Red states are now paying unemployment benefits to anti-vaxxers who quit their jobs.

  
Via:  Devangelical  •  7 months ago  •  217 comments

By:   William Saletan (Slate Magazine)

Red states are now paying unemployment benefits to anti-vaxxers who quit their jobs.
Republican governors have decided to coddle vaccine refusers, even as they cut benefits for everyone else.

Leave a comment to auto-join group Mike Hunt's Taco Stand

Mike Hunt's Taco Stand

uh yeah, what was all that bullshit about nannie states again?


S E E D E D   C O N T E N T



On Oct. 20, Iowa Gov. Kim Reynolds announced a crackdown on unemployment benefits. She required recipients to double their job search activity, and she imposed strict audits—with the threat of cutting off payments to anyone who fell short—to ensure that "no Iowan who is receiving unemployment benefits unnecessarily remains on the sidelines" of the job market.

Nine days later, however, Reynolds signed legislation that pays vaccine refusers to do just that: sit on the sidelines. Under the new law, anyone "discharged from employment for refusing to receive a vaccination against COVID-19 … shall not be disqualified for benefits."
Reynolds is one of many Republican politicians who openly advocate, and in some states have successfully imposed, a two-tiered system of unemployment insurance. It's not a left-wing policy of money for everyone or a right-wing policy of money for no one. It's a policy of pernicious hypocrisy: welfare for vaccine refusers, tough love for everyone else.

Under these new laws, any worker who gets fired for broadly defined "misconduct," such as flunking an employer-imposed drug test, is disqualified from unemployment benefits—but employees who refuse COVID vaccination are glorified, protected, and subsidized. The state must guarantee, in Reynolds' words, that these reckless freeloaders "will still receive unemployment benefits despite being fired for standing up for their beliefs."

The GOP's coddling of vaccine refusers makes a joke of its rhetoric about self-reliance. This summer, for instance, Tennessee Gov. Bill Lee ended the federal government's supplemental COVID-era unemployment benefits. "We are paying people to stay home. That needs to change," he declared. But two weeks ago, Lee signed legislation that pays vaccine refusers to stay home. Under Tennessee's new policy, the state's normal rule about employees fired for "misconduct"—that they lose their eligibility for unemployment benefits—can no longer be applied to anyone who is terminated for "refusing to receive a vaccination for COVID-19."

In May, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis announced that he, too, would end bonus payments to unemployed Floridians. These payments, he argued, had created a perverse "incentive structure" that discouraged people from working. But DeSantis signed legislation two weeks ago that sets up a similar incentive structure, exclusively for people who defy COVID vaccine requirements (albeit with lower payments than when the federal government was still offering an extra $300 per week in benefits). Under the new law, vaccine refusal can't "be deemed misconduct for the purpose of reemployment assistance." In fact, the Florida law says that if you're unemployed and you're offered a job that requires vaccination, you can turn it down and stay on the dole.

Last week, Kansas adopted the same policy: You can keep drawing unemployment checks while declining job opportunities, as long as you specifically refuse "work that requires compliance with a COVID-19 vaccine requirement." And if you were recently fired for refusing vaccination—or if you were previously denied unemployment benefits because you refused job offers that entailed vaccination—the state now promises that you'll be "retroactively paid benefits" going back to the beginning of September. This bonus payout is yours, as a special kind of welfare recipient, even if you have "not requested retroactive payment of such benefits." Tennessee has enacted a similar clause promising "retroactive payment of unemployment benefits," without a specified time limit.

Prior to the enactment of these laws, the standard policy about job termination for "misconduct" in most states—i.e., that such offenders were disqualified from unemployment compensation—was generally understood to cover vaccine refusal. Kansas law, for instance, defined misconduct as "a violation of a duty or obligation reasonably owed the employer as a condition of employment including, but not limited to, a violation of a company rule, including a safety rule." Under Florida law, misconduct included "disregard of the reasonable standards of behavior which the employer expects of his or her employee." Tennessee's law was almost identical. Refusing vaccination, in the midst of a respiratory pandemic that has killed millions of people, was a pretty obvious safety violation. Now it's been elevated to a sacred right.

The new state laws also make a mockery of religion. Under Florida's statute, if an employee simply "presents" a statement "indicating that the employee declines COVID-19 vaccination because of a sincerely held religious belief," "the employer must allow the employee to opt out of the employer's COVID-19 vaccination mandate." Iowa's policy is similar. The Kansas law orders employers to accept such requests for religious exemptions "without inquiring into the sincerity of the request." By framing vaccine refusal as religious freedom—while making it impossible to ascertain whether the refusal is truly grounded in religion—the GOP is wrapping its constituency of anti-social moochers in a cloak of martyrdom.

Republicans also argue that vaccine refusers deserve special treatment because it's wrong, as a matter of personal autonomy, to let employers dictate workers' health decisions. As DeSantis put it two weeks ago, "We are respecting people's individual freedom." But that's not how DeSantis treats marijuana. Under Florida law, if you flunk an employer-imposed drug test, that's "misconduct," and it bars you from unemployment benefits if you're fired. And if you apply for a new job—but you're rejected for failing a drug test "required as a condition of employment" in that job—you're further disqualified from unemployment benefits "for refusing to accept an offer of suitable work."

Let's pause to appreciate the Orwellian majesty of this sequence. 1) You, a responsible citizen, have gotten your COVID shots and want to be productive, so you apply for a job. 2) The prospective employer demands that you take a drug test. You test positive for marijuana, so the employer rejects you. 3) Based on the employer's rejection of you—not your rejection of the employer—Florida declares that you have refused the job offer and are therefore disqualified from unemployment benefits. However, 4) your neighbor, who was fired for refusing COVID vaccination and has turned down two subsequent job offers that required COVID vaccination, continues to collect unemployment checks.

Meanwhile, under the same Florida law, employees who leave their jobs because they're afraid of getting COVID become ineligible for unemployment benefits, unless they can prove to the DeSantis administration that this fear constituted "good cause" to quit. They're treated more harshly than people who quit because they're afraid of a federally approved vaccine. This is how Republicans define "personal responsibility".

Iowa has the same rule about employer drug tests. Its law specifically names marijuana as a substance that merits disqualification of the user from unemployment benefits. Under the Kansas statute, a "positive breath alcohol test or a positive chemical test" is "conclusive evidence of gross misconduct," with extra penalties—beyond ordinary misconduct—for anyone seeking unemployment assistance. And in Tennessee, losing your job for "refusal to take a drug test or an alcohol test" can be "deemed to be a discharge for misconduct connected with work," rendering you ineligible for assistance. When Republicans claim that their defense of vaccine refusers is based on a principled commitment to the physical autonomy of employees—as they did at a Senate press conference on Tuesday—don't believe a word of it.

This isn't a party of personal autonomy, moral responsibility, free enterprise, limited government, or self-reliance. It's a party that has casually tossed aside each of these values, first for Donald Trump and then for COVID. Today's GOP believes that the government should control workplace policies and should subsidize freeloaders who endanger their communities. It's the party of socialism for anti-vaxxers.

trolling, taunting, and off topic comments may be removed at the discretion of group mods. NT members that vote up their own comments or continue to disrupt the conversation risk having all of their comments deleted. please remember to quote the person(s) to whom you are replying to preserve continuity of this seed.


Article is LOCKED by author/seeder
 

Tags

jrGroupDiscuss - desc
[]
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
1  seeder  devangelical    7 months ago
Today's GOP believes that the government should control workplace policies and should subsidize freeloaders who endanger their communities. It's the party of socialism for anti-vaxxers.

republican socialism, when the poor and middle class pick up the tab for the politically connected. buying voters is what these policies are about. what's that spinning noise I hear off in the distance?

 
 
 
Nowhere Man
Junior Expert
2  Nowhere Man    7 months ago

Well they weren't reckless freeloaders until the federal government made them that way with their vax or be fired mandate....

Protecting the hard working American citizen from government abuses... Yea Team!

 
 
 
evilgenius
PhD Guide
2.1  evilgenius  replied to  Nowhere Man @2    7 months ago
Well they weren't reckless freeloaders until the federal government made them that way with their vax or be fired mandate....

So, if I refuse work because I oppose mandatory drug testing I'm a freeloader, but if I refuse work for mandatory vaccination I'm not? Sounds partisanly hypocritical to me. 

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
2.1.1  Tessylo  replied to  evilgenius @2.1    7 months ago

Sounds?

 
 
 
Nowhere Man
Junior Expert
2.1.2  Nowhere Man  replied to  evilgenius @2.1    7 months ago
So, if I refuse work because I oppose mandatory drug testing I'm a freeloader, but if I refuse work for mandatory vaccination I'm not? Sounds partisanly hypocritical to me.

Huge difference... 

One, Drug Testing, IS NOT a medical treatment....

Two, Vaccination, IS a medical treatment....

What they are doing is supporting hard working people that were forced out of their jobs by an illegal mandate... I see the state helping people that were devastated by the federal government illegally....

There are numerous other reasons as well, workplace safety, consumer safety, and as we are seeing in Seattle, public safety, personally I'm for giving drug users NOTHING at all... Let them live with their choices...

As far as people not wanting to vax, same thing, let them live with their choices...

Partisanly hypocritical, not at all, unless your pushing an agenda...

 
 
 
Tacos!
Professor Expert
2.1.3  Tacos!  replied to  Nowhere Man @2.1.2    7 months ago
There are numerous other reasons as well, workplace safety, consumer safety, and as we are seeing in Seattle, public safety

Isn’t vaccinating people to reduce the spread of a highly contagious, often fatal disease also a matter of workplace, consumer, and public safety?

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
2.1.4  Trout Giggles  replied to  Tacos! @2.1.3    7 months ago

Yes

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Senior Quiet
2.1.5  Jack_TX  replied to  evilgenius @2.1    7 months ago
So, if I refuse work because I oppose mandatory drug testing I'm a freeloader, but if I refuse work for mandatory vaccination I'm not? Sounds partisanly hypocritical to me. 

Because those two ideas are remotely similar.  Riiiiiiight.

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
2.1.6  Sparty On  replied to  evilgenius @2.1    7 months ago

Interesting contrast.   Drug testing vs Vaccination

We required drug testing only because some of our major clients required it.   Only because of that.  

It's an interesting study in autonomous self determination vs forced subjugation but there comes a point in time where one might be forced to do something via forces other than your belief system.   For example, we restricted concealed carry, when that passed in Michigan, for all employees while on our dime and/or in our property.   Being avid 2nd amendment people we didn't want to do it but were forced there by insurance requirements.

It's not always as simply as, I'll just do what i believe in.   In either direction.

