay when even the plaintiffs want it.

Did the court justify their decision in denying the stay?

Re: Wisconsin Supreme Court strikes down stay-at-home order that closed businesses

#543

Post by apacheCamel » Thu, May 14, 2020, 7:57 PM UTC

leetcrew wrote: post #541

apacheCamel wrote: post #525

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, I can't imagine a single cart attendant would appreciate the extra work. What I am trying to say is: yes a good portion of people probably do follow the rules, despite the possibility of not having any negative consequences but that doesn't mean we should get rid of the rules. There are people who "just want a haircut despite my cough, what could possibly happen" and will infect people along the way. Sure, they w…

I don't necessarily think we should get rid of the rules either, but for a somewhat different reason. I do believe that free citizens who a.) trust their government officials and b.) can do so without severe economic stress will generally follow official recommendations without the threat of force. at least, enough of them will follow it that the outliers don't really matter. unfortunately, we don't have a good syste…

I can fully agree with that sentiment.

Re: Wisconsin Supreme Court strikes down stay-at-home order that closed businesses

#544

Post by anoraca » Thu, May 14, 2020, 7:57 PM UTC

dilandau wrote: post #454

anoraca wrote: post #440

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wouldn't they be bringing in more income from the $600/week in Federal unemployment + state unemployment than they would at their job?

That is short term assistance, it won't be free (taxpayers will have to help cover this), and when it runs out then what? In other words, I think you completely fail to understand the impact this is having on the poorest people. If they close schools again God help the single parents..

The federal government should extend those payments until there is a national return to normal operating conditions. A deferment of rent and mortgages would solve a lot of problems that businesses/land lords/renters have.

Re: Wisconsin Supreme Court strikes down stay-at-home order that closed businesses

#545

Post by pdonis » Thu, May 14, 2020, 8:00 PM UTC

kenjackson wrote: post #144

pdonis wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> When our actions can harm others, the government absolutely has the right—and the obligation—to step in. No. When our actions have harmed others, then the government has the right to step in--because we delegated that power to them. But the government does not have the right to step in just because some government official things our actions "can" harm others. That's not their call to make. We are adult human being…

Wait. I can drive drunk now? Those checkpoints are actually illegal? All those people in jail for DUIs shouldn’t be there? Has anyone taken these laws to the Supreme Court?

> Has anyone taken these laws to the Supreme Court?

No, but that's because we live in a legal regime where the government assumes the power to punish people with jail time even when no actual harm is caused, based on a government official's judgment of "possible harm". But the fact that we live in such a regime does not make it right.

In a sane legal regime, what would happen if you were driving drunk, but had not caused any actual harm, and a cop saw you and stopped you, would be: cop determines that you are drunk (breathalyzer, let's say); cop makes sure your car is safely parked off the road, locks it, and takes the key; cop says "sir, I really think you should let me drive you home, since you're too drunk to drive safely; you can get a family member or friend to bring you back to get your car tomorrow when you're sober". Then, either the cop drives you home and gives your car keys to whoever is there; or, if you resist, the cop puts you in the back of his car and drives you to the police station instead, and calls a family member or friend to come take you home, and gives your car keys to them.

In other words, the cop has a perfect right, when he sees you're obviously impaired, to stop you from driving. Indeed, anyone would; if you were at a friend's house and you were clearly too drunk to drive home, the friend would have a perfect right to hide your car keys and either drive you home himself, or have you crash in his spare bedroom or on the couch. But the government does not have the right to throw you in jail if all you did was drive drunk, and caused no actual harm. It only has the right to punish you if you caused actual harm.

Re: Wisconsin Supreme Court strikes down stay-at-home order that closed businesses

#546

Post by footnipple » Thu, May 14, 2020, 8:09 PM UTC

dmode wrote: post #459

sandworm101 wrote: post #128

This is where culture really matters. Almost every jurisdiction in the western world has faced this issue. Governments are issuing orders that, when push comes to shove, might not be 100% legitimate in the eyes of a court. In most countries that hasn't mattered. People acknowledge the covid problem and are obeying the "orders" despite them, perhaps, not having legal teeth. This requires trust. Like the current politi…

Wisconsin, like many American states, is politically a 3rd world state now. It is so heavily gerrymandered that Republicans are a heavy majority in state senate despite actually receiving fewer votes. It has tried very hard to suppress voting by forcing an in person vote in the peak of pandemic. The Supreme Court in Wisconsin is essentially a Kangaroo court. It reminds me of the political system in the state of Bihar…

Have you ever been to Wisconsin?

