Should the government make vaccination compulsory?

Page 10 of 12 [ 187 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12  Next

RetroGamer87
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Jul 2013
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,267
Location: Adelaide, Australia

01 Jan 2022, 8:18 am

goldfish21 wrote:
People have had enough time to get vaccinated and there's probably enough supply in Canada and the USA to have completed the job.. but people aren't all getting vaccinated because they've been convinced by conspiracy theories and "you can't make me, freedoms1!!" BS sold to them by right wing media and tinfoil hat types.

I don't think more time is going to help with that.


_________________
The days are long, but the years are short


AngelRho
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Jan 2008
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,107
Location: The Landmass between N.O. and Mobile

01 Jan 2022, 9:16 am

RetroGamer87 wrote:
goldfish21 wrote:
People have had enough time to get vaccinated and there's probably enough supply in Canada and the USA to have completed the job.. but people aren't all getting vaccinated because they've been convinced by conspiracy theories and "you can't make me, freedoms1!!" BS sold to them by right wing media and tinfoil hat types.

I don't think more time is going to help with that.

No, and I can tell you that it’s not just a right-wing thing. I live in a predominantly black neighborhood, and most of my friends here are highly skeptical of the vaccine.

A very small part of it was that Trump spearheaded developing the vaccine and distributing it, meanwhile leftists were publicly putting up heavy resistance. After Trump left office, support for the vaccine radically shifted in its favor. But there was still so much hesitancy in getting the vaccine, which I believe is due to lingering effects of liberal propaganda coinciding with the final days of Trump’s term.



ironpony
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 3 Nov 2015
Age: 38
Posts: 5,504
Location: canada

01 Jan 2022, 12:21 pm

AngelRho wrote:
RetroGamer87 wrote:
goldfish21 wrote:
People have had enough time to get vaccinated and there's probably enough supply in Canada and the USA to have completed the job.. but people aren't all getting vaccinated because they've been convinced by conspiracy theories and "you can't make me, freedoms1!!" BS sold to them by right wing media and tinfoil hat types.

I don't think more time is going to help with that.

No, and I can tell you that it’s not just a right-wing thing. I live in a predominantly black neighborhood, and most of my friends here are highly skeptical of the vaccine.

A very small part of it was that Trump spearheaded developing the vaccine and distributing it, meanwhile leftists were publicly putting up heavy resistance. After Trump left office, support for the vaccine radically shifted in its favor. But there was still so much hesitancy in getting the vaccine, which I believe is due to lingering effects of liberal propaganda coinciding with the final days of Trump’s term.


Why did support change for the vaccine after Trump left office? I mean it's still the same vaccine isn't it, and it's not like they changed the recipe of it just because Trump left. So why did support change when it's still the same vaccine?



AngelRho
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Jan 2008
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,107
Location: The Landmass between N.O. and Mobile

01 Jan 2022, 2:40 pm

ironpony wrote:
AngelRho wrote:
RetroGamer87 wrote:
goldfish21 wrote:
People have had enough time to get vaccinated and there's probably enough supply in Canada and the USA to have completed the job.. but people aren't all getting vaccinated because they've been convinced by conspiracy theories and "you can't make me, freedoms1!!" BS sold to them by right wing media and tinfoil hat types.

I don't think more time is going to help with that.

No, and I can tell you that it’s not just a right-wing thing. I live in a predominantly black neighborhood, and most of my friends here are highly skeptical of the vaccine.

A very small part of it was that Trump spearheaded developing the vaccine and distributing it, meanwhile leftists were publicly putting up heavy resistance. After Trump left office, support for the vaccine radically shifted in its favor. But there was still so much hesitancy in getting the vaccine, which I believe is due to lingering effects of liberal propaganda coinciding with the final days of Trump’s term.


Why did support change for the vaccine after Trump left office? I mean it's still the same vaccine isn't it, and it's not like they changed the recipe of it just because Trump left. So why did support change when it's still the same vaccine?

Democratic Party M.O. has consistently been to oppose anything they cannot exploit for political advantage and sing the praises of anything that they can exploit to their advantage.

Democratic ideals are almost strictly collectivist by nature. The working theory is 1) Oppressed, minority, special victim classes exist; 2) Exploit needy people (see 1) by creating and demonizing a common enemy, typically rich, white people--race/wealth/status isn't that important, it's really more about the dominant cultural hegemony. If a Republican succeeds in making a life-saving vaccine available, it's a problem because it is rushed and safety/effectiveness haven't been proven yet. But if a Democrat is in power and the metaphorical cat is out of the bag in terms of vaccine availability, well, suddenly it's the best thing since bottled beer, we're going to make sure EVERYONE can get the vaccine, and we'll punish people who don't like us by implementing vaccine mandates.

