Quoted post unavailable.
No post body was provided.
Unvaccinated workers who lose jobs ineligible for unemployment benefits (Canada)
321–330 of 600 posts
Re: Unvaccinated workers who lose jobs ineligible for unemployment benefits (Canada)
#322Earlier quoted context omitted.
Quoted post unavailable.
The penalty in the case is irrelevant to the nature of the government's power. Also equating vaccines to apartheid is unrealistic and in poor taste.
No, it is very much relevant. And, systematic denial of employment, education, access to government services etc to a group based on a medical condition very much is apartheid. It is in poor taste to deny it, but I guess the apologists in South Africa were legalistically talking about “nature of the government’s power” too.
Re: Unvaccinated workers who lose jobs ineligible for unemployment benefits (Canada)
#323Earlier quoted context omitted.
Um… I think we have a fundamental disagreement on what sources of information we cite! Do you have non-governmental sources of information we can mutually agree upon to discuss instead? Thank you!
Quoted post unavailable.
No post body was provided.
Re: Unvaccinated workers who lose jobs ineligible for unemployment benefits (Canada)
#324Earlier quoted context omitted.
Will I? Show me the data for high vaccination outbreak size == low vaccination outbreak size. I think your opinion is based on unrelated data.
You can't do a comparison like that because there are absolutely no 2 countries like each other and how they count cases is also different so that data does not exist. You can however look at what's happening in a single country despite the vaccination: Portugal, with close to 90% vaccination rate, is getting the highest rates of infection ever as we speak. https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/portugal/…
This argument is scientifically (which you wanted) void: since you are not making a comparison with a low vaccination country, it does not make any sense. Try harder.
I'll give you an example: Russia with relatively low vaccination rates has close to the highest number of excess deaths per capita. Portugal you mentioned is not even close.
> are absolutely no 2 countries like each other
fortunately there are like 200+ of them, so one should be able to see a trend. Even the 50 US states would work.
From what I see you are the one not understanding science and ignoring facts here. You just dismissed my first link based on an irrelevant claim that countries with high vaccination rates still have outbreaks (duh).
Re: Unvaccinated workers who lose jobs ineligible for unemployment benefits (Canada)
#325Earlier quoted context omitted.
Quoted post unavailable.
No, they can believe what they want as far as I’m concerned. Completely physically excluding them from society is enough. If they want to ‘protect’ themselves from the vaccine they have that right, absolutely, but the rest of us also have the right to protect ourselves from them.
> the rest of us also have the right to protect ourselves from them
How does your right to protect yourself lead to a right to exclude someone else from society?
Re: Unvaccinated workers who lose jobs ineligible for unemployment benefits (Canada)
#326Earlier quoted context omitted.
> blocked from receiving government services Quite the hyperbole: not all government services, just employment insurance and that too if you were only fired for not receiving the vaccine. A reminder that in many of these jobs, there was already a requirement for getting a set of vaccines so this is not new. Though for some people, this vaccine is "different" but once you ask them to explain why they can't. So no new…
> "You are still free to drive to work or take local public transit." Then the whole point of this thing is pointless. We're selectively punishing people. We don't prevent or punish positive cases from going around to work, public transport, etc and infecting others, yet we punish people that choose to simply not vaccinate. > "If you cannot participate in society moving forward, then you should not expect society to…
> Then the whole point of this thing is pointless. We're selectively punishing people. We don't prevent or punish positive cases from going around to work, public transport, etc and infecting others, yet we punish people that choose to simply not vaccinate.
It's not pointless. Unvaccinated people are far far more likely to occupy the hospital and the ICU -- see above. How is that pointless? I am not talking about positivity as that is not relevant. See the official numbers above.
Your hyperbole is not valid as these jobs already required vaccinations so I am not sure what the new outrage is.
Re: Unvaccinated workers who lose jobs ineligible for unemployment benefits (Canada)
#327It seems we are heading in a direction where those who don't take the jab will be blocked from receiving government services, prevented from patronizing various businesses, and even restricted from traveling and the ability to work. Are most citizens really okay with this medical apartheid, or are they afraid of speaking out against it?
It's incredibly offensive to compare differences in treatment based on some people's choice to knowingly putting others at risk with oppression on the basis of something people could not change.
Re: Unvaccinated workers who lose jobs ineligible for unemployment benefits (Canada)
#328Re: Unvaccinated workers who lose jobs ineligible for unemployment benefits (Canada)
#329I've been asking friends that believe in such punishments whether they would have punished gay people in the 1990s that got AIDS. Condoms are extremely effective at preventing transmission. Invariably no one wants to go there. Gay people with AIDS that didn't use a condom are to be cried over in our society, while those with COVID that didn't take the vaccine are to be punished.
Beyond the other obvious problems with your comment, you're also missing the fact that many of the people dying of AIDS died 10+ years after contracting the virus, substantially before any of the science on HIV spread was settled.
By the 1990s you would have had to live under a rock not to know to use condoms.
Re: Unvaccinated workers who lose jobs ineligible for unemployment benefits (Canada)
#330Earlier quoted context omitted.
Under 50 has 20% of ICU cases (how many are incidental and without comorbidity?).
You are the one who made the claim that age is relevant to this when it is not as if the ICUs are full, it impacts everyone. So maybe find the source and share it here since you are the one who made the argument? Burden of proof is on you, not me.
No post body was provided.