Re: Wisconsin Supreme Court strikes down stay-at-home order that closed businesses

#547

Post by wikibob » Thu, May 14, 2020, 8:10 PM UTC

Broken_Hippo wrote: post #458

leetcrew wrote: post #453

Earlier quoted context omitted.

many (ie, as an absolute number) parents may do a poor job of homeschooling, but I don't think this is enough to condemn the practice overall. although an imperfect measure, american homeschooled students actually have significantly higher average scores on standardized tests than public school students.

If a decent percentage do poorly (15-25%), then it is enough to condemn the practice overall - at least in its current form. There aren't nearly enough controls to eliminate this sort of thing, and I think it is probably more expensive to do so. I also think that - apart from test scores - these kids are less likely to be forced to deal with folks different from themselves and a bit less likely to be introduced to co…

> “ also think that - apart from test scores - these kids are less likely to be forced to deal with folks different from themselves and a bit less likely to be introduced to concepts their parents disagree with.”

This is precisely why “homeschooling” is so dangerous.

It is also precisely WHY the majority of Americans who “homeschool” chose to do it. It is usually religious families, and they explicitly do it to isolate and “protect” their children from outside influences.

Re: Wisconsin Supreme Court strikes down stay-at-home order that closed businesses

#548

Post by wikibob » Thu, May 14, 2020, 8:12 PM UTC

dtwest wrote: post #300

threeseed wrote: post #228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How about one of the most similar countries to the US ? Australian deaths per million = 3.92 US deaths per million = 228.5 And the US number is likely to go to 500 in the next two months whilst in some Australia states it looks like COVID-19 is fully eradicated.

And another similar country: UK deaths per million = 488

This only proves the point. The UK’s response is among the worst in the developed world. Similar to the US’s response.

Re: Wisconsin Supreme Court strikes down stay-at-home order that closed businesses

#549

Post by ntsplnkv2 » Thu, May 14, 2020, 8:12 PM UTC

ericmay wrote: post #485

altoidaltoid wrote: post #468

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, but people still want to live there vs. Youngstown or Cleveland

People still want to live in those locations, evidenced by the fact that there are still people living there and getting along ok. Maybe you're a doctor and want to work at one of the two best hospitals on the planet, then you'd move to Cleveland, for example. Maybe you want to go to the #1 CS program on the planet, so you go to CMU. And who knows. Maybe now with more companies going remote or encouraging more remote…

Honestly, given this and your other replies, it just seems you have an axe to grind, because you're essentially agreeing with my point: none of the regulators, wall-street investors, or people clamoring for the economy to reopen cared when the manufacturing industries collapsed here. And now all of a sudden, they care about people working? They didn't back then. They do now because THEIR pocket books are hurting.

I'm not from the valley - born and raised, and live currently, in Pittsburgh. My father was a steel worker, my grandfather on one side an ironworker, the other a steelworker as well. I've seen the downfall, and some of the comeback, and it's a great place - but there are so many areas that are really bad and haven't recovered, and you say "people still live there" - well, look at their population 50 years ago, and try living there now. Because if you did, your tune would damn well change in 5 minutes.

Re: Wisconsin Supreme Court strikes down stay-at-home order that closed businesses

#550

Post by leetcrew » Thu, May 14, 2020, 8:16 PM UTC

wikibob wrote: post #547

Broken_Hippo wrote: post #458

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If a decent percentage do poorly (15-25%), then it is enough to condemn the practice overall - at least in its current form. There aren't nearly enough controls to eliminate this sort of thing, and I think it is probably more expensive to do so. I also think that - apart from test scores - these kids are less likely to be forced to deal with folks different from themselves and a bit less likely to be introduced to co…

> “ also think that - apart from test scores - these kids are less likely to be forced to deal with folks different from themselves and a bit less likely to be introduced to concepts their parents disagree with.” This is precisely why “homeschooling” is so dangerous. It is also precisely WHY the majority of Americans who “homeschool” chose to do it. It is usually religious families, and they explicitly do it to isola…

this is certainly the stereotype, but do you have any data to support this? none of the broad studies I can find collected info on religious affiliation (let alone how seriously the family actually takes it). anecdotally, the homeschooled children I know had somewhat eccentric atheist/agnostic parents.