This has mainly become a case of government power vs. the people.
The government at this point has 0 reason to kill the ostriches except to prove their authority.
IMO, the government fucked up here by delaying. The government should have killed them much earlier but the owners out-maneuvered the government by going public with everything and painting a biased narrative that stuck.
In reality, the government offered the owners fair compensation for the ostriches to kill them all due to health concerns and then but new ones. The owners should have listened given the health concerns and then just buy new birds. They're ostriches not dinosaurs. They're replaceable and this had nothing to do with some conspiracy to kill all ostriches. The owners defined the government and potentially put other people and birds at risk. The government should have seized the birds at this time but the government waited.
Now, the birds have essentially been proven to not be sick because of the time that has passed so the previous moral grounds the government may have had to kill the birds is gone. Now, if the government kills the birds it's simply about proving its authority and punishing people who defied them which is not a good reason for the government to go in. They should significantly fine the ostrich farm for not following orders then leave it at that.
When the government destroys any livestock, it’s destroyed. No one gets it. They will even poisonfood means for the homeless. It is a waste on all levels for the government to touch any livestock.
Yes, because it makes perfect sense to destroy a bunch of flightless birds who aren't poultry because they may have at one point had a respiratory illness (but we only know this because of two anal swab PCR tests run at 40 cycles, and we all know how infallible those tests are).
Just do what the government says and don't ask questions. They have experts.
Yes, I do believe the government's rationale for their decision making when it comes to these things should be questioned but these people if they had listened to the government would not have lost very much at all because they were offered fair compensation.
I hate the government too but I feel the "choose your battles" also applies. They tried to say they loved their birds because they were pets. Not a great argument. They're ostriches. They should have just taken the compensation and made a case for why this was not a good thing. They rallied the public for their own heel digging over some ostriches, though I imagine it's all idealism now.
The government fucked up and should back down also but I don't have much sympathy for the ostrich owners because they could have just taken the compensation and not been in the mess they're now in.
I understand you see this as unjust and I would agree but what happens when we actually have a real problem with some sort of disease and the owners choose not to comply because they don't feel the government is just in its actions and it actually does cause public harm? It's one thing to kill the birds, not provide fair compensation and in this way destroy the business and reduce the overall availability of meat. That's a huge problem like in European countries or even here by implementing taxes and regulations on livestock that harms the business. That's a problem. This wasn't it though.
Yeah, my last girlfriend was a prostitute. You can probably get her for $300. I didn't care then and wouldn't care now. I dunno who's more of the cuck, the pimp selling his wife or the John paying the pimp to fuck the pimp's wife. All women are whores, so why care?
Actually, for the public health we should give all men access to pussy to buy at fair market value. I did after all recently post about a Universal Basic Sex program where we use taxes to ensure men get laid for the public good.
This has mainly become a case of government power vs. the people.
The government at this point has 0 reason to kill the ostriches except to prove their authority.
IMO, the government fucked up here by delaying. The government should have killed them much earlier but the owners out-maneuvered the government by going public with everything and painting a biased narrative that stuck.
In reality, the government offered the owners fair compensation for the ostriches to kill them all due to health concerns and then but new ones. The owners should have listened given the health concerns and then just buy new birds. They're ostriches not dinosaurs. They're replaceable and this had nothing to do with some conspiracy to kill all ostriches. The owners defined the government and potentially put other people and birds at risk. The government should have seized the birds at this time but the government waited.
Now, the birds have essentially been proven to not be sick because of the time that has passed so the previous moral grounds the government may have had to kill the birds is gone. Now, if the government kills the birds it's simply about proving its authority and punishing people who defied them which is not a good reason for the government to go in. They should significantly fine the ostrich farm for not following orders then leave it at that.
Just kiss the boot, goy!
I mean when kissing the boot gets you a few hundred pounds of ostrich meat as well as the money to by a new flock? I'll kiss that boot right now!
When the government destroys any livestock, it’s destroyed. No one gets it. They will even poison food means for the homeless. It is a waste on all levels for the government to touch any livestock.
Yes, because it makes perfect sense to destroy a bunch of flightless birds who aren't poultry because they may have at one point had a respiratory illness (but we only know this because of two anal swab PCR tests run at 40 cycles, and we all know how infallible those tests are).
Just do what the government says and don't ask questions. They have experts.
They were offered fair compensation. Much different than the COVID situation. I still haven't been given fair compensation for the COVID ordeal.
You completely ignored my entire point.
You think this is about compensation?
Yes, I do believe the government's rationale for their decision making when it comes to these things should be questioned but these people if they had listened to the government would not have lost very much at all because they were offered fair compensation.
I hate the government too but I feel the "choose your battles" also applies. They tried to say they loved their birds because they were pets. Not a great argument. They're ostriches. They should have just taken the compensation and made a case for why this was not a good thing. They rallied the public for their own heel digging over some ostriches, though I imagine it's all idealism now.
The government fucked up and should back down also but I don't have much sympathy for the ostrich owners because they could have just taken the compensation and not been in the mess they're now in.
I understand you see this as unjust and I would agree but what happens when we actually have a real problem with some sort of disease and the owners choose not to comply because they don't feel the government is just in its actions and it actually does cause public harm? It's one thing to kill the birds, not provide fair compensation and in this way destroy the business and reduce the overall availability of meat. That's a huge problem like in European countries or even here by implementing taxes and regulations on livestock that harms the business. That's a problem. This wasn't it though.
So if I offer you fair compensation to sleep with your wife, when can I come over next?
Yeah, my last girlfriend was a prostitute. You can probably get her for $300. I didn't care then and wouldn't care now. I dunno who's more of the cuck, the pimp selling his wife or the John paying the pimp to fuck the pimp's wife. All women are whores, so why care?
Actually, for the public health we should give all men access to pussy to buy at fair market value. I did after all recently post about a Universal Basic Sex program where we use taxes to ensure men get laid for the public good.