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Senior Quiet
2.1.7  Jack_TX  replied to  Tacos! @2.1.3    7 months ago
Isn’t vaccinating people to reduce the spread of a highly contagious, often fatal disease also a matter of workplace, consumer, and public safety?

Not if you understand the math on these vaccines.

 
 
 
Veronica
Masters Expert
2.1.8  Veronica  replied to  Jack_TX @2.1.7    7 months ago

You want numbers - how about these:

Regional COVID statistics as of November 30, 2021

  • 31 out of every 100,000 residents in the Finger Lakes region is hospitalized due to COVID-19
  • In New York City – where vaccination rates are higher - there are five hospitalizations per 100,000 residents
  • 20% of all COVID-related ICU patients in New York state are in Finger Lakes-area hospitals
  • Of those hospitalized for COVID in Monroe County, 65% are not vaccinated
  • Of those in ICU for COVID, almost 80% are not vaccinated
  • Of those who are on a respirator for COVID, 82% are not vaccinated

“The facts and science show that the vast majority of people in hospitals with COVID could have avoided it simply by getting vaccinated,” said Bello. “Because of these preventable cases, those needing an ICU bed for unavoidable illness may have a lengthy wait for a bed to free up. This pandemic is with us until we approach a fully vaccinated population. If you won’t get vaccinated for yourself or your loved ones and their safety, please get vaccinated to allow others who need critical care to get the timely treatment they need and deserve.”

 
 
 
evilgenius
PhD Guide
2.1.9  evilgenius  replied to  Nowhere Man @2.1.2    7 months ago
Two, Vaccination, IS a medical treatment....

In every case I know of (with exception to medical workers) there is an option for testing. So, no they are very similar.

 
 
 
evilgenius
PhD Guide
2.1.10  evilgenius  replied to  Jack_TX @2.1.5    7 months ago
Because those two ideas are remotely similar.  Riiiiiiight.

As I said above - In every case I know of (with exception to medical workers) there is an option for testing. So, yes they are very similar. Under many employers that require random drug testing, if a worker refuses they are fired and don't get benefits. Where's the difference? 

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
2.1.11  Trout Giggles  replied to  Veronica @2.1.8    7 months ago
If you won’t get vaccinated for yourself or your loved ones and their safety, please get vaccinated to allow others who need critical care to get the timely treatment they need and deserve.”

LOL! If they won't do it for their loved ones they sure as shit ain't gonna do it for a stranger!

 
 
 
Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom
Professor Guide
2.1.12  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom  replied to  Veronica @2.1.8    7 months ago

jrSmiley_12_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Veronica
Masters Expert
2.1.13  Veronica  replied to  Trout Giggles @2.1.11    7 months ago

Yea, I know.  My daughter is "fully" vaccinated and I get my booster on Tuesday.  Hubby, our son and his gf are scheduled for next week sometime.  My sister who is staying with us gets hers on Wednesday.  

The hospital I work at is at full capacity at this time.  It didn't have to be this way.  

 
 
 
evilgenius
PhD Guide
2.1.14  evilgenius  replied to  Sparty On @2.1.6    7 months ago
It's not always as simply as, I'll just do what i believe in.   In either direction.

Very true. I don't disagree. The issue is not what you or I believe in though. It's Republican lawmakers' hypocrisy on UEB. It's clearly carving out a special benefit to populist voters.

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
2.1.15  Sparty On  replied to  evilgenius @2.1.14    7 months ago
UEB

UEB?

 
 
 
Tacos!
Professor Expert
2.1.16  Tacos!  replied to  Jack_TX @2.1.7    7 months ago
Not if you understand the math on these vaccines.

Which is . . . ?

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Masters Principal
2.1.17  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Sparty On @2.1.15    7 months ago

UnEmployment Benefits. People treat it like it's three words............

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
2.1.18  Sparty On  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @2.1.17    7 months ago

Ah so ....

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Masters Principal
2.1.19  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Veronica @2.1.8    7 months ago
  • Of those hospitalized for COVID in Monroe County, 65% are not vaccinated

So 35% are

  • Of those in ICU for COVID, almost 80% are not vaccinated

So a little over 20% are

  • Of those who are on a respirator for COVID, 82% are not vaccinated

So 18% are. Damn can't wait till January so I can get my booster. I don't want to go through that shit again and hopefully the booster and my acquired immunity through having that severe case will keep me out of the loop.

 
 
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
2.1.20  XXJefferson51  replied to  Sparty On @2.1.15    7 months ago

[deleted

 
 
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
2.1.21  XXJefferson51  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @2.1.17    7 months ago

[deleted]

 
 
 
Steve Ott
Professor Quiet
2.1.22  Steve Ott  replied to  Nowhere Man @2.1.2    7 months ago

Not Breaking News: Mandatory Vaccination Has Been Constitutional for Over a Century

" Justice Antonin Scalia stated that “the elimination of communicable diseases through vaccination became one of the greatest achievements of public health in the 20th century.”   Id.   at 226 (2011) (quotation marks and footnote omitted)."

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Senior Quiet
2.1.23  Jack_TX  replied to  Veronica @2.1.8    7 months ago
You want numbers

Always.

- how about these:

Rock and roll.

  • 31 out of every 100,000 residents in the Finger Lakes region is hospitalized due to COVID-19
  • In New York City – where vaccination rates are higher - there are five hospitalizations per 100,000 residents
  • 20% of all COVID-related ICU patients in New York state are in Finger Lakes-area hospitals
  • Of those hospitalized for COVID in Monroe County, 65% are not vaccinated
  • Of those in ICU for COVID, almost 80% are not vaccinated
  • Of those who are on a respirator for COVID, 82% are not vaccinated

These are great.  Once again we're confirming the two fundamental truths of covid vaccination:

People should get vaccinated.

Once you're vaccinated, you're incredibly well protected from people who are too stupid to get vaccinated.

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Senior Quiet
2.1.24  Jack_TX  replied to  evilgenius @2.1.10    7 months ago
As I said above - In every case I know of (with exception to medical workers) there is an option for testing. So, yes they are very similar. Under many employers that require random drug testing, if a worker refuses they are fired and don't get benefits. Where's the difference?

There are several differences.

Drug testing does not require you to inject a drug into your body.  Mandatory vaccination does.

Drug testing screens for the presence of illegal substances in your system.  It is in fact a screen for a specific type of criminal activity. 

Drug testing is often required for jobs where the person in question may be operating some sort of machinery where their impairment would cause them to be a danger to those around them.  The statistical data demonstrates clearly that unvaccinated people are NOT a threat to vaccinated people in general workplace settings.  Math.  Really.  Inconvenient, but it's true. 

So what we have here are two groups of people who have adopted disparate irrational fears founded primarily in their identity politics.   RWNJs have convinced themselves that the vaccines alter their DNA or contain microchips or whatever is their idiocy of the day.  LWNJs have simply added Covid to the long list of triggers for which they believe they have the right to declare "we're afraid.... so all of you must change behavior".

 
 
 
Nowhere Man
Junior Expert
2.1.25  Nowhere Man  replied to  Steve Ott @2.1.22    7 months ago
Not Breaking News: Mandatory Vaccination Has Been Constitutional for Over a Century

Who said it wasn't? I sure didn't...

 
 
 
Drakkonis
PhD Guide
2.1.26  Drakkonis  replied to  Tacos! @2.1.3    7 months ago

Hard to say. From what I have seen, vaccination doesn't prevent anyone from getting Covid. It may increase likelihood of surviving it. 

 
 
 
Tacos!
Professor Expert
2.1.27  Tacos!  replied to  Drakkonis @2.1.26    7 months ago

Interesting claims I would like to see you try to support.

But more fascinating would be if you got together with Jack. He seems convinced that vaccinated people are so thoroughly protected from Covid that it doesn’t matter if they’re around unvaccinated people.

That seems like two completely different - and wrong - rationales for saying that people don’t need to get vaccinated.

 
 
 
Nowhere Man
Junior Expert
2.1.28  Nowhere Man  replied to  Tacos! @2.1.27    7 months ago
That seems like two completely different - and wrong - rationales for saying that people don’t need to get vaccinated.

Well you seem to think we are saying that people shouldn't get vaxxed, we aren't...

What we are saying is that it is wrong for one political side to force vaxing upon the other side...

That is the REAL issue, the democrat ready willingness to use forceful compliance... Biden standing up in front of Americans and saying that your side is tired of waiting so we are going to force you non vaxxed people?

How bout the government telling you that you need a teaspoon of castor oil every morning before you go to work? and if you don't take it you can't work?

It's the law.....

 
 
 
Veronica
Masters Expert
2.1.29  Veronica  replied to  Nowhere Man @2.1.28    7 months ago

I thought it was employers asking their employees to get vaxxed.  Do they not have the right to that for their business?  Are you saying that businesses cannot demand things in their own companies?  Is that what you are saying?  Better inform Hobby Lobby of that - they make all kinds of demands on their employees and those on the right APPLAUD them for it.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
2.1.30  Tessylo  replied to  Veronica @2.1.29    7 months ago

I remember a brilliant comment a while back regarding drug testing - and that when you apply for a job that they don't have to tell you that you'll be drug tested as a condition of employment.  jrSmiley_78_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Tacos!
Professor Expert
2.1.31  Tacos!  replied to  Nowhere Man @2.1.28    7 months ago
Well you seem to think we are saying that people shouldn't get vaxxed, we aren't...

Well, I didn't really include you, so . . . 

What we are saying is that it is wrong for one political side to force vaxing upon the other side...

No, what they're really saying is that there is no justification for us to want other people to be vaccinated. And that is 100% wrong. Other people being vaccinated reduces the risk of infection and death for all people, and reduces the opportunity for virus mutation. These are facts.

It's not about politics and government for we: the pro-vaccination crowd. It's about public health. The ones who don't want to be made to get vaccinated are the ones who have made it partisan.

How bout the government telling you that you need a teaspoon of castor oil every morning before you go to work?

How about it? Let's examine that. Would it save lives? Have millions of people died in the last couple of years because of a lack of castor oil?

No, of course not. So let's dispense with trying to insult people's intelligence with inane attempts at analogy.

 
 
 
Tacos!
Professor Expert
2.1.32  Tacos!  replied to  Drakkonis @2.1.26    7 months ago
From what I have seen, vaccination doesn't prevent anyone from getting Covid.

So then would you say you disagree with Jack? who wrote:

Once YOU are vaccinated, you are protected against the disease, regardless of what other people do. 
 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
2.1.33  Sparty On  replied to  Tacos! @2.1.31    7 months ago
Other people being vaccinated reduces the risk of infection and death for all people, and reduces the opportunity for virus mutation. These are facts.

