Sure and while we’re at it, let’s not treat aids patients because they engaged in high risk activity and not treat heart attacks of the overweight either.
Are the hospitals collapsing because of aids patients or so many people getting heart attacks? If so then maybe we should start using carrots/sticks to limit peoples risky behavior or make them absorb more of the cost.
If they’re not collapsing the hospitals then why bring them up?
The US medical system is financially untenable due to the massive percentage of adults drinking sugary sodas with every meal, getting fat, and developing Type II diabetes. Guess we should let them die too, right?
You are making an argument with no limiting principle, because it's poorly thought out and shallow, and it shows.
Was it untenable before covid? There were twos of needing more nurses before every boomer was in a nursing home, but I don’t remember reading reports of elective surgeries being cancelled or hospitals going to extremely understaffed.
> You are making an argument with no limiting principle, because it's poorly thought out and shallow, and it shows.
It wasn’t poorly thought out. Our system sucked but was sustainable before the unvaxxed group decided to eschew medical prevention for this disease. Now it sucks _and_ is unsustainable.
Any argument you bring out that doesn’t recognize that the situation has changed due to covid, that also points out other health problems as a reason to not react to the change caused by covid, is poorly thought out.
If any self inflicted problem causes our healthcare system to tip over we should react to it.
People refusing the covid vaccination have tipped over the system. People getting type II diabetes have not
The way you talk about the unvaccinated is telling.
I'd like to propose a solution that I think you would really prefer:
Let's make it really obvious who the unvaccinated are. I'm thinking we could maybe have some kind of article of clothing that could be worn over top of normal clothes. Perhaps an armband would suffice? Would that make you feel comfortable? It would also make it easier for you to mistreat them and shame them at will. Perhaps we could have a different armband for people that are unvaccinated but have a record of a positive test and recovery. They could be subject to shaming as well for not going along with your sacrament.
59% of Democratic party voters surveyed support a policy of confining unvaccinated people to their homes. We should go ahead and do that right? I'm taking this to its logical end because you don't dare do so.
I voted Democrat my entire life. People have no idea what it was like campaigning for Barack Obama in southwestern Virginia. I literally had a man brandish a shotgun at me in his driveway. It's coal country. I was a die-hard supporter and they betrayed me and other people like me.
This coercion was the last straw and I'm never voting for the party again. Congratulations you and your ilk have created a monster.
> Let's make it really obvious who the unvaccinated are. I'm thinking we could maybe have some kind of article of clothing that could be worn over top of normal clothes. Perhaps an armband would suffice? Would that make you feel comfortable? It would also make it easier for you to mistreat them and shame them at will. Perhaps we could have a different armband for people that are unvaccinated but have a record of a positive test and recovery. They could be subject to shaming as well for not going along with your sacrament.
I’m not going to accept you trying to make comparisons between the unvaxxed and Jews. Being unvaccinated is a _choice_. If you make choices you deal with the consequence. I’m never going to be behind treating people different for aspects of their life they had no choice in, but I am 100% behind treating people differently based on their choices.
> 59% of Democratic party voters surveyed support a policy of confining unvaccinated people to their homes. We should go ahead and do that right? I'm taking this to its logical end because you don't dare do so.
You didn’t ask. I’m completely fine taking this to the logical end. Not a democrat but I’d be in the 59%. If you want to be unvaxxed and not enter society, that’s fine. You’ve kept your externalities to yourself. If you want to have access to public areas and not take steps to stop breaking down public systems, then you’re pushing your problems on us and that’s where I have a problem with it
> I literally had a man brandish a shotgun at me in his driveway
And? It’s America, who grew up here and hasn’t had someone threaten to kill them for coming on their land?
> This coercion was the last straw and I'm never voting for the party again. Congratulations you and your ilk have created a monster.
I didn’t talk about being democrat at all, but if I was in the Democratic Party and you were threatening to leave over not being getting vaccinated then I wouldn’t lift a finger to stop you. It’s not a threat when I already don’t want the unvaccinated associated with me. Go ahead, take your ball, and go home.
I fully admit I've been harsh in this thread, and frankly I'm unhappy with myself for letting my emotions get the best of me.
I appreciate your honesty and candor on your feelings on this subject.
What I will state bluntly is this:
You have stated, implicitly, that you support the policy of confining the unvaccinated to their homes.
