I’d be puzzled if I were working from the premise that nobody in Canada or France or the UK dislikes the current people in power and would not like to see them have cause to take a victory lap.
Since I don’t work from that premise, I am not puzzled at all.
So far, very, very few people are willing to lose their jobs over this. Millions more have gotten the shots, apparently motivated by the mandates to do it.
This is a magnificent thing, and the tradeoff seems tiny. What are you arguing for? That because a few people quit, that means it’s bad policy even though it got millions more vaccinated, and made thousands of workplaces safer for everyone? If so, that’s a ridiculous argument IMO.
People are willing to, and have, lost their lives because they refused to get vaccinated, so losing a job is nothing in comparison. And I bet half of them were betting the bosses would back down before they got fired.
No-It is an I.Q. test, and some(but not as many as you make it out to be) are failing it.
I’m curious as to how you think it best that we enforce such a mandate? Throughout 2020 and 2021, I’ve lamented that many of my fellow Arkansans refused to social distance, wear their masks, or refused the vaccine whereas I was happy to wear my mask, social distance, and got my vaccine as soon as it became available to me. But I’m not interested in having to prove my vaccination status every time I step out of the house, go to a restaurant, or hit up a museum.
Indeed. Many, many of the anti-vaxxers in Canada are of the frothing at the mouth “we hate Trudeau and so should you!” Variety.
Yeah, that’s one of the various reasons such measures are basically just an ‘I wish’ rather than a practical level of requirement, I figure. I too would find needing to prove my vaccination status anytime I go outside to be more than a little annoying. In theory, it could easily be connected to a centralized ID database of some kind, such that anytime you identify yourself (such as, for instance, using a credit card to pay for something) it could ping that database to confirm your vaccination status. But it would definitely be difficult and questionably practical to implement. Obviously anytime you come to the attention of law enforcement for any other reason they could check that, though, and the very fact that it is illegal and results in steep fines would probably have a strong deterrent factor.
So I suppose in principle that’s the level of mandate I would support, but practicalities of enforcement mean a less stringent mandate would have to be what is resorted to instead.
Not when you go out of the house, but in NYC, you have to prove your vaccination status every time you go to a restaurant or a museum. It’s really easy – you can show a picture of the card plus ID, show the card itself plus ID, use one of the many apps that can prove your vaccination status. It’s a very quick process.
I know that. I really, really don’t want that to be the new normal going forward. It’s not a matter of how quick or convenient it is. It’s that I don’t want to normalize showing your papers to participate in day-to-day life. I think it’s a bad precedent.
I think it will go away once the pandemic does. No one wants to go through that hassle. But, with all the anti-vaxxers here in the States, and the constant right-wing barrage of lies about the vaccine, this is where we are.
So many countries who started way behind the US in vaccinations have now passed us by. It’s shameful
The way you’ve framed it–having to show proof of vaccination status to enter a restaurant–this would obviously be a new development. So I can kinda see what you mean by “new normal.”
But when I think about my everyday life, and just the steps I go through to get to this point in the day, I don’t think it holds up. I take my dogs to the dog park, and I’m required to have “papers” I can show on demand to demonstrate that I have licenses and they’re vaccinated. I need a driver’s license, proof of registration, proof of insurance to drive my car to a parking lot where I show a pass to be able to put my car in it. Then I have to swipe a badge to get into my building, show it to the security, and then swipe it again to get into my suite. My vaccine status is connected to the badge, but if I and my employer hadn’t gone through that step, I would have to show that too, I suppose.
In my life, it’s pretty normal to have to prove I’ve done some kind of administrative thing in order to get access to some mundane activity. If I want to go buy alcohol tonight, even though I’m a broken down old man, there’s a decent chance I would have to show ID for that. If I wanted to go to Costco, there’s a thing for that. It doesn’t seem like there would be any substantial new precedent in the course of my everyday life if they also said you have to show some kind of electronic badge type of thing to get a seat at a restaurant, too.
When was the last time someone examined your dog’s papers before you entered a dog park or while you were on a walk? Because it’s literally never happened to me. When was the last time you were prevented from driving down the street until you showed someone your driver’s license? The only time I have to show someone my license when it comes to driving is when the nice officer thinks I’m speeding, my tags are expired, or I’m actually renting a vehicle. I suppose you got me on swiping my badge at work. But I guess I should clarify, I don’t want having to show vaccination status to be normalized as a requirement for participation in public life.
You’re right about having to swipe my badge at work to get in. I suppose I should have clarified that I don’t want having to show proof of vaccination to be required just to participate in public life. My workplace isn’t public and neither is Costco (it’s a private club). I didn’t balk at having to wear a mask nor am I upset that my employer required me to get vaccination as a condition of employment. But I’m going to get agitated if I can’t participate in public life without showing someone my papers.
