I am as free market as they come, but they are using our principles against us (because they have none).The lefties initiate force through their aggression and threats of aggression, and the threats of turning their propaganda machine against a non-complying business. None of this is free-market, and we need to fight back just as dirty.
Nope. No shirt, no shoes, no service and restaurants having a dress code mean unless the courts or legislature change the law businesses can refuse service based on what you wear or don't wear.
Yes, in the ideal free market. I wish we had anything like that. What we have now is big corps partnering with the government to dominate entire industries. The alliance of government and business has a name, but it isn't free market.
"No shirt, no shoes" is not a dress code. It's in place for liability purposes. I've been explaining it to this troll (he's well known on this site) all over this thread. Businesses cannot be held liable if someone contracts CCP Virus, or the Flu or Pneumonia or Whooping Cough or a cold, etc. because they got sick days after entering that business because it can't be proven.
No shoes: Guy walks in without shoes and slips and falls or steps on a broken bottle that wasn't cleaned properly: Provable lawsuit.
No shirt: A woman walking in with her tits hanging out violates public decency laws. Even a skimpy bikini top violates public decency laws in most jurisdictions. It applies to men because they can't say women can't go topless in a public establishment but men can.
No mask: Sorry, there's no rule or liability issue in place that allows it. Therefore it falls under the heading of discrimination. They can't ask if there's a health related reason you can't wear a mask because HIPAA applies.
I am as free market as they come, but they are using our principles against us (because they have none).The lefties initiate force through their aggression and threats of aggression, and the threats of turning their propaganda machine against a non-complying business. None of this is free-market, and we need to fight back just as dirty.
Nope. No shirt, no shoes, no service and restaurants having a dress code mean unless the courts or legislature change the law businesses can refuse service based on what you wear or don't wear.
Yes, in the ideal free market. I wish we had anything like that. What we have now is big corps partnering with the government to dominate entire industries. The alliance of government and business has a name, but it isn't free market.
"No shirt, no shoes" is not a dress code. It's in place for liability purposes. I've been explaining it to this troll (he's well known on this site) all over this thread. Businesses cannot be held liable if someone contracts CCP Virus, or the Flu or Pneumonia or Whooping Cough or a cold, etc. because they got sick days after entering that business because it can't be proven.
No shoes: Guy walks in without shoes and slips and falls or steps on a broken bottle that wasn't cleaned properly: Provable lawsuit.
No shirt: A woman walking in with her tits hanging out violates public decency laws. Even a skimpy bikini top violates public decency laws in most jurisdictions. It applies to men because they can't say women can't go topless in a public establishment but men can.
No mask: Sorry, there's no rule or liability issue in place that allows it. Therefore it falls under the heading of discrimination. They can't ask if there's a health related reason you can't wear a mask because HIPAA applies.