Not totally true, not unless you can show valid studies that prove vaccination actually does reduce the risk of infection.   That horse left the barn long ago.   Breakthrough infections are a reality now even though we were told they wouldn't be an issue.

In fact, most of the people i know who got COVID were breakthrough infections including myself.

 
 
 
Nowhere Man
Junior Expert
2.1.34  Nowhere Man  replied to  Tacos! @2.1.31    7 months ago
No, of course not. So let's dispense with trying to insult people's intelligence with inane attempts at analogy.

Ok, you don't like inane hypotheticals as analogy... I'll give ya one that isn't and is directly on point...

Worldwide, several millions die each year from the flu... With vaccines widely available.... 

Covid in two years hasn't matched that death rate yet... 

Yet we do not force vaccines onto people for the flu.... We don't force them out of work, have never needed to...

Why is it that covid creates such a fear complex? the flu doesn't, or does it?

Even Fauci was saying at the initial outbreak that covid would eventually be just like the common cold or the flu once we get past the initial spread.... (I only used fauci as he is the current liberal disease darling and will report anything his political masters tell him to)

WHY THE FEAR GENERATION?

Personally I think Jay Inslee inadvertently let the cat out of the bag during the presidential campaign, and is persona non grata in the democrat party cause of it...

COVID IS THE PERFECT OPPORTUNITY!!!!

We mustn't EVER forget that....

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
2.1.35  Tessylo  replied to  Nowhere Man @2.1.34    7 months ago

The flu has absolutely nothing to do with Co-Vid

"ven Fauci was saying at the initial outbreak that covid would eventually be just like the common cold or the flu once we get past the initial spread.... (I only used fauci as he is the current liberal disease darling and will report anything his political masters tell him to)"

Proof?

Forget what?

WTF is the FEAR GENERATION???????????

Dr. Fauci is an expert in his field - not a 'liberal disease darling'  He doesn't have masters, political or otherwise.  

 
 
 
Nowhere Man
Junior Expert
2.1.36  Nowhere Man  replied to  Tacos! @2.1.31    7 months ago
The ones who don't want to be made to get vaccinated are the ones who have made it partisan.

Sorry not the case... Democrats made it partisan when they started criticizing the president for his handling of it... That was WAY before vaccines and mandates forcing compliance... what were they complaining about? 

Think Jay Inslee's campaign statements about it...

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
2.1.37  Tessylo  replied to  Nowhere Man @2.1.36    7 months ago

The 'president' essentially didn't handle dick - essentially did NOTHING.  

Why do you keep harping on about Inslee FFS?

 
 
 
Veronica
Masters Expert
2.1.38  Veronica  replied to  Nowhere Man @2.1.36    7 months ago
what were they complaining about?

Then President Trump doing NOTHING but lie about how damaging Covid was going to be - complaining about lockdowns put in place by states - NEVR wearing a mask - THAT is what they were complaining about - Trump being a total ass about Covid - no worse than the flu - how many DEAD on his watch?

 
 
 
Kavika
Professor Principal
2.1.39  Kavika   replied to  Nowhere Man @2.1.34    7 months ago
Worldwide, several millions die each year from the flu... With vaccines widely available....

John Hopkins reports that between 250K and 650K die worldwide from the flu. There are a number of other organizations reporting and all are in the same ballpark.

Covid in two years hasn't matched that death rate yet... 

As of December 1st, the deaths WW from Covid were 5.245 million.

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
2.1.40  Trout Giggles  replied to  Tacos! @2.1.31    7 months ago
Other people being vaccinated reduces the risk of infection and death for all people, and reduces the opportunity for virus mutation.

I do think that's the key to getting a handle on this virus. However, I have my doubts that it will ever just go endemic and stay there. We're going to live with a pandemic for the rest of our lives

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Masters Principal
2.1.41  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Trout Giggles @2.1.40    7 months ago

I have to agree. I think we will see this thing for years to come in one form or another unfortunately. Just one more annual or semi-annual vaccination shot like the flu and pneumonia

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
2.1.42  seeder  devangelical  replied to  Sparty On @2.1.33    7 months ago
most of the people i know who got COVID were breakthrough infections including myself

... swing and a miss.

 
 
 
Tacos!
Professor Expert
2.1.43  Tacos!  replied to  Nowhere Man @2.1.34    7 months ago
Worldwide, several millions die each year from the flu

No, they don’t.

According to data collected by the CDC from 2010 to 2020, the agency estimates that the flu has caused 12,000–52,000 deaths annually. During that time, the flu also caused 9 million–41 million illnesses, and 140,000–710,000 hospitalizations. Globally, the World Health Organization (WHO) estimates that the flu kills 290,000 to 650,000 people per year.

As of today, Covid has killed about 5.22 million people globally in less than two years. That’s roughly ten times the amount of people typically killed by the flu. 

In the United States, 777,000 people have died from Covid over those less than two years. That’s a death rate of roughly 20 times what we see with the flu.

Additionally, for most people who recover from the flu, they go back to life as normal. But many people who survive Covid suffer with what doctors are calling “ Long Covid .” These are serious, long-term, possibly permanent damage to organs and systems in the body. We don’t tend to see that kind of damage in recovered flu victims.

For those reasons, Covid is a dramatically different public health concern compared to the flu.

 
 
 
Tacos!
Professor Expert
2.1.44  Tacos!  replied to  Sparty On @2.1.33    7 months ago
Not totally true, not unless you can show valid studies that prove vaccination actually does reduce the risk of infection.

Happy to do so:

CDC COVID-19 Study Shows mRNA Vaccines Reduce Risk of Infection by 91 Percent for Fully Vaccinated People

In the new analysis, 3,975 participants completed weekly SARS-CoV-2 testing for 17 consecutive weeks (from December 13, 2020 to April 10, 2021) in eight U.S. locations. Participants self-collected nasal swabs that were laboratory tested for SARS-CoV-2, which is the virus that causes COVID-19. If the tests came back positive, the specimens were further tested to determine the amount of detectable virus in the nose (i.e., viral load) and the number of days that participants tested positive (i.e., viral shedding). Participants were followed over time and the data were analyzed according to vaccination status. To evaluate vaccine benefits , the study investigators accounted for the circulation of SARS-CoV-2 viruses in the area and how consistently participants used personal protective equipment (PPE) at work and in the community. Once fully vaccinated, participants’ risk of infection was reduced by 91 percent. After partial vaccination, participants’ risk of infection was reduced by 81 percent. These estimates included symptomatic and asymptomatic infections.

Hope that helps.

Breakthrough infections are a reality now even though we were told they wouldn't be an issue.

Who told you breakthrough infections wouldn’t be an issue? No manufacturer and no study has ever said that any Covid vaccine reduced the risk of infection by 100%.

 
 
 
Tacos!
Professor Expert
2.1.45  Tacos!  replied to  Trout Giggles @2.1.40    7 months ago

I hope you’re wrong, but if it does stay with us to that degree, we might have to get used to the idea of it killing a few million people every year.

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
2.1.46  Trout Giggles  replied to  Tacos! @2.1.45    7 months ago

I hope I'm wrong, too. We seem to have a flu epidemic/pandemic every few years, so maybe we will just have to get used to COVID becoming like the flu...a new variant every few months

 
 
 
cjcold
Professor Quiet
2.1.47  cjcold  replied to  Tacos! @2.1.45    7 months ago
killing a few million people every year.

The global ecosystem might not have a problem with that.

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
2.1.48  Dulay  replied to  Nowhere Man @2.1.2    7 months ago
One, Drug Testing, IS NOT a medical treatment....

Drawing blood is the same form of medical procedure as getting a vaccine. 

What they are doing is supporting hard working people that were forced out of their jobs by an illegal mandate... I see the state helping people that were devastated by the federal government illegally....

That's false. They have the choice to get vaccinated or get tested all the time. Nobody is forcing them to quit. 

As far as people not wanting to vax, same thing, let them live with their choices...

The problem is that the REST of us have to live with their choices too. 

Partisanly hypocritical, not at all, unless your pushing an agenda...

Hell YA I'm pushing a fucking agenda.

Covid in the rearview mirror. THAT'S my agenda Nerm. 

I'm so fucking sick of the narcissistic selfish bullshit. I'm getting to the point that I just wish the morons would get infected and die already. The faster they are gone, the faster the rest of the population can get on with our lives. 

 
 
 
Nowhere Man
Junior Expert
2.1.49  Nowhere Man  replied to  Nowhere Man @2.1.2    7 months ago

Wow first time someone has confused me with Nerm....

You should apologize to Nerm... {chuckle}

 
 
 
al Jizzerror
Sophomore Expert
2.1.50  al Jizzerror  replied to  Tacos! @2.1.3    7 months ago

jrSmiley_81_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
2.1.51  Sparty On  replied to  devangelical @2.1.42    7 months ago

[deleted]

 
 
 
Nowhere Man
Junior Expert
2.1.52  Nowhere Man  replied to  evilgenius @2.1.9    7 months ago
In every case I know of (with exception to medical workers) there is an option for testing. So, no they are very similar.

Not in the State of Washington, Inslee's mandate had no provision for ongoing testing, when he was asked about it he essentially said what many here say, it's your choice, vaxx or lose your livelihood it's your choice...

 
 
 
Drakkonis
PhD Guide
2.1.53  Drakkonis  replied to  Tacos! @2.1.27    7 months ago
Interesting claims I would like to see you try to support.

T he current surge in infections with the SARS-CoV-2 Delta variant has made it clear to health care workers and the public alike that fully vaccinated people remain at risk for SARS-CoV-2 infections. It is also apparent that breakthrough infections in fully vaccinated people can sometimes be serious. As of October 21, 2021, for example, 35% of the 519 patients hospitalized with COVID-19 in Massachusetts had been fully vaccinated. 1  Furthermore, multiple reports have documented that if fully vaccinated individuals do become infected, their viral loads may be as high as the levels seen in unvaccinated individuals.

But more fascinating would be if you got together with Jack. He seems convinced that vaccinated people are so thoroughly protected from Covid that it doesn’t matter if they’re around unvaccinated people.

Well, I'm not sure I'd agree with that, based on the article I presented. 

That seems like two completely different - and wrong - rationales for saying that people don’t need to get vaccinated.

I didn't say people don't need to get vaccinated. My view is that it is better to be vaccinated than not vaccinated, even in spite of the report cited above. I just don't believe it is the cure all some make it out to be or that it would magically end covid in this country, even if every last one of us were vaccinated. We would still be left with the problem of variants, which seem to be coming from poor vaccination efforts in developing countries. One could be mutating right now for which our vaccines would be useless. 