New vaccines do not support a Democratic Party, collectivist narrative. It's easy to put an entire economy on lockdown because that means productive people are unable to create wealth. They remain on par with economically disadvantaged people. Vaccines eliminate challenges and common enemies and erode the necessity of collective solidarity for which everyone must sacrifice their freedom. As long as people are sick and dependent on government, collectivists can maintain their grip on power.

Now...if a life-saving vaccine IS developed, it's almost by accident. You have to follow the narrative. Remember, collectivist voters are the oppressed, the victimized, so now to protect the victims ALL people are REQUIRED to get the vaccine. Victims are required to get the vaccine to minimize cost to the state from hospitalization or from medical claims filed at home, and the dominant cultural hegemony is required to get the vaccine in order to prevent spreading the virus to victim communities.

This prompts immediate reactions from people of all walks of life, whether they are protected grievance groups or they are productive people. Grievance groups are going to see the vaccine as the resu Republican policy, something that is rushed and untested and potentially harmful, or they are going to see it as a new means of control devised by the hegemony. Conservatives are going to view the vaccine as something coopted by liberals and used as a political weapon. In either case, those who are hesitant to get the vaccine see it as more than potentially harmful and do not trust the government to have their best interests in mind.

Both views are highly irrational. It is a freakin' VACCINE. It works to help develop a short-term immunity to a deadly virus, decrease complications in those who get breakout infections, and helps keep the economy running. However, mandating vaccination is objectively harmful because it negatively impacts individual freedom and agency. As I said in my post before, any time a person declines getting a vaccine, the consequences are simply that HE gets sick. Quarantining mandates, of course, also limit freedom, but is reasonable and objective because it means that the government is only functioning in its proper role of protecting healthy people by limiting contact with those who are actually sick. If someone has a mental illness that causes them to be violent, they are institutionalized or medicated to prevent them from harming themselves and others. If someone commits violent crimes, he's incarcerated to prevent contact with others he would harm if he has his freedom. If someone declares war on your country, you kill him. There's nothing wrong with that since it is the protection of individual well-being and freedom that is in view. Quarantining is no different than medicating the mentally ill or keeping criminals in jail. The expectation is that one may be released from quarantine once he is healthy and no longer a threat. People who ARE healthy, though, are not a threat to others. But if they become sick, they become a threat.

It is in your best interest to get the vaccine. But it is not right for the government to compel citizens to get it.

And politically, collectivists have more to gain by keeping people sick. If they are unable to control the vaccine, at least they can use the vaccine to control people. It is the principle of government maintaining control over individuals that is best served by compulsory vaccination. Personally, I would strongly urge people to go ahead and get the vaccine while it remains a voluntary choice to do so.



RetroGamer87
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Jul 2013
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,267
Location: Adelaide, Australia

01 Jan 2022, 8:30 pm

AngelRho invents fictional scenario and then gets angry about it.

AngelRho wrote:
Democratic Party M.O. has consistently been to oppose anything they cannot exploit for political advantage and sing the praises of anything that they can exploit to their advantage.

Democratic ideals are almost strictly collectivist by nature. The working theory is 1) Oppressed, minority, special victim classes exist; 2) Exploit needy people (see 1) by creating and demonizing a common enemy, typically rich, white people--race/wealth/status isn't that important, it's really more about the dominant cultural hegemony. If a Republican succeeds in making a life-saving vaccine available, it's a problem because it is rushed and safety/effectiveness haven't been proven yet. But if a Democrat is in power and the metaphorical cat is out of the bag in terms of vaccine availability, well, suddenly it's the best thing since bottled beer, we're going to make sure EVERYONE can get the vaccine, and we'll punish people who don't like us by implementing vaccine mandates.

New vaccines do not support a Democratic Party, collectivist narrative. It's easy to put an entire economy on lockdown because that means productive people are unable to create wealth. They remain on par with economically disadvantaged people. Vaccines eliminate challenges and common enemies and erode the necessity of collective solidarity for which everyone must sacrifice their freedom. As long as people are sick and dependent on government, collectivists can maintain their grip on power.


_________________
The days are long, but the years are short


AngelRho
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Jan 2008
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,107
Location: The Landmass between N.O. and Mobile

01 Jan 2022, 11:27 pm

RetroGamer87 wrote:
AngelRho invents fictional scenario and then gets angry about it.

AngelRho wrote:
Democratic Party M.O. has consistently been to oppose anything they cannot exploit for political advantage and sing the praises of anything that they can exploit to their advantage.