Unfortunately, we have to do this because of the numb-nuts in society that want to have the “freedum” to infect others with a deadly disease. The only alternative to showing ID at public places is forced immunizations.
A restaurant is not a public place. It is a private business that can ask for proof that you are not spreading a dangerous disease before you enter. Likewise stores. Museums are generally run by registered societies. They also have the right to keep diseased people out. Going to a museum is nice, but you can get along without it - it’s not a “right”. Perhaps is is necessary for you to go to a government office like the post office … in this case, they may need to have an accommodation for disease spreaders - maybe an outside wicket with plexiglass and a speaker system.
These anti-vaxxers are essentially demanding the “right” to randomly punch people directly in the face, with no consequences. No. They do not have the right to harm others.
A public space is generally understood to be any private or publicly owned property where there is a specific or implied invitation to the public enter. Restaurants, grocery stores, movie theaters, etc., etc. all typically public places in most states. A private club can exclude anyone they want, even for typically protected traits such as race, gender, or sexual orientation, but most areas open to the public, such as a restaurant or a concert hall, cannot. However, I don’t have any objection to the owner of a restaurant requiring proof of vaccination to enter their establishment. What I objected to was Mnemnosyne’s wish to prohibit anyone from not being vaccinated from being in public places.
Anyway, I’ll just take it as wishful thinking and not something anyone has the political will to implement in the long term.
They don’t have politics in those countries?
Um, no, I am definitely not down with this. I thought I was as pro-vax as they come, but apparently there’s at least one person way to the left of me.
You realize the flu shot is an annual thing, right? At what point in each year does someone have to be vaccinated to get their damn groceries?
What about tetanus? That’s a safe and effective vaccine, but it also hurts like hell and makes it hard to do physical labor for a few days after. It’s also not an epidemic, so not really any of my business if someone wants to delay a bit until they have some downtime, or just skip it entirely and hope they still have access to it if they ever step on a rusty nail.
Shingles? Presumably that’ll only be mandated over a certain age? Will there be a grace period? What about the chicken pox vaccine for those of us too old to have gotten it before the actual pox was upon us? How do we prove it? I didn’t know I was gonna need records of that when I was four.
There’s a safe and effective vaccine for Yellow Fever. That’s another not-fun one to get, but it’s a good idea if you’re going to Africa. Those of us just going to a concert here in the Western hemisphere should be able to continue not getting it.
I suppose I could qualify by saying 'any disease which easily transmits human-to-human, and which there’s a non-negligible chance of encountering. So that would exclude a requirement for things like tetanus which can’t spread person-to-person, and exclude things like yellow fever for which there’s a negligible chance of catching it. But the flu vaccine, yes, would have to get it every year, and I’m sure experts could figure out a date by which it is reasonable to require that it be gotten.
The point was basically ‘if there’s a disease which there’s a non-negligible chance of catching and spreading to others, everyone should be required to be vaccinated’.
And as a final addendum, if I could single-handedly mandate such a thing, obviously all such vaccinations would be free just like the current COVID vaccine is; if it’s a requirement to get something, it would be absurd to require us to pay for it.
Still not on board. I’m in favor of the current requirements for vaccines for school, and oppose religious or personal belief exemptions. I’d be open to broadening those requirements to include flu shots for school kids and adults in certain professions, although I still have reservations I’m not willing to shrug off as “eh, the experts will figure it out.” There are second-order consequences to consider, including but not limited to parents homeschooling their kids or workers leaving, which have been discussed in this thread. I feel the consequences of allowing people to forgo the COVID vaccine are so dire they warrant a gamble with those second-order consequences, and my hope is that enough people will capitulate, because COVID is so severe, that those second-order consequences won’t be too dramatic. But I don’t feel the same way about the flu. I get my shot every year and encourage everyone who will listen (and even those who about-face and walk briskly away) to do the same. But if your argument is that COVID is no worse than the annual flu and merits the same public policies, you’ve got some bad company.
Nah, that’s not it at all. I just feel that if a transmittable (especially easily-transmittable) disease is preventable in the majority of cases, nobody should be allowed to intentionally be a reservoir and spreader of that disease, since vaccines aren’t 100% effective.
Now if the vaccines were perfectly effective and there were no people that medically could not receive them, then whatever. But I don’t think people should be allowed to intentionally make it much more likely that they will spread disease. Even if people only catch a mild illness, I don’t think they should have to be exposed to that if it could have been prevented, and I think part of being allowed to be around other people is taking reasonable steps to prevent that.