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
2.1.54  TᵢG  replied to  Drakkonis @2.1.53    7 months ago

Let's start with this: 

95119.jpg

Do you agree that being fully vaccinated substantially reduces your likelihood of infection?   There are other studies that show fully vaccinated individuals are far less likely to transmit the virus to others.

My position is that the vaccinations do not (of course) guarantee 100% immunity from coronovirus variants but being fully vaccinated substantially reduces one's risk of infection and one's likelihood of infecting someone else.

With what part of this do you disagree?

... even if every last one of us were vaccinated. We would still be left with the problem of variants, which seem to be coming from poor vaccination efforts in developing countries.

Of course.    But it still makes sense for us to do what we can to encourage everyone (who medically can) to get vaccinated.   Do you disagree?

One could be mutating right now for which our vaccines would be useless. 

True.   But, happily, that has not yet happened.   And with the mRNA vaccines it is much easier for researchers to develop a new vaccine for a disruptive variant and deliver it as a payload of the existing vaccines.   That is, they do not have to start from scratch ... they can reuse the mRNA infrastructure to deliver new RNA instructions to combat the new variant.

 
 
 
Tacos!
Professor Expert
2.1.55  Tacos!  replied to  Drakkonis @2.1.53    7 months ago

To refresh our recollections, your statement was:

From what I have seen, vaccination doesn't prevent anyone from getting Covid. It may increase likelihood of surviving it. 

Saying that vaccinated people remain at risk does not support that. I would agree that vaccinated people are at risk.To my knowledge, no one has ever said otherwise. Even the initial studies of the Moderna and Pfizer vaccines put efficacy against infection at 94% and 95%. That’s not 100%.

But saying that people are at risk is very different from saying that vaccination doesn’t prevent anyone from getting Covid. For that to be true, efficacy would be 0%.

Also, I would think the scientific level of certainty for increased likelihood of survival is something beyond “may.” 

I just don't believe it is the cure all some make it out to be

I don’t know who is saying it’s a “cure all,” but it is absolutely the most effective preventative and prophylactic step we can take.

One could be mutating right now for which our vaccines would be useless. 

That is certainly true. Our best tool for fighting such mutation is getting as many people vaccinated as we can.

 
 
 
Drakkonis
PhD Guide
2.1.56  Drakkonis  replied to  Tacos! @2.1.55    7 months ago
But saying that people are at risk is very different from saying that vaccination doesn’t prevent anyone from getting Covid. For that to be true, efficacy would be 0%.

Well, to my knowledge, vaccines don't prevent infection. It trains our immune systems to deal with it if or when we do get infected. It isn't as if it creates a shield of some sort around our bodies that prevents infection. The 94% and 95% figures you give is the rating of effectiveness of dealing with the infection, not preventing infection. That is, those figures reflect efficacy of the vaccine in preventing people infected with Covid from getting seriously sick. 

I don’t know who is saying it’s a “cure all,” but it is absolutely the most effective preventative and prophylactic step we can take.

Okay. Why do you keep bringing this up, as if I were arguing against vaccination? 

That is certainly true. Our best tool for fighting such mutation is getting as many people vaccinated as we can.

Which we aren't doing very well at accomplishing. I mostly hear is ranting against anti-vaccers in this country when the greater threat is more likely to be the poor effort so far in vaccinating the developing countries. You know, where most of the variants of any significance has been coming from. Saying this doesn't mean I think trying to vaccinate as much of our population as we can is pointless. I just think it will likely not have the hoped for consequences some think it will. Not when large populations in developing countries, who's health is already behind the rest of the world is acting like a large petri dish. Borders are being crossed all over the world by migrants trying to escape, often from places that are heavily infected and bringing it with them. This doesn't even take into account all the legal travel that occurs every day between countries. 

None of that is an argument against vaccination. Rather, I think it simply is a more realistic view of things than simply saying if only everyone was vaccinated the problem would go away. Not in my opinion. Not unless we vaccinate the whole world, which we aren't doing.  Since we aren't I think we're going to be in a more or less perpetual round of reinfections and introductions of new variants for a while. Maybe a long while. 

 
 
 
TᵢG
Professor Principal
2.1.57  TᵢG  replied to  Drakkonis @2.1.56    7 months ago
Well, to my knowledge, vaccines don't prevent infection. It trains our immune systems to deal with it if or when we do get infected.

Correct, the virus must enter the body for the immune system antibodies to attack it.   So one must be infected, technically, before the immune system can fight the virus.   The protection, however, is there.   One can be infected and then be cleared of same instantly by the immune system.   Depending upon the person and the nature and volume of virus molecules, we will either have the infection destroyed at the onset, cause some mild reactions, cause the individual to be sick or, eventually, kill the individual.

But I think it is perfectly reasonable to view the vaccine as a highly-effective mechanism for training the body to kill invading virus molecules before they damage the individual or linger in the body to infect another individual.

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
2.2  seeder  devangelical  replied to  Nowhere Man @2    7 months ago

I don't care if those anti-vax nuts get the shot or not, natural selection will eventually find them. I do however deserve to be protected from these nuts out in the world. I don't care what happens to them and I don't need to be exposed to any typhoid trumpster or religious wacko gambling with their own lives. their freedom ends where me and mine starts. unless there is a valid medical reason for someone not to be vaccinated, get the shot or get fucked over until they do. this issue has already been decided by SCOTUS a long time ago.

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Senior Quiet
2.2.1  Jack_TX  replied to  devangelical @2.2    7 months ago
I don't care if those anti-vax nuts get the shot or not, natural selection will eventually find them.

Exactly.

I do however deserve to be protected from these nuts out in the world.

Then get your ass vaccinated.  Once YOU are vaccinated, you are protected against the disease, regardless of what other people do. 

Because math.  

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
2.2.2  Trout Giggles  replied to  Jack_TX @2.2.1    7 months ago

Because Omnicron

 
 
 
MrFrost
Professor Principal
2.2.3  MrFrost  replied to  Jack_TX @2.2.1    7 months ago
Then get your ass vaccinated.  Once YOU are vaccinated, you are protected against the disease, regardless of what other people do. 

The reason we keep having new variants is because some people will not get vaccinated. Viruses mutate over time, we have known this for a LONG LONG time. The only way to stop covid is to get everyone vaccinated. BUT, since that's not going to happen because anti-vaxers aren't typically the sharpest tools in the shed, we will be stuck with covid for a very long time. It will continue to kill family, friends and strangers alike. The problem with your statement is that as new variants rear their heads, it means that those of us that do get vaccinated have to keep getting vaccinated over and over again because anti-vaxers keep spreading this shit around. 

 
 
 
Veronica
Masters Expert
2.2.4  Veronica  replied to  MrFrost @2.2.3    7 months ago
because anti-vaxers keep spreading this shit around. 

Ding ding ding.....

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
2.2.5  Trout Giggles  replied to  MrFrost @2.2.3    7 months ago

The problem with your statement is that as new variants rear their heads, it means that those of us that do get vaccinated have to keep getting vaccinated over and over again because anti-vaxers keep spreading this shit around. 

 

I didn't think about that.

Also...does everyone really want to keep wearing masks?

 
 
 
Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom
Professor Guide
2.2.6  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom  replied to  Trout Giggles @2.2.5    7 months ago
Also...does everyone really want to keep wearing masks?

R.135d48eed1f0434c99c057b72f59a208?rik=U%2bY5VUyuTEDTuA&riu=http%3a%2f%2fmedia-cache-ak0.pinimg.com%2f736x%2fea%2f7b%2fb1%2fea7bb1da915f99272114af830f01291d.jpg&ehk=vGKuYQYiIjCguvNcmG4bMptUPAqYUD1AG1f3B5HOT7U%3d&risl=&pid=ImgRaw&r=0

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
2.2.7  Trout Giggles  replied to  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom @2.2.6    7 months ago

I would never cover that face with a mask.

Did you know that cat passed away?

 
 
 
Veronica
Masters Expert
2.2.8  Veronica  replied to  Trout Giggles @2.2.5    7 months ago
Also...does everyone really want to keep wearing masks?

I don't know - last year was the first winter that I did not catch a massive head cold - I kind of like that.  Of course it could have been all the hand sanitizer I was drinking....

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
2.2.9  Trout Giggles  replied to  Veronica @2.2.8    7 months ago

I didn't catch my annual bout of bronchitis last year, either. I think it's because I have taken an active interest in not touching stuff with my bare hands

 
 
 
Veronica
Masters Expert
2.2.10  Veronica  replied to  Trout Giggles @2.2.9    7 months ago
bare hands

Bear hands????

78841287-brown-bear-raising-up-hand.jpg

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
2.2.11  Trout Giggles  replied to  Veronica @2.2.10    7 months ago

jrSmiley_10_smiley_image.gif

I envy those hands. But mostly those claws

 
 
 
Greg Jones
Professor Guide
2.2.12  Greg Jones  replied to  MrFrost @2.2.3    7 months ago

We could vaccinate every single person in the US and it wouldn't make a difference. We still have the rest of the world to deal with and can't keep all the carriers out. None of these variants originated in the US. 

 
 
 
Veronica
Masters Expert
2.2.13  Veronica  replied to  Trout Giggles @2.2.11    7 months ago
But mostly those claws

Yea, I love those claws...

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
2.2.14  Trout Giggles  replied to  Greg Jones @2.2.12    7 months ago

Then let's close all the borders ban any and all travel out of or into the states.

Then you can truly call Biden a tyrant

 
 
 
Greg Jones
Professor Guide
2.2.15  Greg Jones  replied to  Trout Giggles @2.2.14    7 months ago

Then keep doing what you've been doing...getting your shots, masking up, and socially distancing.

 
 
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
2.2.16  XXJefferson51  replied to  Trout Giggles @2.2.2    7 months ago

[deleted]

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
2.2.17  Trout Giggles  replied to  XXJefferson51 @2.2.16    7 months ago

You don't know squat. So better to be thought a fool instead of opening your mouth and removing all doubt

 
 
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
2.2.18  XXJefferson51  replied to  XXJefferson51 @2.2.16    7 months ago

[deleted]

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Senior Quiet
2.2.19  Jack_TX  replied to  MrFrost @2.2.3    7 months ago
The reason we keep having new variants is because some people will not get vaccinated.

If you're talking about the 94% of the developing world that isn't vaccinated, then I think you may want to check your privilege.  It may be just a bit harsh to blame them for not getting vaccinated when many of them can't even find food or potable water.

If you're talking about the Trump supporters you blame everything else on, that's post-doctoral, pioneering, breakthrough levels of utterly, stupidly inaccurate.  

The problem with your statement is that as new variants rear their heads, it means that those of us that do get vaccinated have to keep getting vaccinated over and over again because anti-vaxers keep spreading this shit around. 