Democratic ideals are almost strictly collectivist by nature. The working theory is 1) Oppressed, minority, special victim classes exist; 2) Exploit needy people (see 1) by creating and demonizing a common enemy, typically rich, white people--race/wealth/status isn't that important, it's really more about the dominant cultural hegemony. If a Republican succeeds in making a life-saving vaccine available, it's a problem because it is rushed and safety/effectiveness haven't been proven yet. But if a Democrat is in power and the metaphorical cat is out of the bag in terms of vaccine availability, well, suddenly it's the best thing since bottled beer, we're going to make sure EVERYONE can get the vaccine, and we'll punish people who don't like us by implementing vaccine mandates.

New vaccines do not support a Democratic Party, collectivist narrative. It's easy to put an entire economy on lockdown because that means productive people are unable to create wealth. They remain on par with economically disadvantaged people. Vaccines eliminate challenges and common enemies and erode the necessity of collective solidarity for which everyone must sacrifice their freedom. As long as people are sick and dependent on government, collectivists can maintain their grip on power.

Who’s angry? It doesn’t affect me. All I do is observe things, analyze patterns, and draw conclusions. I think both political parties in the US are stupid.

As far as fiction goes…well, do you believe something is real because it exists apart from the mind, or is something real because the narrative makes it real? Because if it is all purely narrative, all I can say to that is you have your fiction and I have mine.



Fixxer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Mar 2021
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,448

01 Jan 2022, 11:35 pm

The government should stop trying to break down the human population. We aware that the current living conditions are atrocious, much worst than the actual effects of the virus, which is SOOO overtalked and overpraised. I don’t know much about that new religion. Imma do my thing, people are going crazy out there. I’m not scared of the virus, but of the converted people acting like preachers out there. They are spreading the disease, just like the media, including social media.



vividgroovy
Sea Gull
Sea Gull

Joined: 20 Dec 2018
Gender: Male
Posts: 232
Location: Santa Maria, CA

02 Jan 2022, 3:48 am

I don't know if it *should* be made mandatory, but for one thing, it would make things clearer. Biden's "losing patience" comment and other such remarks seem to suggest, "You have a choice, but if you don't choose what we want you to, we'd like to take your choice away." That's very confusing.



ironpony
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 3 Nov 2015
Age: 38
Posts: 5,504
Location: canada

02 Jan 2022, 12:30 pm

Why is Biden taking it so personally though? Why doesn't he just admit defeat and say well I can't win this one, I might as well concentrate on other things. But it's as if Biden is taking it personally, like covid is his personal archnemesis for revenge for something.



goldfish21
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Feb 2013
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 17,820
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada

02 Jan 2022, 1:03 pm

ironpony wrote:
Why is Biden taking it so personally though? Why doesn't he just admit defeat and say well I can't win this one, I might as well concentrate on other things. But it's as if Biden is taking it personally, like covid is his personal archnemesis for revenge for something.


He's supposed to lead the citizens of the country he's governing.. and ~30% of them or whatever are refusing to do what's medically/scientifically good for them, the country, the economy etc. Of course it's frustrating for Biden - and since people blame the leader for things that go wrong, of course he takes it personally. Getting America and Americans out of the pandemic IS the major challenge of his job right now. Why wouldn't he be taking it on and doing what he can and getting frustrated with idiots working against his efforts?

Why should he take the "Pandemic? What pandemic? Who cares??!" approach that trump took? That's not a good look. Ignoring covid is part of what made it kill more than 800,000 Americans so far. It's a good thing that Biden's been making an honest effort to combat covid and save lives.

But the Biden Administration does have to shift gears and change their message.. no government can beat covid - it's here to stay - it's endemic and hopefully it just fizzles out to a flu/fever/cold. Surviving the pandemic long enough to get people vaccinated and have the virus mutate and weaken significantly needs to be measured as a win vs. an objective of eliminating covid - because that's never gonna happen.


_________________
No :heart: for supporting trump. Because doing so is deplorable.


ironpony
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 3 Nov 2015
Age: 38
Posts: 5,504
Location: canada

02 Jan 2022, 1:38 pm

goldfish21 wrote:
ironpony wrote:
Why is Biden taking it so personally though? Why doesn't he just admit defeat and say well I can't win this one, I might as well concentrate on other things. But it's as if Biden is taking it personally, like covid is his personal archnemesis for revenge for something.


He's supposed to lead the citizens of the country he's governing.. and ~30% of them or whatever are refusing to do what's medically/scientifically good for them, the country, the economy etc. Of course it's frustrating for Biden - and since people blame the leader for things that go wrong, of course he takes it personally. Getting America and Americans out of the pandemic IS the major challenge of his job right now. Why wouldn't he be taking it on and doing what he can and getting frustrated with idiots working against his efforts?

