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

451–460 of 600 posts

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

#451

Post by bmeski »

evgen wrote: post #381
bmeski wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You seem to misunderstand the entire reason the U.S. was created. Don't like it, leave. Seriously.

The reality of the situation seems to be that we have all decided upon the proper collective course of action and you are the one who is in denial. You are the one who seems to have no clue why nations form, why this particular nation came into being, and what demands it has made over and over upon its citizens for the benefit of their fellow Americans. If you do not like it then you are the one who should leave. We,…

“We, the many, believe so much in the narrative that these vaccines are effective, despite the consistent spread of the disease it was aimed to stop, so much so that we will kick anyone out of society that does not agree with the collective mob. Most of which who are scientifically illiterate and get their news from talking heads and the revolving door of medical officials/pharma execs.”

Is this what you’re saying?

Galileo is rolling over in his grave.

Edit: also you didn’t decide shit.

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

#452

Post by bmeski »

scrollaway wrote: post #403
bmeski wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mandated COVID-19 vaccination of individuals with the current EUA approved vaccines. The devil is in the details. The EUA designation was pushed through because there was no other, "obvious" treatment (despite proven efficacy of a combination of prophylactic treatments). They are testing this thing on us. Even if it works I do not consent to be tested on.

As someone who actually tested a vaccine in phase 3 voluntarily, please do not put yourself in the same group as me. You got a jab hundreds of millions of people got. I got a jab a few thousand of people got. I got to install an app and log all sorts of things on it every couple days. You didn’t have to do that. You received a QR code to allow you to participate in a variety of things. I didn’t, and had to even-more-…

Exactly, why didn’t we all get that?

All I got was, “sit here for 15 minutes”.

I don't remember that for any other vaccine I’ve ever taken.

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

#453

Post by seneca »

ukj wrote: post #427
seneca wrote: post #270

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is absurd authoritarian double talk. That's like saying you're free to speak your mind, but you're also free to be executed for it. The government punishing you for an action you take (including indirectly, but purposefully) is a pretty good starting point for a definition of not being free to do it.

That is pretty absurd anti-authoritarian double talk also. Comparing being fired with being executed. The government isn’t punishing you because you broke a law - your employer (who happens to be the government) fired you for failing to adhere to conditions of employment. There is literally nothing the government (in any of its capacities) can do to you which would toggle your vaccination status without your consent.…

Honest question: do you believe that a contract someone signs with a gun to their head is legitimate?

If not, why not? At what point does compelled consent become illegitimate? I think most people agree a person with a gun to their head is under duress. After that it's just a matter of figuring out where the line is.

I personally believe the government threatening peoples' livelihood in order to compell them to be vaccinated is placing those people under duress, and can not be considered legitimate consent.

For what it's worth, I also think most healthy people ought to vaccinate themselves just as a matter of being good member of society.

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

#454

Post by scrollaway »

bmeski wrote: post #452
scrollaway wrote: post #403

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As someone who actually tested a vaccine in phase 3 voluntarily, please do not put yourself in the same group as me. You got a jab hundreds of millions of people got. I got a jab a few thousand of people got. I got to install an app and log all sorts of things on it every couple days. You didn’t have to do that. You received a QR code to allow you to participate in a variety of things. I didn’t, and had to even-more-…

Exactly, why didn’t we all get that? All I got was, “sit here for 15 minutes”. I don't remember that for any other vaccine I’ve ever taken.

I don't understand what else you were expecting.

The 15 min wait is because some known side effects manifest within those 15 minutes. Everything else is either minor, or extremely rare, or both. The US has the VAERS system if you want more on side effect reporting, but your doctor is supposed to do the work.

Either way, the vaccine was tested. That it didn't go through a 10 year trial period is because we didn't have the time. Will you suddenly explode or combust in 11 years? I can't prove you won't. I would happily put money on the negative though, care to wager?

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

#455

Post by bmeski »

scrollaway wrote: post #402
bmeski wrote: post #399

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The issue is much more nuanced. I will gladly take an FDA approved vaccine like any other for such reasons. None of the available ones right now are. Yes even Pfizer isn’t as the approved Pfizer vax (Comirnaty) is not the same exact vaccine as the one currently available/being used. Edit: In short, many of us fear that the regulatory processes that govern our healthcare have been hijacked by corporate interest. We al…

Why do you think specifically this has to do with corporate interests? Doesn’t Occam’s razor say that it’s just the fact the pandemic is destroying society and there is immense pressure from everywhere to accelerate usually very slow and bureaucratic processes because the risk reward ratio is completely different than the one for a vaccine for more contained diseases?

Yes, this virus is brutal and highly dangerous, which is why we need to do everything we can to stop it, not just somethings that are highly lucrative.

Why hasn’t the news or our medical governance brought up the fact that a small intranasal injection can greatly prevent transmission?

Source: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8026810/

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

#456

Post by ukj »

seneca wrote: post #453
ukj wrote: post #427

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is pretty absurd anti-authoritarian double talk also. Comparing being fired with being executed. The government isn’t punishing you because you broke a law - your employer (who happens to be the government) fired you for failing to adhere to conditions of employment. There is literally nothing the government (in any of its capacities) can do to you which would toggle your vaccination status without your consent.…

Honest question: do you believe that a contract someone signs with a gun to their head is legitimate? If not, why not? At what point does compelled consent become illegitimate? I think most people agree a person with a gun to their head is under duress. After that it's just a matter of figuring out where the line is. I personally believe the government threatening peoples' livelihood in order to compell them to be va…

Honest question: do you think any of the relationships and contracts in Canada were signed with actual guns to anyone’s head? Because your metaphor is emotionally loaded and screams “libertarian bias”.

Do you see all interactions/negotiations with government as having a gun to your head?

From where I am looking it seems wee bit exaggerated and lacking nuance to equate mandates/economic sanctions and contract law to actual violence.

It is precisely because you don’t have to (nor want to) sign the contract which requires you to be vaccinated is why you don’t have to work there any longer.

You get what you want (remain unvaccinated). Employer get what they want (no unvaccinated employees).

It seems like a win-win negotiation between consenting parties to me?

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

#457

Post by lordloki »

Daishiman wrote: post #441
guilhas wrote: post #434

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wrong, a year ago all countries vaccination target was lower Initially started with the medicine standard herd immunity of 65%, which includes vaccinated and recovered And now even 90% vaccinated is supposedly unacceptable https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-56722186

Because the disease has changed. Are you ignorant of that?

The disease has changed to reduce the effectiveness of the vaccines to the point where they don't show any significant ability to stop the spread. The current vaccines may help the individual against Omicron but does nothing to help the collective.

Are you ignorant of that?

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

#458

Post by lordloki »

huntertwo wrote: post #312
dekhn wrote: post #293

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While I understand where you are coming from, pretty much all the observational evidence is pointing to vaccines not being particularly effective against omicron, which seems to explain the data we are seeing (massive surge in infections and hospitalizations). That alone is enough information to reasonably conclude that the vaccine does not provide a high level of protection against omicron, even if we are nto doing…

Another explanation, the one that's more probable, is that omicron is much more infectious than the previous variants. Actual studies that look at evidence and test hypotheses seem to suggest that mRNA vaccines are effective.

Those studies don't really exist yet for Omicron, so you are working on faith not science.

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

#459

Post by aaron695 »

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…

No post body was provided.

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

#460

Post by lordloki »

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...

Not against Omicron.
Post reply on HN