That is just so stupid on so many levels.

I'm curious.... Exactly how many of those hated "anti-vaxxers" do they have in Botswana?  I've never been.  Does everybody there wear MAGA hats or what?  

How...precisely....are the American anti-vaxxers you hate supposedly responsible for a variant from South Africa?  Do explain how the fuck THAT happened.  Did they convert their AR-15s to dart guns and run around on some sort of infection safari?  

What is your imagined timeline for the eradication of Covid?  It took 30 years to get rid of smallpox.  After 60+ years of a vaccine, we STILL haven't eradicated polio.  So naturally, we should expect to be rid of Covid within 6 months of the vaccines being widely available.  Riiiiiight. 

I'm not even going to bother to talk about the CDC data, because if you had any interest in reality you wouldn't believe the stupid shit you've just posted.

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
2.2.20  seeder  devangelical  replied to  Jack_TX @2.2.1    7 months ago

I am vaccinated, along with the booster. I deserve to know which businesses haven't mandated vaccines for their employees so that I can choose not to do business with them. just because some halfwit wants to gamble with their own health, doesn't mean he can gamble with mine. math.

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Masters Principal
2.2.21  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  MrFrost @2.2.3    7 months ago
he problem with your statement is that as new variants rear their heads, it means that those of us that do get vaccinated have to keep getting vaccinated over and over again because anti-vaxers keep spreading this shit around. 

You do realize that even vaccinated people still get COVID and can still spread it around too right? They just don't feel as bad with symptoms. See 2.1.8

 
 
 
Tacos!
Professor Expert
2.2.22  Tacos!  replied to  Jack_TX @2.2.1    7 months ago
Once YOU are vaccinated, you are protected against the disease, regardless of what other people do. 

I'm curious then, about your reaction to Drakkonis in @2.1.26 where we read:

vaccination doesn't prevent anyone from getting Covid

If that's true, then we aren't protected. Just wondering what you think of that.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
2.2.23  Tessylo  replied to  Greg Jones @2.2.12    7 months ago

Of course it would make a difference!  jrSmiley_78_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Senior Quiet
2.2.24  Jack_TX  replied to  Tacos! @2.2.22    7 months ago
If that's true, then we aren't protected. Just wondering what you think of that.

We are definitely protected against the severe reactions our bodies have to the disease, like the extreme respiratory inflammation and other symptoms that cause us to be "sick". 

Think of it like Montezuma's revenge.  Mexicans take in the same microbes that Americans do when in Mexico.  But they are immune to the effects of those microbes in a way that Americans are not, so they don't get diarrhea and stomach cramps like we do.

A similar situation happens with Covid and vaccinated individuals.  You may contract Covid in the sense that you have a given load of the virus in your body that exceeds whatever threshold, but the probability of the adverse symptoms becomes incredibly small.

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Senior Quiet
2.2.25  Jack_TX  replied to  devangelical @2.2.20    7 months ago
I am vaccinated, along with the booster.

Well done.  Got my booster yesterday.

I deserve to know which businesses haven't mandated vaccines for their employees so that I can choose not to do business with them.

No you don't.  It's none of your business, any more than the details of their health insurance plans or their drug screening program.  

just because some halfwit wants to gamble with their own health, doesn't mean he can gamble with mine. math.

[deleted]

 
 
 
Veronica
Masters Expert
2.2.26  Veronica  replied to  Jack_TX @2.2.25    7 months ago
that once you are fully vaccinated, other people are no threat to you.

How about those that are fully vaccination & then came down with Covid - I showed you the numbers.  So I guess you are wrong or maybe just mistaken.

Here they are again... Non-vaccinated people are a threat to those that are vaccinated.  But don't let the numbers bother you - keep putting your head in the sand.

Regional COVID statistics as of November 30, 2021

  • 31 out of every 100,000 residents in the Finger Lakes region is hospitalized due to COVID-19
  • In New York City – where vaccination rates are higher - there are five hospitalizations per 100,000 residents
  • 20% of all COVID-related ICU patients in New York state are in Finger Lakes-area hospitals
  • Of those hospitalized for COVID in Monroe County, 65% are not vaccinated
  • Of those in ICU for COVID, almost 80% are not vaccinated
  • Of those who are on a respirator for COVID, 82% are not vaccinated

“The facts and science show that the vast majority of people in hospitals with COVID could have avoided it simply by getting vaccinated,” said Bello. “Because of these preventable cases, those needing an ICU bed for unavoidable illness may have a lengthy wait for a bed to free up. This pandemic is with us until we approach a fully vaccinated population. If you won’t get vaccinated for yourself or your loved ones and their safety, please get vaccinated to allow others who need critical care to get the timely treatment they need and deserve.”

monroecounty

 
 
 
cjcold
Professor Quiet
2.2.27  cjcold  replied to  Jack_TX @2.2.1    7 months ago
you are protected

You are not 100% protected!

The vaccine plus a mask and regular hand washing do not protect you 100%.

It only takes one friend or family member to infect you.

Didn't do thanksgiving with the family this year and will likely not do christmas.

They don't believe in vaccinations or masks.

Hell, they don't even believe in anthropogenic global warming.

 

 
 
 
MrFrost
Professor Principal
2.2.28  MrFrost  replied to  Trout Giggles @2.2.5    7 months ago

Also...does everyone really want to keep wearing masks?

I have to wear a mask at work, 9 hours a day, plus whenever I am out and about. I get the anti-maskers complaints, but I do wear it. Would I rather not? Of course. 

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
2.2.29  Trout Giggles  replied to  MrFrost @2.2.28    7 months ago

I wear one when I'm required to.

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Masters Principal
2.3  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Nowhere Man @2    7 months ago

This article makes it sound as though the fired former employees aren't held to the same rules the other unemployed people are as in you have to be actively looking for employment.

It would be different IMO if there was a mandate and they were just hired, but employees who have some length of tenure aren't used to the new ruling and should be exempt and NOT fired as it wasn't policy when they began their tenure.

 
 
 
cjcold
Professor Quiet
2.3.1  cjcold  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @2.3    7 months ago

Fuck all anti-vaxers. they only put the rest of society in danger. Shun them!

 
 
 
al Jizzerror
Sophomore Expert
2.3.2  al Jizzerror  replied to  cjcold @2.3.1    7 months ago

jrSmiley_28_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
2.3.3  Tessylo  replied to  cjcold @2.3.1    7 months ago

Doesn't matter WHEN they we're hired.  No vaccine?

YOU'RE FIRED

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Masters Principal
2.3.4  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  cjcold @2.3.1    7 months ago

See 3.1.21

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
Professor Guide
2.3.5  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  cjcold @2.3.1    7 months ago

There are many deserted towns in this country.  All the anti vaxers should take them over, live in them and kill each other off.

 
 
 
Veronica
Masters Expert
2.3.6  Veronica  replied to  Paula Bartholomew @2.3.5    7 months ago

As long as they aren't in my state

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
2.3.7  Texan1211  replied to  Paula Bartholomew @2.3.5    7 months ago

[deleted]

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
Professor Guide
2.3.8  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  Veronica @2.3.6    7 months ago

Any town they might take over should come with warnings signs that they are willful CV participants and to enter at your own risk.

 
 
 
Ozzwald
Professor Quiet
2.4  Ozzwald  replied to  Nowhere Man @2    7 months ago
Well they weren't reckless freeloaders until the federal government made them that way with their vax or be fired mandate.

Not just federal government, private companies are also requiring vaccines.  And apparently, people that are choosing to quit a PRIVATE COMPANY are also qualifying for these benefits.

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
2.4.1  Trout Giggles  replied to  Ozzwald @2.4    7 months ago

people that are choosing to quit a PRIVATE COMPANY are also qualifying for these benefits.

 

now that's just horse shit!

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Masters Principal
2.4.2  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Trout Giggles @2.4.1    7 months ago

What is also horseshit is the fact that the article is claiming that people are quitting when in reality they are being fired. It's a bit misleading unless after reading it for the fourth time I'm missing something..............................If they quit, screw 'em but if they get fired that's a horse of a different color.

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
2.4.3  Trout Giggles  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @2.4.2    7 months ago

They basically are choosing to quit. They refuse the vaccine...they get fired. They made a choice.

Choice. Choice. Choice.

And private companies can pretty much do what they want. Isn't that what conservatives harp about all the time...let business do business and be done with all those annoying regulations?

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
2.4.4  Tessylo  replied to  Trout Giggles @2.4.3    7 months ago

Yup it was their choice to be an ignorant shithead.  You go girlfriend!

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Senior Quiet
2.4.5  Jack_TX  replied to  Trout Giggles @2.4.1    7 months ago
now that's just horse shit!

Horse shit in the sense that the statement in question is inaccurate and misleading?  Yes.  Yes it is.

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
2.4.6  Trout Giggles  replied to  Jack_TX @2.4.5    7 months ago

Horse shit in the sense that a private company tells an employee to get a vaxx or get fired. The employee refuses and then the damned state pays the employee to sit on his fat ass all day watching TV

 
 
 
Jack_TX
Senior Quiet
2.4.7  Jack_TX  replied to  Trout Giggles @2.4.3    7 months ago
They basically are choosing to quit. 

I think you'll find they are not.

  

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Masters Principal
2.4.8  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Trout Giggles @2.4.3    7 months ago
And private companies can pretty much do what they want. Isn't that what conservatives harp about all the time...let business do business and be done with all those annoying regulations?

Ummmm the federal mandate isn't letting business do business without an annoying regulation (mandate).

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
2.4.9  Trout Giggles  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @2.4.8    7 months ago

You know what FINE!

I'm protected. I got my shot and I got my booster. So if somebody doesn't want a vaccine it's their funeral, not mine.

And yes, I literally mean funeral

 
 
 
Ozzwald
Professor Quiet
2.4.10  Ozzwald  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @2.4.2    7 months ago
What is also horseshit is the fact that the article is claiming that people are quitting when in reality they are being fired.

Perhaps the article is just addressing the people that chose to quit when they discover that the vaccine is being mandated by their employer?  Or does that not fit within your faux outrage?

 
 
 
Ozzwald
Professor Quiet
2.4.11  Ozzwald  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @2.4.8    7 months ago
Ummmm the federal mandate isn't letting business do business without an annoying regulation (mandate).

They can CHOOSE to not do business with the federal government.  That would exclude them from the mandate.

 
 
 
MrFrost
Professor Principal
2.4.12  MrFrost  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @2.4.2    7 months ago
If they quit, screw 'em but if they get fired that's a horse of a different color.