Unfortunately, I don't see a path forward for me to ever forgive, or be willing to be decent to, people who hold that opinion, because I view it as absolutely and unequivocally tyrannical, to a degree that I view is a betrayal to the constitution. My ancestors settled in southern Appalachia in the early 1700s, and I would have a far larger number of relatives if not for so many of them dying in the Revolutionary War for the right to never again have their fundamental rights violated by inevitably corrupt, morally certain and powerful rulers in distant cities. They too, fled Ulster, where oppressive policies could have been avoided if they had made the CHOICE to convert to the Anglican church. Just a CHOICE. They CHOSE to not join the Anglican church, so they deserved the oppression that was visited on them in the eyes of the British monarchy. "Those stupid Scots-Irish Presbyterians. If they'd just convert, they'd be fine! Let's take their shit." The English KNEW that THEY were RIGHT. It was all justified.
I strongly suspect that, had you been born in 1914, you would have been fully supportive of the internment of Japanese Americans in World War II. Most Americans were, because violating the sovereign rights of fellow citizens made them feel safer. It reduced the risk imposed by some of them being spies. You have applied the same logic here. I know you view that as an unfair characterization. I don't fault you for that. Most people think that, if push came to shove, they would not have been one of the majoritarian oppressors they read about in history books. They think they are one of the small percentage of people who would have taken a stand, and sacrificed to do so. I see no evidence to support that belief in this conversation.
All I will say is that the machinery required to enforce such policies, as put on display in Australia, once put in place, can be used for any end, by any ruler who seizes power.
Regarding the political party aspects, it wasn't intended as a threat, but more of as a single data point that should make you question what the long-term fallout will be when this already endemic virus is eventually recognized as such by the vast majority of the American public. I'm not the only one who has hit a point of no return. I know I am in a minority, but it's an intransigent one, and the effect will be generational. I used to support gun control as well. Knowing that people out there are happy to violate my rights, I no longer do. 2 years ago, I viewed the NRA as a bunch of psychopaths allied with gun and ammunition manufacturers. My opinions, likely correct, was that a lot of the "Obama will take your guns" was designed to boost ammunition sales and profits for the gun/ammo companies. Now I view them as a useful counterbalance. I've been radicalized. Was it worth it?
There’s a lot in here to respond to but I think the most important part is this
> I've been radicalized. Was it worth it?
Why do I always hear this from people who think the unvaxxed should be completely unrestrained in their behavior? And why do I always hear it from people who haven’t realized they’ve radicalized the rest of us.
If you asked about limiting someone to their home because they won’t take a vaccine for a plague, you would have only gotten odd looks because no one would have expected people to be that crazy en masse. But hey, they are, they’re inflicting their problems on the rest of us, and like to get threatening anytime it’s questions.
We’ve been radicalized by the insistence of personal freedom over not harming the rest of us. Was it worth it?
I tested positive for COVID in February of 2021. I have natural immunity but I'm being treated like I'm a risk to fully vaccinated people around me. I think that might explain why I feel like I'm having my rights violated.
Please explain to me why the scientists in the EU consider prior infection equivalent to being vaccinated but the United States doesn't?
Like any kid who grew up in Appalachia, I own firearms and a sweet compound bow, learned how to hunt when I was 9, caught my first fish when I was 4, and therefore have no need to "stock up on food." I grow cannabis and vegetables in a hydroponic system in my basement. Fresh tomatoes in the middle of winter makes a hell of an impression at dinner parties, and I highly recommend an indoor hydro garden to anyone. The wonders of LED grow lights and deep water recirculating hydroponics! I don't brew my own beer, so I guess I'll be hosed on that front. Obviously, I know I'll never be welded into my house, but I appreciate the dry wit of your statement.
I'm angry and disappointed, but I'm not afraid of you and the other innumerate immunity deniers. I pity you. The willful imposition of tyranny on others is dehumanizing for those who push it, and for those who go along with it. You're better than that, and I hope you realize it one day. I sincerely wish you a good evening, and I appreciate the opportunity to learn your perspective. I also want you to know that I apologize for being so harsh at times in my comments. I don't fault you, because I understand that people aren't themselves when they are afraid.
The vaccination rate for vericella (Chickenpox) is over 90%, so our society has herd immunity and cases are rare. Same with measles, mumps, diphtheria and polio. I don't know the vaccination for meningitis, but cases are rare and mostly in children not old enough to be vaccinated.
If an officemate wanted to be a free rider on one of those they could, and it would be very unlikely any harm would come from it.
If we had a 90% vaccination rate for this coronavirus we would not be having this conversation (and several hundred Americans would not be dying daily from a preventable illness).
As for the flu, its not especially dangerous, not prone to exponential spread, pre-symptomatic transmission is rare and the vaccines are not especially effective. So the flu shot is in a different class than the others.
