Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

OSHA to require employers with 100 employees vaccinate or test workforce

whitehouse.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

521–530 of 1001 posts

Re: OSHA to require employers with 100 employees vaccinate or test workforce

#521

Post by TOMDM »

ctrlp wrote: post #492
TOMDM wrote: post #287

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If it weren't already standard, there is no way we'd be able to mandate seat belts today. EDIT: I'm pro seatbelt just in case that needed clarifying

Are you pro-motorcycle helmet as well? I don't ride but my understanding is there is disagreement about the relative protection of a helmet vs compromised visibility, yet most states in the US mandate helmets. Maybe some motorcyclists could clarify.

Plenty of motorcyclists would also argue that louder exhausts are safer but the data doesn't bare that out either.

Yes I'm pro motorcycle helmet.

Re: OSHA to require employers with 100 employees vaccinate or test workforce

#522

Post by [deleted] »

UncleMeat wrote: post #476
zxcvbn4038 wrote: post #462

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Smoking kills 500,000 people per year in the US - which is only slightly less then COVID at current rates - I don't see anyone rushing to shut that down. Heart disease kills 650,000 per year, but there is still a McDonalds and Taco Bell on every corner.

There are absolutely enormous anti-smoking adversing and education campaigns. Cigarettes are mandated by law to have very specific packaging that loudly lists the risk of death. Large taxes are placed on them. In a great many places you are not allowed to smoke in public. Smokers have higher health insurance premiums and cannot access certain kinds of medical care like various organ transplants. Selling a cigarette t…

[deleted]

Re: OSHA to require employers with 100 employees vaccinate or test workforce

#523

Post by lax4ever »

UncleMeat wrote: post #476
zxcvbn4038 wrote: post #462

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Smoking kills 500,000 people per year in the US - which is only slightly less then COVID at current rates - I don't see anyone rushing to shut that down. Heart disease kills 650,000 per year, but there is still a McDonalds and Taco Bell on every corner.

There are absolutely enormous anti-smoking adversing and education campaigns. Cigarettes are mandated by law to have very specific packaging that loudly lists the risk of death. Large taxes are placed on them. In a great many places you are not allowed to smoke in public. Smokers have higher health insurance premiums and cannot access certain kinds of medical care like various organ transplants. Selling a cigarette t…

The difference being that people's general livelihoods are not being affected by these campaigns and requirements. The choice is still available to people even if there are restrictions on use and distribution. That is not the case with the vaccine.

Re: OSHA to require employers with 100 employees vaccinate or test workforce

#525

Post by boplicity »

disneygibson wrote: post #430
boplicity wrote: post #420

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am open to hearing a coherent description of the specific "cost to freedom" of taking one of the widely available COVID vaccines.

I don’t think most people have an issue with voluntary vaccination. The problem is when nefarious actors use the situation to create a surveillance state, social credit system, and then exclude people from doing simple human things like eating at a restaurant. Australia is the future of the Western world.

> Surveillance state

If that exists, it existed before COVID, and vaccinations against COVID certainly haven't changed that.

> Social credit system

Are you referring to mandates? These have been a thing, in the U.S., for many decades

> exclude people from doing simple human things

Vaccine mandates have excluded people from things far more important than restaurants, such as education, for many decades. This is not new to COVID.

You seem to be arguing against a system that has existed for many, many years.

Re: OSHA to require employers with 100 employees vaccinate or test workforce

#526

Post by _fat_santa »

leesalminen wrote: post #422
_fat_santa wrote: post #243

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I just hate that there seems to be zero nuance now on the topic. According to the media you're in one of two camps. Camp 1: Pro vaccine, pro mask, pro lockdown, pro doing anything and everything the government says. Camp 2: Anti vaxx, anti mask, anti lockdown, trump supporter, Jan 7th attendee, etc. And it seems that now more than ever, if you're not 10000% in Camp 1, you're automatically assumed to be in Camp 2

What happened on January 7th?

Sorry I meant the 6th. Capitol riot in DC.

Re: OSHA to require employers with 100 employees vaccinate or test workforce

#527

Post by disneygibson »

TooKool4This wrote: post #510
ctrlp wrote: post #203

Whether or not you agree if there is legal authority for mandates for this vaccine or this pandemic, where does it end? The trajectory we're on is for all people to be monitored by the State for compliance with the vaccine programs. Israel is already saying 4 shots (and more) will required [0] to participate in that society. Australia, New Zealand, and Canada are quasi-police states [1] and will probably mandate vacc…

> Australia, New Zealand, and Canada are quasi-police states [1] and will probably mandate vaccination+boosters soon. Regardless of whatever metric you use to define “freedom” all of those countries rank higher than the US pre-Covid for “freedom”[1][2][3]. If your argument is that those countries are fundamentally “less-free” post-Covid due to public health measures, I don’t see the data to support that. To imply tha…

Have you been following the events in Australia, at all?

Linking to pre-Covid sources is a bit like linking to a pre-Hiroshima encyclopedia entry about nuclear energy.

Re: OSHA to require employers with 100 employees vaccinate or test workforce

#528

Post by R0b0t1 »

OneEyedRobot wrote: post #371
da_big_ghey wrote: post #322

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then why did we fight a war on keeping them together. Maybe both would be happier if south and middle states split from coast ones.

I'd say that the pressure for fission becomes higher as the scope of federal government increases. Using spending as an approximation for control: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/FYONGDA188S WWII being an outlier of course. I'd like to have the numbers for the 19th C. There was a time when a state/county/municipality could largely ignore central government diktat. With centralization there'll be a tendency for a s…

I agree, a lot of problems seem to stem from over-reliance on federal authority to solve problems. It can get a bit reductionist but people are essentially mad they are not able to live in the way they want.

Re: OSHA to require employers with 100 employees vaccinate or test workforce

#529

Post by furgooswft13 »

UncleMeat wrote: post #476
zxcvbn4038 wrote: post #462

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Smoking kills 500,000 people per year in the US - which is only slightly less then COVID at current rates - I don't see anyone rushing to shut that down. Heart disease kills 650,000 per year, but there is still a McDonalds and Taco Bell on every corner.

There are absolutely enormous anti-smoking adversing and education campaigns. Cigarettes are mandated by law to have very specific packaging that loudly lists the risk of death. Large taxes are placed on them. In a great many places you are not allowed to smoke in public. Smokers have higher health insurance premiums and cannot access certain kinds of medical care like various organ transplants. Selling a cigarette t…

Who is trying to get people fired from their jobs because they smoke?

Re: OSHA to require employers with 100 employees vaccinate or test workforce

#530

Post by [deleted] »

lalaland1125 wrote: post #9
walterbell wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because it alters the risk/benefit calculus. A sterilizing vaccine that stops transmission in its tracks, has a clear public health benefit to every part of society, even if there are risks. A non-sterilizing vaccine does not provide that society-wide public health benefit, leaving the employer to bear risks without benefit.

But the COVID vaccine does provide a society-wide public health benefit. Our best available data indicates that it reduces the risk of transmission, even for Delta [1]. 1. https://www.acsh.org/news/2021/09/07/covid-19-vaccines-preve...

[deleted]
Post reply on HN