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

Unvaccinated workers who lose jobs ineligible for unemployment benefits (Canada)

edmontonjournal.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 600 posts

Re: Unvaccinated workers who lose jobs ineligible for unemployment benefits (Canada)

#171

Post by hrhrhrhrhr »

jquery wrote: post #134
hrhrhrhrhr wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Violating NAP requires taking some action, you can't just "aggress" by not doing anything.

Quoted post unavailable.

No, NAP is pretty clear. It's just some people treat it as a silver bullet, when it's only a fundamental building block. Libertarians are not against having contractual jurisdictions which would mandate being vaccinated on a certain territory, as long as you can quit that jurisdiction at any time.

It's not clear that getting vaccinated would stop you from spreading the virus though.

Re: Unvaccinated workers who lose jobs ineligible for unemployment benefits (Canada)

#172

Post by LaunchAway1 »

kstenerud wrote: post #50

To clarify for non-Canadians: EI benefits are generally only given if you lose your employment through no fault of your own (didn't quit or get fired). What this policy does is clarify that losing work hours or your job due to vaccine refusal after a workplace vaccination mandate (outside of medical exemptions) does NOT count as "through no fault of your own", and instructs employers to indicate as such. So: For the…

That's an interesting point to make and defendable but these declarations mentioned in another comment, I will assume to be true, coming from Trudeau, Canada's president:

“They don’t believe in science/progress and are very often misogynistic and racist....This leads us, as a leader and as a country, to make a choice: Do we tolerate these people?"

I have taken both shots, and will take the third but these declarations are appropriate for a mad man, not a country leader.

Re: Unvaccinated workers who lose jobs ineligible for unemployment benefits (Canada)

#173

Post by thakoppno »

logicalmonster wrote: post #49
Ardon wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If a seatbelt doest stop you from dying in 100% of car crashes, I don't understand why they're mandatory?

Whatever one thinks about seatbelts and the ethics of seatbelt laws, they’re a horrendously bad analogy for “vaccines”. A seatbelt can always be removed after use. A “vaccine” cannot. If somebody is concerned about potential issues with the “vaccine” comparing it to a seatbelt feels disingenuous because the “vaccine” can never be undone.

A seat belt you can’t take off.

Re: Unvaccinated workers who lose jobs ineligible for unemployment benefits (Canada)

#174

Post by MiroF »

kitd wrote: post #94
VoodooJuJu wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The vaccines do work by diminishing severity of symptoms and thus reducing rate of hospitalization. The unvaccinated are banned as means to put social and financial pressure on individuals to get the vaccine. It is an unfortunate misconception that any of the currently-approved intramuscular vaccines reduce transmission to a meaningful degree. This social and financial pressure is placed on individuals because urban…

It is an unfortunate misconception that any of the currently-approved intramuscular vaccines reduce transmission to a meaningful degree. Vaccines absolutely do reduce transmission from the vaccinated outward. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.newscientist.com/article/22...

your link does not work

Re: Unvaccinated workers who lose jobs ineligible for unemployment benefits (Canada)

#175

Post by mercy_dude »

Where is the court system? The court system has been very much in lines with these stupidities we have been seeing around mandates and so on, which makes me make a much more cynical claim. Leaders like Justin Trudeau don’t give a damn about science/progress and public health and well being for example. If they did, we wouldn’t be this far along the crisis and still be talking about this. My thinking is they are setting these things as a precedent (through legislative and court system rubber stamping these policies) for the next crisis. Could it be a looming debt crisis and using that crisis as a pretext to have more control on property rights and other basic rights in the constitution? Who knows. But if one thing, if a set of “experts” (who have been proven wrong in many instances and have done a terrible job in public communication) calls something a crisis then all your basic rights in constitution can be annulled using that as a pretext. That precedent has been established clearly and sadly court system has done nothing but rubber stamping this.

Re: Unvaccinated workers who lose jobs ineligible for unemployment benefits (Canada)

#176

Post by m-p-3 »

tdrdt wrote: post #144
roganp wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1% of the population dying a preventable death is alot of bodies.

Let's talk about eating unhealthy and heart diseases.

Which aren't transmissible through the air.

Re: Unvaccinated workers who lose jobs ineligible for unemployment benefits (Canada)

#177

Post by [deleted] »

decebalus1 wrote: post #99
NoblePublius wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There’s an Antarctic research station of entirely triple vaxxed people that is on complete lockdown now because most of them have Covid. I know 22 people who have gotten positive tests in the last two weeks, all vaccinated. Sports leagues practically 100% vaccinated and dozens and dozens and dozens of players out for Covid. I do not believe for one second any public health data today claiming only 1/5 new cases are v…

So is the WA state data invalid/faked/wrong? I mean this is literally a handful of anecdotes vs the department of health's data. Data showing similar results as in both nationwide and other countries (global level conspiracy I guess?). It's like me saying 'I can't believe for a second that Biden won the elections because everyone I know voted for Trump'

[deleted]

Re: Unvaccinated workers who lose jobs ineligible for unemployment benefits (Canada)

#178

Post by baskethead »

SamoyedFurFluff wrote: post #18
b3nji wrote: post #2

I don't understand, if the vaccines work then why the issue? However the vaccines don't stop you catching or spreading the virus, so why is this banning of the unvaccinated a thing? Very odd.

My understanding is that the vaccines aren’t completely effective at stopping you catching/spreading, but they are a whole lot better than being immune naive altogether. Casual googling has given me some Washington state pdf data that says even in the most robust cohort (13-29 year olds) unvaccinated folks get Covid at 3x the rate of unvaccinated and the differences only get more dramatic from there. If you have more…

No post body was provided.

Re: Unvaccinated workers who lose jobs ineligible for unemployment benefits (Canada)

#179

Post by throwaway55421 »

scrollaway wrote: post #4
b3nji wrote: post #2

I don't understand, if the vaccines work then why the issue? However the vaccines don't stop you catching or spreading the virus, so why is this banning of the unvaccinated a thing? Very odd.

> However the vaccines don't stop you catching or spreading the virus Vaccines reduce spread. Even if it doesn’t stop spread completely it’s still a significant factor.

Moving from 100% infected to 100% infected is not a reduction.

At some point, there is no realistic difference between R=10 and R=7. Everyone is getting this. Some of us have known that since March 2020.

If your theory includes "avoid being infected with coronavirus" and you live in a democratic country it is a flawed theory. Only full home isolation or hazmat suit rituals will suffice.

Re: Unvaccinated workers who lose jobs ineligible for unemployment benefits (Canada)

#180

Post by m-p-3 »

newsclues wrote: post #15
Ardon wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If a seatbelt doest stop you from dying in 100% of car crashes, I don't understand why they're mandatory?

Do we ban people from driving if they refuse to wear seatbelts?

You can if you rack up too many unpaid fines.
Post reply on HN