I don't buy it, even if there was 90% vaccination, which I think we can get to, people want to see obedience. This is as much about calling out heretics as it is about health, especially at companies like google. If broad vaccination was the goal like for other apolitical diseases, there are lots of measures google could support to get us there that don't involve invasive tracking of health information. Let's try to increase vaccine uptake if that's really the goal.
"This is as much about calling out heretics as it is about health"
No, you're wrong, this is about saving lives. Around 300 people died today from a disease that we can stop. 300 more will die tomorrow. Are there perhaps others sub-agendas that some people are pushing under the cover of the pandemic? Yes, obviously, just like with literally every other catastrophe. But the primary agenda is stopping a preventable disease form killing another 20,000 or 30,000 Americans.
Full stop.
Also, I find it baffling you think we can get to a 90% vaccination rate given the politicization of this vaccine.
> A unanimous public opinion tends to eliminate bodily those who differ, for mass unanimity is not the result of agreement, but an expression of fanaticism and hysteria.
-- Hannah Arendt
Thousands die worldwide each die from hunger and thirst. And just earlier, these two stories were flagged off the front page after shooting to the top very quickly:
You don't just get to say "this as about saving lives" and not have any real argument.
Encouraging vaccination, and getting it to levels consistent with other vaccines, does not automatically mean accepting new powers for employers or anyone else to enquire about people's medical status.
Google's move is consistent with wanting to give the appearance of being a progressive company that shares the values of many people here, that think individual privacy and freedom take a back seat to showing that we are taking the disease seriously. This is the same theater we see with airlines and security at other venues. There are real ways of addressing it, and then there are token gestures that are mostly about appeasing stakeholders. This is effectively populism. It's comforting to provide rituals and easy answers, but it is discriminatory and divisive, and not consistent with liberal democratic values, even if you agree with it.
What kind of hyper-politicized, conspiracy-minded sociopath doesn't count "saving human lives from an easily preventable illness" as a reasonable argument? Get out there in the world and talk to some people who have lost loved ones in this pandemic and maybe they can reason with you.
Several of those are essentially required to get a university degree already... so for many people I'm not sure an additional requirement would significantly help things, but it also couldn't hurt.
Less transmission of disease in the office would be a good thing as we return.
They are required if you want to immigrate to the US [1], so I sure hope citizens-by-birth also have to follow similar rules. Maybe you don't need to prove anything because by default people would already either be vaccinated, or had to obtain an exemption?
There are vaccines required to attend public school, but if your parents just say "I refuse" they are not going to kick you out. These hard-core antivaxxers are pretty small in number though.
It's one of those cases where it's required by law, but the law is never enforced.
I have applied for visa in multiple countries, attended public schools as well as university, and even had employment contracts specifying current vaccination.
I have never had to actually present any of that information. I'm not even sure how I could find it.
Interesting! So I guess the enforcement will only start when it's needed to get rid of some troublemaker. "-The person is causing us grief, what can we do to expel them? -Check their vaccination status, and look for other normally unenforced rules, there's gotta be something!"
C# itself isn't hard, but the ecosystem is. I have been writing code for years and wanted to take a look at dotnet not that long ago. There are no tutorials on how to make something that is not also a tutorial on visual studio. I want to learn how to make a webapp or whatever in C#.NET, learn the paradigms, classes, and functions that I need to do that. I'll go look into Visual Studio after I understand the basics to make things easier, but I shouldn't need that as the price of admission. The author addresses this with a comment about goland. But the point is that any other language, the beginner material is about "here's a main.go text file that starts a web server..." and not "click some buttons in one specific IDE and magic happens". I can use emacs, vi, or VScode to write C, go, rust, python, javascript, etc... just about everything. But not C#.
You don't need Visual Studio for C#, I write all C# and F# in VS Code with official MS extension, you can use the dotnet CLI to do everything (install packages, build tasks, etc, just like cargo/npm/etc).
The experience is surprisingly good.
If you want to create and build + run a .NET web API, you just do:
Just a note that this isn't true anymore. All the official C# tutorials default to VSCode + dotnet CLI. The Web framework tutorials also let you switch instructions depending on what editor you're using.
I recently tried to take a look at dotnet core since I heard it can compile and run on linux. Every tutorial I looked at for building a webapp started with "download visual studio and click these buttons..." which would result in a "mostly complete" program that it would go on to fill in some variables to. Literally every other language tutorial starts with a simple empty file and fills in functions with descriptions of what's going on and builds up understanding. When I want to learn how to make a webapp in .NET, I want to learn to make a webapp in .NET/C#, not how to install and click buttons in Visual Studio.
Unless you are going to systematically and reliably audit literally everything that any installer in any of those packages does as root, this is not a solution to the real problem, it's just trying to reduce the risk a bit.
