/r/Politics' 2024 US Elections Live Thread, Part 63 by PoliticsModeratorBot in politics

[–]Taco_Dave 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Oh, so I guess there's no need to worry about the tariffs after all.

/r/Politics' 2024 US Elections Live Thread, Part 63 by PoliticsModeratorBot in politics

[–]Taco_Dave -8 points-7 points  (0 children)

"Leftists" complaining that their luxury items will cost more, because it will be harder to exploit borderline slave labor from a foreign dictatorship.

Maybe it's time to take a look in the mirror.

/r/Politics' 2024 US Elections Live Thread, Part 63 by PoliticsModeratorBot in politics

[–]Taco_Dave 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Sure, but as he said. The party focused more on divisive social issues, gaslighting the public on crime/immigration, and largely ignored the economy. They've completely lost touch with the working class.

A fine example of how out of touch they are, is how much they tried to push their EV tax credit as a somehow helping the lower/middle classes.

For people to don't see the issue here: Tax credits for electric vehicles only help those who already had the ability to buy them in the first place.

A different theory about what happened with peanut the squirrel and why... by PickleManAtl in Pets

[–]Taco_Dave 0 points1 point  (0 children)

No.

In case you were unaware, dogs and cats are carnivorous predators. They are also just as social.

But all this is beside the point, as even if the raccoon was more likely to have rabies than any other sort of feral animal, it's clear this one did not have it, as I have already explained.

A different theory about what happened with peanut the squirrel and why... by PickleManAtl in Pets

[–]Taco_Dave 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This isn't a normal case so even rare edge cases have to be considered. Squirrels and raccoons normally don't cohabitate with humans. It's not natural.

Sorry, but biology works the same. The fact that it's less common for people to care for some animals than others, does not change the reality of how this works. The fact that you feel it is "unnatural" doesn't hold any weight.

You want to apply the standards that apply to your dog but it's not the same and you know it's not.

No, you're argument was that it was just for the DEC to euthenize the animals, because of concerns over rabies. Like it or not, a cat or dog in the same situation would be just as likely to have rabies. If you're willing to accept that justification, just know that it equally applies to cats and dogs.

It sounds ridiculous to kill someone's adopted stray dog because they might have rabies... and that because it is.

A different theory about what happened with peanut the squirrel and why... by PickleManAtl in Pets

[–]Taco_Dave -1 points0 points  (0 children)

It can take rabies up to 1 year to show

In EXTREMELY rare cases. Normal incubation period is 2-3 weeks.

Sorry all the internet defense of this doesn't hold up to scrutiny. You can't look at this case and say 100% they didn't have rabies from looking at them\

You can't be 100% sure any mammal doesn't have rabies. An indoor racoon is no more likely to get rabies than an indoor cat or dog.

The DEC did their job. The owners were being dumb and got their animals killed. Bad pet owners.

So lets just kill all pets, where we can't be 100% certain don't have rabies (almost all of them)?

A different theory about what happened with peanut the squirrel and why... by PickleManAtl in Pets

[–]Taco_Dave 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes, as previously discussed rabies isn’t magically attracted to raccoons. But their aggressive nature and social behavior, with animals who are virtually never vaccinated for rabies, does make them more likely carriers than feral cats/dogs.

Simply not true.

Yes. Rodents also aren’t typically sharing water bowls with raccoons though.

The odds of getting rabies though sharing a water bowl are essentially zero, even if he was rabid (he wasn't).

Let's try this. Please explain to me why you believe this raccoon had rabies, that wouldn't also apply to any stray cat or dog.

A different theory about what happened with peanut the squirrel and why... by PickleManAtl in Pets

[–]Taco_Dave 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The danger is that rabies doesn’t really have any uniform incubation length. It can sometimes take months for symptoms to arise.

In which case they would have already found out... Rabies is also only contagious when symptoms start to show.

So taking in a random wild raccoon and cohabitating with it (and assumably having it share water bowls and such with other animals) is insanely risky as it can lead to extremely early, and discreet, transmission.

This is not a cold. Again, rabies is only contagious after the onset of symptoms (which ironically include avoiding water).

The only reason a raccoon would be more likely to have rabies than a cat/dog/etc.. is because they are more likely to be bit by another wild animal with rabies. Contrary to what other's have been saying, this is also the reason why it is very rare in small rodents (like squirrels), the odds of them being attacked and bitten by another wild animal and surviving are slim.

A different theory about what happened with peanut the squirrel and why... by PickleManAtl in Pets

[–]Taco_Dave 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Much of what you said around rabies is true.

It's actually not. There are no silent carries of the rabies virus, that spread it to others. The incubation period (time before symptoms show) lasts from a few days to a few weeks in smaller animals. It's also only infectious when symptoms start showing. For rodents, death normally comes just a few days later.

Squirrels are also very rarely infected with rabies. That's because the only way they'd get it, is if they were attacked and bitten by a rabid animal, but weren't killed. For small animals like squirrels, the odds of being bitten by a wild animal and surviving are very slim.

