Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by Fnord666 on Wednesday September 13 2017, @04:45PM   Printer-friendly
from the crappy-job dept.

San Diego workers will power-wash streets with a bleach solution in an attempt to stop the spread of Hepatitis A:

At least 15 people have died in San Diego from an ongoing hepatitis A outbreak. In an effort to stop the spread of the viral liver disease, city officials have begun power-washing streets across the downtown area, according to NBC San Diego.

As of Monday, workers dressed in protective white gear and red hard hats were seen outside spraying the sidewalks with a bleach-based liquid in hopes of killing the virus that lives in human feces. "We're probably going to be doing them every other Monday, see how that works out at least for the time being," Jose Ysea, a city spokesman, told NBC San Diego.

The high-pressure power-washing system using bleach will hopefully remove "all feces, blood, bodily fluids or contaminated surfaces," according to a sanitation plan included in a letter delivered to San Diego city officials, the Associated Press reports. For now, just streets in San Diego are being washed, but in the near future hand-washing and street-sanitizing efforts will be implemented in other cities in the region, Dr. Wilma Wooten, the region's public health officer, told the AP.

Also at LA Times. San Diego outbreak page.

Previously: San Diego Declares Emergency Due to Outbreak of Hepatitis A


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Wednesday September 13 2017, @09:14PM (15 children)

    by fustakrakich (6150) on Wednesday September 13 2017, @09:14PM (#567469) Journal

    I'm sorry, I don't speak gibberish. Can you rephrase the question into something comprehensible?

    --
    La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 14 2017, @01:07AM (14 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 14 2017, @01:07AM (#567557)

    Speaking of gibberish, you seem to imply that the resources consumed by government come only from government workers.

    The question put to you was quite clear for those of us not smarmy gits: if "government consisting of people" excuses forcible theft by government according to you, explain how "mafia consisting of people" does not likewise excuse them. What magical power differentiates one from the other?

    • (Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Thursday September 14 2017, @03:38AM (13 children)

      by fustakrakich (6150) on Thursday September 14 2017, @03:38AM (#567612) Journal

      Sorry, your Randian voodoo has no effect on me. You get what you vote for...

      --
      La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
      • (Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 14 2017, @04:01AM (12 children)

        by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 14 2017, @04:01AM (#567627)

        Plug your ears and scream "LA LA LA I CAN'T HEAR YOU" all you like. We see that you understand the question and also that you refuse - or cannot - answer it.

        "Voting" being the limiting factor on government power produces nothing more than tyranny, something the creators of the USA were keen to avoid by eschewing a democracy for a constitutional republic. If you had any imagination at all, you might be able to muster the idea that a 95% tax on fustakrakichs might possibly seem like a bad idea to those at the business end of government guns.

        • (Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Thursday September 14 2017, @05:27AM (11 children)

          by fustakrakich (6150) on Thursday September 14 2017, @05:27AM (#567656) Journal

          :-) I'm sorry, what was the question?

          --
          La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 14 2017, @02:55PM (10 children)

            by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 14 2017, @02:55PM (#567825)

            what was the question?

            Explain the delegation chain of authority that somehow distinguishes one group of people with guns that force their will on others [soylentnews.org] (government) from another group of people with guns that force their will on others (mafia).

            • (Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Thursday September 14 2017, @03:40PM (9 children)

              by fustakrakich (6150) on Thursday September 14 2017, @03:40PM (#567851) Journal

              Silly goose... Government has the voters' consent. Mafia is private security for the businessman.

              --
              La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
              • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 14 2017, @03:51PM (8 children)

                by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 14 2017, @03:51PM (#567858)

                Interesting. Tell me more about this "consent". I heard that, for example, Hillary Clinton got more total votes than Donald Trump, indicating that this consent of yours doesn't need to be unanimous. There is obviously at least a small minority who consent, as government employees consent to using government force, just like Mafia employees consent to using Mafia force.

                At what point does the magic happen and allow those who do want to use force against others to have this consent of their victims? One percent? Ten percent? Fifty percent plus one? Can this same magic be used against a recalcitrant hottie at my school who resists my romantic advances? If not, why not?

                • (Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Thursday September 14 2017, @04:13PM (7 children)

                  by fustakrakich (6150) on Thursday September 14 2017, @04:13PM (#567873) Journal

                  The rules are well documented, your faux surprise with the results is just sour grapes. Win or lose, you consented to those results when you submitted your ballot. But you do have the right to remain silent. It would do you well to exercise that right, as of... now :-)

                  --
                  La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
                  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 14 2017, @04:27PM (4 children)

                    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 14 2017, @04:27PM (#567894)

                    Win or lose, you consented to those results when you submitted your ballot

                    I see. So, according to your reasoning, once consent is obtained, it is not revokable for at least for the immediate time period. So for you it's perfectly okay to take a date out for dinner and a show, back to the home for some sex, and as long as consent was obtained at some point in the prior proceedings, to consummate intercourse at least once, forcibly if necessary to complete the act over any newfound objections? If not, why not?

                    • (Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Thursday September 14 2017, @05:57PM (3 children)

                      by fustakrakich (6150) on Thursday September 14 2017, @05:57PM (#567971) Journal

                      it is not revokable for at least for the immediate time period.

                      :-) That procedure is also well documented.

                      --
                      La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
                      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 14 2017, @06:30PM (2 children)

                        by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 14 2017, @06:30PM (#567990)

                        In our pursuit to obtain the specifics of your definition of "consent", we've gone from once obtained, not revokable [soylentnews.org] to what I take as a grudging acknowledgement that consent can be revoked at any time [soylentnews.org]. Which of those two mutually-exclusive definitions is the one you use?
                         

                        • (Score: 1) by fustakrakich on Thursday September 14 2017, @06:46PM (1 child)

                          by fustakrakich (6150) on Thursday September 14 2017, @06:46PM (#567999) Journal

                          :-) Take yer pick, I'm easy

                          Hey, Buzz! Wazzup? Is this a Turing test? Am I talking to a chat bot?

                          --
                          La politica e i criminali sono la stessa cosa..
                          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 14 2017, @06:56PM

                            by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 14 2017, @06:56PM (#568010)

                            Take yer pick

                            That indicates you have no principles to stand on at all, not even to the point of condemning rape. That message from you is quite telling.

                  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 14 2017, @07:35PM (1 child)

                    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 14 2017, @07:35PM (#568034)

                    So, abstaining is the proper method of withdrawing consent? Admit it, there is no consent. There is compliance and non-compliance, and the consequences that follow from each.

                    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 14 2017, @08:48PM

                      by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 14 2017, @08:48PM (#568074)

                      Trying to get that blowhard to admit anything beyond empty platitudes is a bit of a challenge. fustakrakich can't even admit that rape [soylentnews.org] is wrong [soylentnews.org].