If they are fired for violating company policy, should they be able to collect benefits? I've seen people just stop showing up for work, the company has no choice but to fire them and more often than not, they get benefits. It's a slippery slope. But if you are a public health risk, you know it and refuse to correct the situation, then that's on the employee. Where I work, they actually pay you an extra $300.00 for proof of covid vaccinations. Win win. 

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Masters Principal
2.4.13  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Trout Giggles @2.4.9    7 months ago

Couldn't agree with you more.

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Masters Principal
2.4.14  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Ozzwald @2.4.10    7 months ago
Perhaps the article is just addressing the people that chose to quit

Perhaps you are, once again, putting words out there that aren't out there to fit your agenda and faux outrage that the states are doing WTF they want to.

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
2.4.15  Trout Giggles  replied to  Ozzwald @2.4.11    7 months ago
They can CHOOSE to not do business with the federal government.  That would exclude them from the mandate.

And isn't that what conservatives want? Choice when it comes to doing business?

 
 
 
Ozzwald
Professor Quiet
2.4.16  Ozzwald  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @2.4.14    7 months ago
Perhaps you are, once again, putting words out there that aren't out there to fit your agenda

Perhaps you do not understand the meaning behind a question mark in the English language. 

Or, perhaps you do know, which is why you purposely failed to include my entire quote.

[Deleted]

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Masters Principal
2.4.17  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Ozzwald @2.4.16    7 months ago

[deleted]

 
 
 
Nowhere Man
Junior Expert
2.4.18  Nowhere Man  replied to  Ozzwald @2.4    7 months ago

Not just federal government, private companies are also requiring vaccines.  And apparently, people that are choosing to quit a PRIVATE COMPANY are also qualifying for these benefits.

Well lets not talk about the provision of the mandate that REQUIRES any PRIVATE COMPANY that is in any way connected to a federal government contract or contractor to also be subject to the mandate...
Pretty much that means ANY and EVERY major company in the nation firing workers is firing them at the order of the government... 
You can't have it both ways, if the companies are subject to the mandate cause they are associated with the government, the workers fired because of the mandate are covered....
the difference is this, you EQUATE not being vaxxed as a personal decision and it very well is.... One cannot receive UE benefits is they take themselves out of the workforce by choice...
Hence, you make the leap that not getting vaxxed is a choice not to work.... Yep they showed up for work every day including the last day before firing... It's not a choice of refusing to work.... It is the work forcing something not related to ability to work, or type of work being done, upon an individual... Hence the reality is that they are being forced out of their work position by something that is unrelated to work not in their control... The employer doesn't want to fire them, they must, if they intend to continue working under their government contracts... 
They were fired due to government force... 
the real sad thing, if ALL the employers refused to fire them and told the government to screw themselves? what position would the government be in then? they would be screwed, the military would be severely limited, ALL government services would be either shut down or severely curtailed, potentially to the point of not even being able to make a phone call...
Business has the upper hand in this against severe government overreach, if they choose to use it... (good luck with that I know wishful thinking no matter how true)
 
 
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
2.4.19  XXJefferson51  replied to  Ozzwald @2.4    7 months ago

[deleted]

 
 
 
cjcold
Professor Quiet
2.4.20  cjcold  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @2.4.2    7 months ago

[removed]

 
 
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
2.5  XXJefferson51  replied to  Nowhere Man @2    7 months ago

[deleted]

 
 
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
2.5.1  XXJefferson51  replied to  XXJefferson51 @2.5    7 months ago

[deleted]

 
 
 
Nerm_L
PhD Principal
3  Nerm_L    7 months ago

Unemployment benefits are available to workers who have been fired, not to workers who have quit.  The vaccine mandates are about firing workers.  

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
3.1  seeder  devangelical  replied to  Nerm_L @3    7 months ago
The vaccine mandates are about firing workers.  

what a load of shit. the vaccines are about protecting the health of americans during a pandemic. anti-vaxers deserve to be fired.

 
 
 
Nowhere Man
Junior Expert
3.1.1  Nowhere Man  replied to  devangelical @3.1    7 months ago

Try to tell that to the thousands of fired union workers in Washington, they were fired to get the state employee vax percentage from 72% to 94%+ overnight, and the governuer has been bragging to everyone that will listen about how they were very successful with their state employee vax plan... 

[deleted]

The hypocritical part? They kept those non-vaxed people that couldn't be replaced, they were granted exemptions... Everybody else was fired....

The load of shit? is you and people like you thinking that your personal rights supersedes anyone else's that disagrees with you...

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
3.1.2  Tessylo  replied to  Nowhere Man @3.1.1    7 months ago

Link?  Proof?

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
3.1.3  Trout Giggles  replied to  Nowhere Man @3.1.1    7 months ago

My personal right of not dying from a virus someone spread does not supercede your right to not get vaxxed?

You call yourself a Christian. Just how do you interpret the Golden Rule and the most important thing Jesus said....Love your neighbor. Loving your neighbor includes getting a shot to prevent death and disease

 
 
 
Ozzwald
Professor Quiet
3.1.4  Ozzwald  replied to  Tessylo @3.1.2    7 months ago

Link?  Proof?

don-t-hold-your-breath-message-recycled-paper-note-pinned-cork-board-concept-image-52023819.jpg

 
 
 
MrFrost
Professor Principal
3.1.5  MrFrost  replied to  devangelical @3.1    7 months ago

what a load of shit. the vaccines are about protecting the health of americans during a pandemic. anti-vaxers deserve to be fired.

I agree with you but Nerm is factually correct. May not always be a fair system, but that's the way it works. 

 
 
 
Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom
Professor Guide
3.1.6  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom  replied to  Ozzwald @3.1.4    7 months ago

*snort!*

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
3.1.7  Trout Giggles  replied to  MrFrost @3.1.5    7 months ago

kill joy

 
 
 
Kavika
Professor Principal
3.1.8  Kavika   replied to  Nowhere Man @3.1.1    7 months ago

1800 were either fired, quit or retired to avoid the vaccine. Washington state has about 119,000 state employees. Roughly 1% of the total number of employees so I doubt that the 72% to 94% was entirely made up of those that quit, retired or were fired. 

 
 
 
Nowhere Man
Junior Expert
3.1.9  Nowhere Man  replied to  Kavika @3.1.8    7 months ago
1800 were either fired, quit or retired to avoid the vaccine. Washington state has about 119,000 state employees. Roughly 1% of the total number of employees so I doubt that the 72% to 94% was entirely made up of those that quit, retired or were fired. 

Don't tell me Kav, tell governuer Inslee and the liberal talking heads incessantly repeating that garbage...

 
 
 
Kavika
Professor Principal
3.1.10  Kavika   replied to  Nowhere Man @3.1.9    7 months ago

The point is that thousands were not fired and the 1800 or so that were either fired, quit or retired makeup 1% of the state workforce. 

I don't think there will be a problem replacing them in the state workforce.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
3.1.11  Tessylo  replied to  Kavika @3.1.10    7 months ago

Thanks for the truth, something some folks don't seem to be concerned with

 
 
 
Nowhere Man
Junior Expert
3.1.12  Nowhere Man  replied to  Kavika @3.1.10    7 months ago
The point is that thousands were not fired and the 1800 or so that were either fired, quit or retired makeup 1% of the state workforce. 

That is the part that isn't clear yet, depending on who you listen to, the 1800 are only the direct firings and doesn't include the the retirees and people that left the job early because they were going to be fired anyway...  AND, that 1800 is only the state government, it doesn't account for the local governments which are next to impossible to get collected data on... A lot of it isn't published yet... Many of the local governments are withholding the information against public inquiry... It eventually will be released but way to late to be considered as anything but historical data...

And those being fired by private companies with connection to the government, unknown as of this date, and we will probably never know the true impact there...

But it is interesting that they are openly saying 72 to 90+ and all requests for the data that claim is based upon, are being rebuffed.......

Not unusual for this government and it's fearless king...

 
 
 
Kavika
Professor Principal
3.1.13  Kavika   replied to  Nowhere Man @3.1.12    7 months ago

According to this link the number of state employees (which is what we are discussing) was 1887 in total. 1696 were fired, 112 resigned and 42 retired. Another 1927 were given medical or religious exemptions.

I know that there are thousands of others covered by the mandate, but as stated this is the state employees. 

They don't want to get the vaccine that is their right, being fired is one of the consequences of that decision. 

IMO, not getting the vaccine is really stupid.

Here is an article on the Seattle city employees and the vaccine/mandate. 

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
3.1.14  Tessylo  replied to  Nowhere Man @3.1.12    7 months ago

It's all quite clear thanks to Kavika despite all your denials.

 
 
 
Nowhere Man
Junior Expert
3.1.15  Nowhere Man  replied to  Kavika @3.1.13    7 months ago

Yeah I've seen those brother, Still partial, incomplete data, and I agree not getting it is stupid, but forcing it on people is even worse....

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
3.1.16  Tessylo  replied to  Nowhere Man @3.1.15    7 months ago

It's not being forced on anyone.  They have the right to be ignorant shitheads.  

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
3.1.17  seeder  devangelical  replied to  Tessylo @3.1.16    7 months ago

free dumb

 
 
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
3.1.18  XXJefferson51  replied to  Nowhere Man @3.1.15    7 months ago

[deleted]

 
 
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
3.1.19  XXJefferson51  replied to  devangelical @3.1.17    7 months ago

[deleted]

 
 
 
Nerm_L
PhD Principal
3.1.20  Nerm_L  replied to  Kavika @3.1.13    7 months ago
According to this link the number of state employees (which is what we are discussing) was 1887 in total. 1696 were fired, 112 resigned and 42 retired. Another 1927 were given medical or religious exemptions.

Those workers who have been fired are eligible for unemployment benefits.  The seeded article is claiming those workers fired for refusing to comply with the vaccine mandate are being given preferential treatment.  That's less than a half-truth, at best.

The workers aren't being fired for engaging in illegal activity, such as failing a drug test.  The vaccine mandate is not a law, so, refusing the vaccine is not illegal.  The vaccine mandate is not supported by existing law which is why the vaccine mandate is being successfully challenged in the courts.

 
 
 
Nerm_L
PhD Principal
3.1.21  Nerm_L  replied to  Trout Giggles @3.1.3    7 months ago
My personal right of not dying from a virus someone spread does not supercede your right to not get vaxxed?

The delta variant is being spread by vaccinated people, too.  Jen Psaki is proof of that.

The vaccine lessens the risk of hospitalization.  But waning immunity means the vaccines will not protect against infection.  The vaccine is intended to prevent you from dying, that's all.  The vaccine wasn't intended to prevent infection or spread of virus.

You're at no greater risk from an unvaccinated person than from a vaccinated person.  The unvaccinated are at greater risk of hospitalization and death but do not pose a greater risk to a vaccinated person.

