4 ms·

Is there any evidence that paying 5x the price would actually result in a faster rollout of the vaccine? At a certain scale and timeline you can't throw money a

Is there any evidence that paying 5x the price would actually result in a faster rollout of the vaccine? At a certain scale and timeline you can't throw money at the problem anymore there's a finite limit to how fast our global infrastructure can operate.

pc86 6y ago
The only thing it would result in is a faster rollout of the vaccine to low-risk individuals with money to spend. Distribution is currently [/supposedly] roughly correlated to risk and public exposure in the early phases. High-risk people with money would just have to spend money they otherwise wouldn't. So this type of plan would come at the expense of high-risk people without money. This proposal is literally about putting high-risk people at greater risk - and by extension, killing them - so low-risk people with money can feel a little better about eating at a restaurant and drinking at a bar on a Friday night.
- tomp 6y ago
  Do you feel the same way about Tesla? ”These selfish rich people just wanna feel better about themselves driving their EV vehicles that noone else can afford!” Yet the end result is, that more people can now afford EVs than otherwise could. I know it’s a bit different with Covid vaccines (AFAIK they were largely sponsored by governments), but the underlying principle of your argument is just wrong - it’s good that rich investors sponsor new technology (even for selfish reasons!) because that makes technology available to everyone, sooner!
  - jowsie 6y ago
    I think comparing driving a Tesla when plenty of other cheaper forms of transport exist, with a vaccine to a currently ongoing pandemic that is literally killing people and to which there is no other available vaccine option, is a tad on the ridiculous side.
  - pc86 6y ago
    It's almost as if luxury vehicles and life-saving vaccines are different, and should be treated differently.

pc86 6y ago

The only thing it would result in is a faster rollout of the vaccine to low-risk individuals with money to spend. Distribution is currently [/supposedly] roughly correlated to risk and public exposure in the early phases. High-risk people with money would just have to spend money they otherwise wouldn't. So this type of plan would come at the expense of high-risk people without money. This proposal is literally about putting high-risk people at greater risk - and by extension, killing them - so low-risk people with money can feel a little better about eating at a restaurant and drinking at a bar on a Friday night.

tomp 6y ago
Do you feel the same way about Tesla? ”These selfish rich people just wanna feel better about themselves driving their EV vehicles that noone else can afford!” Yet the end result is, that more people can now afford EVs than otherwise could. I know it’s a bit different with Covid vaccines (AFAIK they were largely sponsored by governments), but the underlying principle of your argument is just wrong - it’s good that rich investors sponsor new technology (even for selfish reasons!) because that makes technology available to everyone, sooner!
- jowsie 6y ago
  I think comparing driving a Tesla when plenty of other cheaper forms of transport exist, with a vaccine to a currently ongoing pandemic that is literally killing people and to which there is no other available vaccine option, is a tad on the ridiculous side.
- pc86 6y ago
  It's almost as if luxury vehicles and life-saving vaccines are different, and should be treated differently.