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

Biden to mandate coronavirus vaccine for federal workers

npr.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 437 posts

Re: Biden to mandate coronavirus vaccine for federal workers

#71

Post by not2b »

core-utility wrote: post #30
unchocked wrote: post #11

Good. There is no better use of state power than ensuring public health. Supreme Court resolved this in 1905 w/r/t smallpox.

And where does the line for public "health" get drawn? Who draws it, the ruling party in power? Everything is health based if you want it to be.

Slippery slope arguments are a way of avoiding discussing whether a particular proposal is good, by suggesting that they will lead to other, less positive developments. Better to evaluate each action on its own.

Vaccination requirements have been a standard practice for well over a hundred years now, and the case for mandating a vaccine for Covid-19 is much, much better than the case for mandating many other vaccines that are already required.

This is health-based, clearly, and not just "if you want it to be".

Re: Biden to mandate coronavirus vaccine for federal workers

#72

Post by AndrewBissell »

bestcoder69 wrote: post #63
woodpanel wrote: post #15

Regardless of where you stand with this policy, you gotta give it some Kudos: It's a very efficient way to cleanse your entire bureaucracy of doubters. I can't think of another example where a democratic republic, which by definition includes a spectrum of opinions, has its whole bureaucratic hierarchy re-aligned with the ruling party's platform. Maybe this is due to the fact, that this is inherently undemocratic?

In Texas to be a public employee you must certify that you will not boycott Israel. This is an actual political position that’s disallowed. Under Biden’s change (correct me if I’m wrong), I can believe whatever I want about vaccines and say anything (so: have a political position)… as long as I get vaccinated (this is not a political position). Not to mention that both ruling parties at the top are urging all to get…

> Not to mention that both ruling parties at the top are urging all to get vaccinated.

Ah good, the stuff they come together on is always really great.

Re: Biden to mandate coronavirus vaccine for federal workers

#73

Post by threatofrain »

michaelt wrote: post #40

As a part-time libertarian, one of the frustrating parts of the pandemic has been discovering how many people need the nanny state to step to stop them punching themselves in the face. Near the start of the pandemic, I thought the most intrusive state powers would barely be needed. Why would you ever need to make a vaccine mandatory? What rational person would refuse a lifesaving medicine offered to them for free? We…

Punching yourself in the face, or nanny state discussions, is more akin to something like a seat belt law. We have seat belt laws to stop the individual from hurting themselves, not because we're afraid they're going to launch out as a projectile and hurt others.

But vaccination is a community thing more than an individual thing. If it were just about hurting yourself, then I'd agree that the discussion should be framed as paternal.

Re: Biden to mandate coronavirus vaccine for federal workers

#74

Post by betterunix2 »

michaelt wrote: post #40

As a part-time libertarian, one of the frustrating parts of the pandemic has been discovering how many people need the nanny state to step to stop them punching themselves in the face. Near the start of the pandemic, I thought the most intrusive state powers would barely be needed. Why would you ever need to make a vaccine mandatory? What rational person would refuse a lifesaving medicine offered to them for free? We…

...that is why I could never be a libertarian. People have repeatedly proved themselves unwilling or unable to live up to the libertarian ideal of behaving "rationally."

Re: Biden to mandate coronavirus vaccine for federal workers

#75

Post by hunterb123 »

1270018080 wrote: post #60
AndrewBissell wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How is it "undermining public health" to refuse vaccines which don't work against transmission?

"refuse vaccines which don't work against transmission?" Pretty sure that's false. Regardless, if you have antivaxxers taking up a hospital beds and others with legitimate issues missing out on care, I'm sure you can see how this is a public health issue. There's no way you asked that question in good faith. Not a chance.

While we're at it let's remove the rapists and murderers from hospitals and let them die.

Lets also put a weight limit and a smoking limit on things so people don't crowd resources due to their poor decisions.

These "anti-vaxxers" that are fully vaccinated other than covid can just go rot in the streets /s

Re: Biden to mandate coronavirus vaccine for federal workers

#76

Post by thrill »

swayvil wrote: post #54
unchocked wrote: post #11

Good. There is no better use of state power than ensuring public health. Supreme Court resolved this in 1905 w/r/t smallpox.

Bad. I prefer to have a choice. The, "Trust the authority. It's for your own good." argument does not sway me.

You do have a choice. Take the vaccine if you want to work in the federal government or find another job. The government doesn't owe you or anyone else a job.

Re: Biden to mandate coronavirus vaccine for federal workers

#77

Post by dragontamer »

rajin444 wrote: post #69
dragontamer wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Natural immunity doesn’t only last 6 months. Where did you get that? https://www1.racgp.org.au/newsgp/clinical/delta-raises-covid... You got 180 days before natural immunity wanes and Delta poses a risk of reinfection.

That's looking at relative risk not overall. It's not saying you lose immunity after 180 days.

Natural immunity wanes enough to cause a "2nd surge" in cities that were 75%ish infected, such as Araraquara city, Brazil, and Manaus, Brazil.

I can agree with you that the 180-days thing is just an estimate from one study. Further studies are needed to narrow down the exact time when natural immunity wanes. But its a good "first guess" at the phenomenon, and should be within a magnitude of the truth.

From what we've seen around the world, COVID19 (or at least its variants, like Gamma/P.1 or Delta/B.1.617) is more than willing to reinfect populations in less than a year.

Re: Biden to mandate coronavirus vaccine for federal workers

#78

Post by arsome »

AndrewBissell wrote: post #34
aaroninsf wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Truly held" false belief is still false, and no justification for undermining public health, or being a parasite on other's contributions to it. As the MAGA fascist Q-cultists are so fond of chanting, f--k their feelings.

How is it "undermining public health" to refuse vaccines which don't work against transmission?

Even if they literally had no effect on transmission (which is false), it's still a positive for public health because they have massive effect on hospitalization.

Re: Biden to mandate coronavirus vaccine for federal workers

#79

Post by sk2020 »

betterunix2 wrote: post #55
woodpanel wrote: post #15

Regardless of where you stand with this policy, you gotta give it some Kudos: It's a very efficient way to cleanse your entire bureaucracy of doubters. I can't think of another example where a democratic republic, which by definition includes a spectrum of opinions, has its whole bureaucratic hierarchy re-aligned with the ruling party's platform. Maybe this is due to the fact, that this is inherently undemocratic?

Vaccination is not a political position. Vaccines only work if a large majority of people are vaccinated and people who refuse to receive the shot are putting everyone else in danger. A basic function of a government is to protect public safety, and that is what a vaccine mandate does.

Your vaccine does not work unless someone or everyone else has one? Has this been observed with previous vaccine products?
Post reply on HN