 
 
 
Kavika
Professor Principal
3.1.22  Kavika   replied to  Nerm_L @3.1.20    7 months ago

My comment had nothing to do with whether they can draw unemployment or not. It was in response to NWM and the numbers that have been terminated/quit/retired in Washington. 

The seeded article has nothing to do with the state of Washington which is not a red star and I don't think that the governor there, Inslee is making them eligible for unemployment benefits.

 
 
 
Nerm_L
PhD Principal
3.1.23  Nerm_L  replied to  Kavika @3.1.22    7 months ago
My comment had nothing to do with whether they can draw unemployment or not. It was in response to NWM and the numbers that have been terminated/quit/retired in Washington.  The seeded article has nothing to do with the state of Washington which is not a red star and I don't think that the governor there, Inslee is making them eligible for unemployment benefits.

Well, excuse me for including the seeded topic in my comment.  So it's okay if people in blue states fired for noncompliance with mandate to receive unemployment benefits?  It's only people in red state fired for refusing the vaccine that are being given welfare?

 
 
 
Nowhere Man
Junior Expert
3.1.24  Nowhere Man  replied to  Nerm_L @3.1.20    7 months ago
The vaccine mandate is not a law, so, refusing the vaccine is not illegal.  The vaccine mandate is not supported by existing law which is why the vaccine mandate is being successfully challenged in the courts.

Here in Washington State my friend, they are not being fired over Biden's mandate, they are being fired over Inslee's mandate... And no, they are not getting UE benefits because of it... The State government here is absolutely full on go along, obey, or we will trash you permanently...

What Biden would like to do nationally, Inslee IS doing statewide... The judges stay and injunction doesn't apply here... Or anywhere else a state goveneur has created his own mandate scheme...

 
 
 
Nowhere Man
Junior Expert
3.1.25  Nowhere Man  replied to  Kavika @3.1.22    7 months ago
The seeded article has nothing to do with the state of Washington

From the original post...

Republican governors have decided to coddle vaccine refusers, even as they cut benefits for everyone else.

[deleted]

 
 
 
Nerm_L
PhD Principal
3.1.26  Nerm_L  replied to  Nowhere Man @3.1.24    7 months ago
Here in Washington State my friend, they are not being fired over Biden's mandate, they are being fired over Inslee's mandate... And no, they are not getting UE benefits because of it... The State government here is absolutely full on go along, obey, or we will trash you permanently...

I wasn't aware that Washington was denying unemployment benefits.  In any state, it's necessary for the governor to put a vaccine mandate in place for state employees.

Firing workers that refuse the vaccine won't prevent hospitals being overwhelmed or stop spread of the virus.  The delta variant is being spread by vaccinated people, too.  The vaccines were intended to reduce the risk of severe symptoms and address hospitals being overwhelmed; the vaccines were not intended to stop spread of the virus. 

What we've seen throughout the pandemic is how easily hospitals can be overwhelmed.  The vaccine mandate is attempting to avoid addressing shortcomings in our healthcare system.  Politically the vaccine mandate is portrayed as a quick, easy fix that distracts from an inadequate healthcare system.  And that's why punishing those who refuse the vaccine has become politically attractive.  Those who can't lead punish those who will not follow.

 
 
 
Kavika
Professor Principal
3.1.27  Kavika   replied to  Nerm_L @3.1.23    7 months ago

Look Nerm, I don't care if it's a red or blue state, IMO they are making a decision and the result was they were terminated. It's that simple, they have to live with their decisions. 

I think that they are nuts for not getting the vaccine, not only could/did it cost them their jobs but it could well cost them their lives. 

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
3.1.28  Dulay  replied to  Nerm_L @3.1.20    7 months ago
That's less than a half-truth, at best.

Not at all Nerm. To collect unemployment, one must have lost their job through 'no fault of their own'. Refusing to comply with a 'condition of employment' is a CHOICE and therefore the fault of the employee. 

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
3.1.29  Dulay  replied to  Nerm_L @3.1.21    7 months ago
You're at no greater risk from an unvaccinated person than from a vaccinated person. 

False. 

Vaccinated who get breakthrough infections less contagious – Harvard Gazette

 
 
 
JohnRussell
Professor Principal
3.1.30  JohnRussell  replied to  Dulay @3.1.28    7 months ago

Unemployment compensation for employees generally needs to be approved by the employer. In Illinois anyway. If the employer wants to approve it for someone who they fired they can do that. They may choose to refuse it to people that they fired for cause but are not required to. 

I have a brother who approved unemployment compensation for someone who had stolen money from the cashbox of the business, and was fired for it, because my brother knew that the guy had a family and would need the unemployment money. 

 
 
 
Nerm_L
PhD Principal
3.1.31  Nerm_L  replied to  Kavika @3.1.27    7 months ago
Look Nerm, I don't care if it's a red or blue state, IMO they are making a decision and the result was they were terminated. It's that simple, they have to live with their decisions.  I think that they are nuts for not getting the vaccine, not only could/did it cost them their jobs but it could well cost them their lives. 

Yes, they made a decision concerning an arbitrary and politically motivated condition of employment requiring assimilation.  The individual is being required to assimilate into what society has deemed acceptable behavior.  Society is telling these individuals that a choice defying assimilation into socially acceptable expectations will be severely punished.

Those demanding assimilation are using the methods and tools that have been historically used to coerce assimilation and punish defiance.  Fear.  Scapegoating.  Dehumanizing.  Stereotyping.  Segregating.  We've seen how this has been done before with racial, ethnic, and religious groups in the United States.  The pattern should be familiar.  The self-righteous justifications should be familiar.  

 
 
 
Nerm_L
PhD Principal
3.1.32  Nerm_L  replied to  Dulay @3.1.29    7 months ago
False.  Vaccinated who get breakthrough infections less contagious – Harvard Gazette

Better read that link again.  Those with breakthrough infections pose a risk of spreading the virus for an average of 5.5 days.  The virus is spread by an infected individual until the individual clears the virus.  A vaccinated individual clears the virus in 5.5 days on average while an unvaccinated individual clears the virus in 7.5 days on average.  So both the vaccinated and unvaccinated pose the same risk of spreading the virus for an average 5.5 days.

The vaccines were not intended to prevent infection.  The vaccines were intended to prevent severe symptoms.  And the need for a booster indicates that the effectiveness in preventing severe symptoms wanes over time.  The authorization of boosters is evidence of the risk posed by vaccinated people spreading the virus.

Is the CDC differentiating breakthrough infections in its data reporting?  How do we know how many of the daily reported infections are breakthrough infections?  The performance of the vaccines is measured by hospitalization and not by breakthrough infections.

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
3.1.33  Sparty On  replied to  Nerm_L @3.1.32    7 months ago

I had a breakthrough infection in October.   Almost six months to the day from when i got my second Pfizer shot.  

Low grade fever for one day, some lung congestion.   Nothing bad but i Rapid tested COVID positive for 12 days.

 
 
 
Kavika
Professor Principal
3.1.34  Kavika   replied to  Nerm_L @3.1.31    7 months ago
Fear.  Scapegoating.  Dehumanizing.  Stereotyping.  Segregating.  We've seen how this has been done before with racial, ethnic, and religious groups in the United States.  The pattern should be familiar.  The self-righteous justifications should be familiar.  

I am an American Indian and we as a people and me personally have experienced all of the above, but we are the most vaccinated group of any of the American people. Why do you think that is, Nerm? Because we are not ignorant assholes and value life ours our peoples and all Americans. If any group should be reluctant to get the vaccine or anti-vaxxers it would be us but it's not and that should tell you something.

If their place of business wants them to be vaccinated to work there then so be it as it is their right. If they choose to not get vaccinated and whine about their rights that is their problem and it is also the problem of the US as a whole since mutations will keep coming. Time for them to pull their heads out of their ass.

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Masters Principal
3.1.35  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Kavika @3.1.34    7 months ago
If they choose to not get vaccinated and whine about their rights that is their problem and it is also the problem of the US as a whole since mutations will keep.

I hope you keep reading some of the comments here as well as on other seeds. Just because you are vaccinated doesn't mean you aren't susceptible to getting and spreading the disease. It only lessens the severity once one has been vaccinated. One member posted a little while ago how 6 months almost to the day after his second shot, he got a breakthrough case with mild symptoms............and tested positive for 12 days after.

And this, I do believe as do some of the experts, thing is more than likely going to stay around for quite some time. I see it now as an every six months booster shot will be the norm. 

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
3.1.36  seeder  devangelical  replied to  Kavika @3.1.34    7 months ago

I like to hear from anyone that has never had a condition of their employment change during a career.

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Masters Principal
3.1.37  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  devangelical @3.1.36    7 months ago

Me

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
3.1.38  seeder  devangelical  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @3.1.37    7 months ago

I call bullshit.

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Masters Principal
3.1.39  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  devangelical @3.1.38    7 months ago

Figures. You ask, you get, and you blow it off. Longest tenure I had was a nine year stint and there were no policy changes in that time.

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
3.1.40  seeder  devangelical  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @3.1.39    7 months ago

key word, ...never...

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Masters Principal
3.1.41  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  devangelical @3.1.40    7 months ago

oh you meant WHOLE working life. Still the same. Haven't been at any place longer than the nine years twice in my 50 year work history. They didn't have time or the inkling. Any of them.

 
 
 
Kavika
Professor Principal
3.1.42  Kavika   replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @3.1.35    7 months ago

I've read all the comments and I'm well aware that there are breakthrough cases and how it works. 

My point is that the unvaccinated need to get their heads out of their ass.

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
3.1.43  Dulay  replied to  Nerm_L @3.1.32    7 months ago
So both the vaccinated and unvaccinated pose the same risk of spreading the virus for an average 5.5 days.

So now you're adding an equivocation to what was an unequivocal statement. 

At least that's one tiny step toward the facts. 

jrSmiley_84_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
3.1.44  seeder  devangelical  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @3.1.41    7 months ago

bullshit 2.0

 
 
 
Nerm_L
PhD Principal
3.1.45  Nerm_L  replied to  Dulay @3.1.43    7 months ago
So now you're adding an equivocation to what was an unequivocal statement.  At least that's one tiny step toward the facts. 

The claim was that vaccinated people pose as much risk for spreading the virus as does unvaccinated people.  You're link provided evidence to support that claim.  That's not equivocation; that's validation.