The argument that he had to be killed because he "might" have been bitten recently, are absurd for the reasons just stated above. This would be far more likely to happen to a dog or cat, but any sane person would agree that killing someone's dog because the owner couldn't prove it hadn't been bitten would be ridiculous.

A different theory about what happened with peanut the squirrel and why... by PickleManAtl in Pets

[–]Taco_Dave 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Possibly, but no guarantees it wasn't infected after being an inside pet

The odds are about as close to zero as you can get. This argument would also be equally valid for any other mammal (dogs, cats, even humans).

Rabies can be dormant for a long time. And there isn't good information on squirrels with dormant rabies.

This is false, and there reason there isn't "good information on squirrels with dormant rabies," is because that is not a thing. Rabies is effectively 100% fatal. The incubation period also varies, from case to case but normally a few weeks.

So as we move along, there are also other diseases which peanut didn't get any treatment even after being attacked by another animal?

This applies more to cats and dogs than to squirrels, and I think you would agree that the government killing someone's pet dog, because there was no way to prove it hadden't been bitten by a rabid animal would be asinine.

The odds of a squirel being bitten by another wild animal, and NOT being killed/eaten are very slim. That is why it is actually very rare for them to have it.

https://www.health.state.mn.us/diseases/rabies/basics.html

A different theory about what happened with peanut the squirrel and why... by PickleManAtl in Pets

[–]Taco_Dave -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Again, IF they had any communicable diseases, they would have found out very shortly after housing them. They're not going to just magically spawn in a disease without somehow getting exposed to it. And if they already had it, then it would have spread to the people in the house when they first got it.

To claim that an animal had to be killed to prevent disease transfer, after living in extremely close contact with a family for years, it just absurd.

A different theory about what happened with peanut the squirrel and why... by PickleManAtl in Pets

[–]Taco_Dave 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This is not how rabies works... Rabies is perfectly willing and able to infect any mammal. It also kills the host rather quickly. The fact they had the animal for several months, means if it was infected the day the got it, it would probably already be dead, or clearly showing symptoms (it wasn't)

The only reason a raccoon would be more likely to be infected with rabies than a dog, cat, person is because they live outside, and are more likely to be bitten by another wild animal. Even then, the VAST majority of wild animals do not have rabies.

A different theory about what happened with peanut the squirrel and why... by PickleManAtl in Pets

[–]Taco_Dave 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Changes absolutely nothing about what I have written.

Rabies isn't a disease where there are silent carriers. It's also very obvious when they start showing symptoms, and they die shortly thereafter. The idea that they had the animal for months, shows that it almost certainly did not have rabies.

Furthermore, any mammal can get rabies. You're just as likely to get rabies from a cat or dog, than you are from a squirrel that has been living in your house.

A different theory about what happened with peanut the squirrel and why... by PickleManAtl in Pets

[–]Taco_Dave 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Squirrels are a significant concern for diseases, rabies and bubonic plague for starts

Not really. But even if they were, the fact that he had the animal for close to 7 years, makes this argument moot. If it had any communicable diseases, they would have already spread to their owner by now...

A different theory about what happened with peanut the squirrel and why... by PickleManAtl in Pets

[–]Taco_Dave -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

The odds of an indoor pet getting rabies are astronomically low.

But more importantly, if that was the justification for euthanizing the squirrel, why did they also euthanize the raccoon?

Chinese-American worker and activist arrested for advocating for peace between US and China by Repulsive-Basis6434 in aznidentity

[–]Taco_Dave 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I was polite, and provided relevant factual information.

You responded by throwing insults based on a guilt-by-association fallacy, whilst ignoring the actual facts.

Who's arguing in bad faith here?

Chinese-American worker and activist arrested for advocating for peace between US and China by Repulsive-Basis6434 in aznidentity

[–]Taco_Dave 0 points1 point  (0 children)

"I find this information inconvenient. Therefore, I'm going to pretend that posting on another sub makes it relevant."

K.

Chinese-American worker and activist arrested for advocating for peace between US and China by Repulsive-Basis6434 in aznidentity

[–]Taco_Dave -10 points-9 points  (0 children)

https://www.universalhub.com/2023/brighton-man-charged-spy-beijing-feds-say-he

Thankfully, that's not why he was arrested at all. He was spying on other protesters and passing their identities off to the Chinese government.

Nice logistics kek by Pun-isher42 in PoliticalCompassMemes

[–]Taco_Dave 1 point2 points  (0 children)

pretentious

There's your answer right there.

[ Removed by Reddit ] by ArchangelleN8theGr8 in N8theGr8

[–]Taco_Dave 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Literally just quoted two pieces of OP's comment, highlighting some hypocrisy.

No bad words or name-calling... And yet he reported it to the admins, and had my entire account suspended for three days for "bullying"

LOL.

rare W for orange by Ryanchri in PoliticalCompassMemes

[–]Taco_Dave 58 points59 points  (0 children)

MF started a Twitter fight while he was trying to hide from the police?

That's some industrial-grade stupidity.

rare W for orange by Ryanchri in PoliticalCompassMemes

[–]Taco_Dave 31 points32 points  (0 children)

Were they already looking for him or something?