Why should he take the "Pandemic? What pandemic? Who cares??!" approach that trump took? That's not a good look. Ignoring covid is part of what made it kill more than 800,000 Americans so far. It's a good thing that Biden's been making an honest effort to combat covid and save lives.

But the Biden Administration does have to shift gears and change their message.. no government can beat covid - it's here to stay - it's endemic and hopefully it just fizzles out to a flu/fever/cold. Surviving the pandemic long enough to get people vaccinated and have the virus mutate and weaken significantly needs to be measured as a win vs. an objective of eliminating covid - because that's never gonna happen.


But not everyone is going to agree with a leader, and leaders shouldn't take that personally. He should learn to deflect criticism better, and learn that not everyone is going to do as you say as leader, and that's part of the job as well.



goldfish21
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Feb 2013
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 17,820
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada

02 Jan 2022, 1:45 pm

ironpony wrote:
goldfish21 wrote:
ironpony wrote:
Why is Biden taking it so personally though? Why doesn't he just admit defeat and say well I can't win this one, I might as well concentrate on other things. But it's as if Biden is taking it personally, like covid is his personal archnemesis for revenge for something.


He's supposed to lead the citizens of the country he's governing.. and ~30% of them or whatever are refusing to do what's medically/scientifically good for them, the country, the economy etc. Of course it's frustrating for Biden - and since people blame the leader for things that go wrong, of course he takes it personally. Getting America and Americans out of the pandemic IS the major challenge of his job right now. Why wouldn't he be taking it on and doing what he can and getting frustrated with idiots working against his efforts?

Why should he take the "Pandemic? What pandemic? Who cares??!" approach that trump took? That's not a good look. Ignoring covid is part of what made it kill more than 800,000 Americans so far. It's a good thing that Biden's been making an honest effort to combat covid and save lives.

But the Biden Administration does have to shift gears and change their message.. no government can beat covid - it's here to stay - it's endemic and hopefully it just fizzles out to a flu/fever/cold. Surviving the pandemic long enough to get people vaccinated and have the virus mutate and weaken significantly needs to be measured as a win vs. an objective of eliminating covid - because that's never gonna happen.


But not everyone is going to agree with a leader, and leaders shouldn't take that personally. He should learn to deflect criticism better, and learn that not everyone is going to do as you say as leader, and that's part of the job as well.


Why wouldn't a leader be frustrated that they couldn't lead 30% of their team? :?


_________________
No :heart: for supporting trump. Because doing so is deplorable.


ironpony
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 3 Nov 2015
Age: 38
Posts: 5,504
Location: canada

02 Jan 2022, 1:49 pm

Well why doesn't Biden just kick them off the team and lead the other 70 percent? I guess I think it's a leader's just to kick off the non-team players.



goldfish21
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Feb 2013
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 17,820
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada

02 Jan 2022, 2:05 pm

ironpony wrote:
Well why doesn't Biden just kick them off the team and lead the other 70 percent? I guess I think it's a leader's just to kick off the non-team players.


How do you suggest he do that? Exile 100 Million American citizens? Banish them all to where? Or just revoke their citizenship and let them all work in the agricultural industry like other non-citizens in America ? :?


_________________
No :heart: for supporting trump. Because doing so is deplorable.


ironpony
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 3 Nov 2015
Age: 38
Posts: 5,504
Location: canada

02 Jan 2022, 2:06 pm

goldfish21 wrote:
ironpony wrote:
Well why doesn't Biden just kick them off the team and lead the other 70 percent? I guess I think it's a leader's just to kick off the non-team players.


How do you suggest he do that? Exile 100 Million American citizens? Banish them all to where? Or just revoke their citizenship and let them all work in the agricultural industry like other non-citizens in America ? :?


No just ignore their criticisms, and just not let them bother him. Just lead the 70s percent of the real team he has and ignore the ones who do not want to be on the team, or who are unfit to be on the team.



goldfish21
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Feb 2013
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 17,820
Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada

02 Jan 2022, 2:17 pm

ironpony wrote:
goldfish21 wrote:
ironpony wrote:
Well why doesn't Biden just kick them off the team and lead the other 70 percent? I guess I think it's a leader's just to kick off the non-team players.


How do you suggest he do that? Exile 100 Million American citizens? Banish them all to where? Or just revoke their citizenship and let them all work in the agricultural industry like other non-citizens in America ? :?


No just ignore their criticisms, and just not let them bother him. Just lead the 70s percent of the real team he has and ignore the ones who do not want to be on the team, or who are unfit to be on the team.


That's not the job of the leader of a country to just ignore 30% of the population and measure their successes based only on their supporters. They're supposed to lead the entire country and the results of the entire country are the measures of their leadership's success.


_________________
No :heart: for supporting trump. Because doing so is deplorable.