The vaccine mandate is a deliberate discriminatory effort to coerce the unvaccinated to be vaccinated through threat of punishment.  What will that discriminatory practice achieve?  Firing the unvaccinated will not reduce spread of the virus since both the vaccinated and unvaccinated spread the virus.  And the unvaccinated can overwhelm the healthcare system whether or not they are employed.  Denying the unvaccinated unemployment benefits means they cannot isolate themselves.  The discriminatory vaccine mandate forces the unvaccinated to mix with the general population in a more random and uncontrolled manner.  Denying unemployment benefits to those fired for refusing the vaccine actually increases the risk of overwhelming the healthcare system.

The vaccine mandates are about politics and not about the pandemic.  And the deliberate discriminatory effort of vaccine mandates is intended to validate the political response to the pandemic.  

 
 
 
Dulay
Professor Principal
3.1.46  Dulay  replied to  Nerm_L @3.1.45    7 months ago
The claim was that vaccinated people pose as much risk for spreading the virus as does unvaccinated people.  

Well gee Nerm, let's take a look. Oh here it is, you ACTUALLY said:

You're at no greater risk from an unvaccinated person than from a vaccinated person. 

But hey Nerm, NEITHER of your claims is true.

You're link provided evidence to support that claim. 

Wow Nerm, you summarized the article and still don't seem to actually understand it. 

2 MORE days of spreading the virus does in FACT pose a greater risk. 

That's not equivocation; that's validation.

Obtuse. 

 
 
 
cjcold
Professor Quiet
3.2  cjcold  replied to  Nerm_L @3    7 months ago

There tends to be a very fine line between fired and quit.

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
3.2.1  seeder  devangelical  replied to  cjcold @3.2    7 months ago

factor in those right to work laws in some states also...

 
 
 
Nerm_L
PhD Principal
3.2.2  Nerm_L  replied to  cjcold @3.2    7 months ago

[deleted]

 
 
 
Texan1211
Professor Principal
3.2.3  Texan1211  replied to  devangelical @3.2.1    7 months ago

[deleted]

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
Professor Guide
4  Paula Bartholomew    7 months ago

Maybe it is time for a federal law to be passed.  You don't take the vaccine except for a valid medical reason, then you are SOL for any benefits.  But on the upside, maybe the blue states anti vaxers will move to red states for the freebies and infect each other sparing the rest of us who have followed the science.

 
 
 
Veronica
Masters Expert
4.1  Veronica  replied to  Paula Bartholomew @4    7 months ago
maybe the blue states anti vaxers will move to red states

Here is hoping.

 
 
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
4.1.1  XXJefferson51  replied to  Veronica @4.1    7 months ago

[deleted]

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
4.2  seeder  devangelical  replied to  Paula Bartholomew @4    7 months ago

a vaccine or a signed medical insurance waiver is a great idea. be stupid, get the crud, get bankrupted on the way to a dirtnap.

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
Professor Guide
4.2.1  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  devangelical @4.2    7 months ago

Also, anyone who refuses the vaccine with no good reason should have their medical insurance cancelled if they end up in the hospital.

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
4.2.2  Trout Giggles  replied to  Paula Bartholomew @4.2.1    7 months ago

I'm down with that

 
 
 
Greg Jones
Professor Guide
4.2.3  Greg Jones  replied to  Paula Bartholomew @4.2.1    7 months ago

It's a preexisting condition.

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
4.2.4  seeder  devangelical  replied to  Greg Jones @4.2.3    7 months ago

anti-vaxer stupidity certainly is...

 
 
 
Ozzwald
Professor Quiet
4.2.5  Ozzwald  replied to  Paula Bartholomew @4.2.1    7 months ago
Also, anyone who refuses the vaccine with no good reason should have their medical insurance cancelled if they end up in the hospital.

I like the idea.

Or at least have the insurance companies put out notice that if you are medically able to take the vaccine, but choose not to, all COVID related hospitalizations and/or treatments, will not be covered.

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
Professor Guide
4.2.6  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  Ozzwald @4.2.5    7 months ago

Better idea.  Thank you.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
5  Tessylo    7 months ago

258803687_271298008435114_8068501658155067492_n.jpg?_nc_cat=1&_nc_rgb565=1&ccb=1-5&_nc_sid=8bfeb9&_nc_ohc=MKRZHHBfdvgAX_xgYE-&_nc_ht=scontent-iad3-1.xx&oh=82e1adef5b14703a99f5d4db29ea3441&oe=61ACDB2E

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
5.1  Trout Giggles  replied to  Tessylo @5    7 months ago

You would think our republican cohorts here would read this and then realize....they may never hold power ever again

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
5.1.1  Tessylo  replied to  Trout Giggles @5.1    7 months ago

Since it is a fact it will be ignored or called fake.

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
5.1.2  seeder  devangelical  replied to  Trout Giggles @5.1    7 months ago

go covid go.

 
 
 
MrFrost
Professor Principal
5.2  MrFrost  replied to  Tessylo @5    7 months ago

There ya go with your facts again, Tessy.. LOL 

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
5.3  Sparty On  replied to  Tessylo @5    7 months ago

I love it when Democrats like BTC try to use Statistics and stuff.

It usually gives me a great belly laugh like this one did.

Thx!

 
 
 
Ozzwald
Professor Quiet
5.3.1  Ozzwald  replied to  Sparty On @5.3    7 months ago
I love it when Democrats like BTC try to use Statistics and stuff.

I love it when republicans make fun of facts, while failing to disprove them.

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
Professor Guide
5.3.2  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  Ozzwald @5.3.1    7 months ago

[deleted]

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
5.3.3  Tessylo  replied to  Ozzwald @5.3.1    7 months ago

[deleted]

 
 
 
Sparty On
Professor Principal
5.3.4  Sparty On  replied to  Paula Bartholomew @5.3.2    7 months ago

[deleted]

 
 
 
Ozzwald
Professor Quiet
5.3.5  Ozzwald  replied to  Tessylo @5.3.3    7 months ago

[deleted]

 
 
 
XXJefferson51
Senior Guide
5.4  XXJefferson51  replied to  Tessylo @5    7 months ago

[deleted]

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Masters Principal
6  Just Jim NC TttH    7 months ago

BREAKING: Omicron variant in San Francisco.

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
6.1  Trout Giggles  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @6    7 months ago

It's been here for at least a week

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Masters Principal
6.1.1  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Trout Giggles @6.1    7 months ago

I just heard it as breaking news on the radio. Are you saying it took a week to confirm or that the people have been back from South Africa for a week?

 
 
 
Trout Giggles
Professor Principal
6.1.2  Trout Giggles  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @6.1.1    7 months ago

Hmmm...I think I misheard. I heard about the Omnicron about a week ago and that it was in South Africa.

When is Biden going to ban all travel?

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Masters Principal
6.1.3  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Trout Giggles @6.1    7 months ago

Just now heard some more of the story. He was fully vaccinated but is experiencing mild symptoms. And they said he had "recently" been to SA so not sure how long.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
6.1.4  Tessylo  replied to  Trout Giggles @6.1.2    7 months ago

It was reported in a lot of different countries.  First time reported here.  They don't know where it originated.  

 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Masters Principal
6.1.5  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Trout Giggles @6.1.2    7 months ago

It was in South Africa and this guy got it after a trip there. And Mr. Biden has banned travel from 8 countries in South Africa as a precaution since that is the only known place it was. Otherwise he probably would be obligated to do so with other places.

 
 
 
shona1
Junior Participates
6.1.6  shona1  replied to  Tessylo @6.1.4    7 months ago

Morning Tessylo..Yes it is here too..arrived a few days ago. From what we have heard it may have originated in Holland first.

But it has arrived, we have 7 cases so far but nothing drastic has happened. Seems to be more contagious than corona but illness wise not to severe.

But it is early days yet so a case of wait and see.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
6.1.7  Tessylo  replied to  Trout Giggles @6.1.2    7 months ago
South Africa isn't the only known place where omicron was detected.
"What are some of the countries that have detected the new Omicron COVID-19 variant?"
"Omicron, dubbed a "variant of concern" last week by the WHO that is potentially more contagious than previous variants, has now been detected in Australia, Belgium, Botswana, Britain, Denmark, Germany, Hong Kong, Israel, Italy, the Netherlands, France, Canada and South Africa."
3 days ago
 
 
 
Just Jim NC TttH
Masters Principal
6.1.8  Just Jim NC TttH  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @6.1.5    7 months ago

And with further research, they did some retesting of samples in Europe, it was there for a week prior to showing up in SA. So one has to wonder I guess why the ban in just South African travel.

 
 
 
shona1
Junior Participates
6.1.9  shona1  replied to  Just Jim NC TttH @6.1.8    7 months ago

Morning just...yes that is what we are hearing too. The Dutch detected it a week earlier and shut up about it...and it was South Africa who announced this new variant..

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
Professor Guide
6.1.10  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  Trout Giggles @6.1.2    7 months ago

CA now has its first confirmed case from someone returning from South Africa.

 
 
 
Tessylo
Professor Principal
6.1.11  Tessylo  replied to  shona1 @6.1.9    7 months ago

They discovered it so they're being blamed for its origin

 
 
 
shona1
Junior Participates
6.1.12  shona1  replied to  Tessylo @6.1.11    7 months ago

Morning Tessylo.. certainly looks that way...the Dutch have gone very quiet and not saying anything..

SA were the ones to detect it and announce it a week after it first emerged in Holland...

Seems the Dutch are happy for SA to cop the flak for it..from what was reported here the virus is highly contagious.

But people are not losing their taste or smell and so far have just developed a cough.

As it is very early days it really is a case of wait and watch.

It is a given this virus is going to mutate so we will see which country is next...

 
 
 
Kavika
Professor Principal
7  Kavika     7 months ago

In Florida, DeSantis cut jobless aid just as virus began terrifying new wave

Florida has one of the lowest unemployment benefits in the US and also one of the shortest time frames. The system is a mess and DeSantis was saying it was made difficult by design the problem is that his fellow republican, Rick Scott was the one that put it in place.

Good luck to those that DeSantis is trying to protect to live on a $275 weekly benefit and with our system it could take weeks/months to get your benefit. 

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
Professor Guide
7.1  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  Kavika @7    7 months ago

He spends that much on chapstick and lube when he goes to Mar A Lardo.

 
 
 
MrFrost
Professor Principal
8  MrFrost    7 months ago

512

 
 
 
MrFrost
Professor Principal
9  MrFrost    7 months ago

512

 
 
 
Greg Jones
Professor Guide
10  Greg Jones    7 months ago

[deleted]

 
 
 
Hal A. Lujah
Professor Expert
11  Hal A. Lujah    7 months ago

Is the benefit contingent on scoring sufficiently low on the IQ scale?

 
 
 
devangelical
Professor Principal
12  seeder  devangelical    7 months ago

alright, this topic has pretty much run it's course, and I'm no babysitter, so I'm locking it.

 
 

Who is online