3 ms·

You assume people will be given the choice to get vaccinated. I believe it will be as "optional" as not having a SSN or a bank account: in theory possible, in

by 1996 6y ago

You assume people will be given the choice to get vaccinated. I believe it will be as "optional" as not having a SSN or a bank account: in theory possible, in practice with so many hurdles that people will relent. (ex: ban unvaccinated people from plane, train and bus interstate travel using the TSA for controls)

ghiculescu 6y ago
Your example will almost certainly happen in a few months. pdonis is just suggesting the same thing happen, but 6 months earlier.
pdonis 6y ago
> You assume people will be given the choice to get vaccinated. I assumed that they would in my hypothetical, yes. That's in a USA that was even capable of considering that option a year ago, the concept of a "free country" would be understood. In the actual USA of now, that concept is not understood; just as the article under discussion says, our current society combines the worst features of freedom with the worst features of authoritarianism, and gets the benefits of neither. Your hypothetical about how vaccination will be handled is an example of that. In other words, you are giving further evidence that the status quo in the USA is not working and needs to change.
ghaff 6y ago
The Federal government probably has very little authority outside, perhaps, of federal property. States may be able to implement their own requirements. But private organizations like airlines, universities, and companies can do pretty much whatever they want. Qantas has already said they're going to require vaccinations for international flights.
notJim 6y ago
Given the laxity of our pandemic response so far, I'm fairly skeptical of this theory in the US at least. We can't even force people to wear masks or lock down, why would we be able to force them to get vaccines? Hell, we're not even doing a great job getting vaccines to people who want them. And the business community sure as hell aren't going to want any barriers to people traveling. Their primary concerns will be that there is at least the illusion of safety and that they are indemnified.

by 1996 6y ago

ghiculescu 6y ago

Your example will almost certainly happen in a few months. pdonis is just suggesting the same thing happen, but 6 months earlier.

pdonis 6y ago

> You assume people will be given the choice to get vaccinated. I assumed that they would in my hypothetical, yes. That's in a USA that was even capable of considering that option a year ago, the concept of a "free country" would be understood. In the actual USA of now, that concept is not understood; just as the article under discussion says, our current society combines the worst features of freedom with the worst features of authoritarianism, and gets the benefits of neither. Your hypothetical about how vaccination will be handled is an example of that. In other words, you are giving further evidence that the status quo in the USA is not working and needs to change.

ghaff 6y ago

The Federal government probably has very little authority outside, perhaps, of federal property. States may be able to implement their own requirements. But private organizations like airlines, universities, and companies can do pretty much whatever they want. Qantas has already said they're going to require vaccinations for international flights.

notJim 6y ago

Given the laxity of our pandemic response so far, I'm fairly skeptical of this theory in the US at least. We can't even force people to wear masks or lock down, why would we be able to force them to get vaccines? Hell, we're not even doing a great job getting vaccines to people who want them. And the business community sure as hell aren't going to want any barriers to people traveling. Their primary concerns will be that there is at least the illusion of safety and that they are indemnified.