4 ms·
I would argue that anybody who thinks "Why bother getting the vaccine if I'll still have to stay locked down/masked/etc" probably would be avoiding the vaccine
by Sohcahtoa82 6y ago
I would argue that anybody who thinks "Why bother getting the vaccine if I'll still have to stay locked down/masked/etc" probably would be avoiding the vaccine anyways, and this is just a convenient excuse.
- josephcsible 6y agoWhy do you think that? It's a risk-reward balance. Why wouldn't increasing the reward tip the scales?
- ryandrake 6y agoAt this point, we know there is close to zero risk to getting vaccinated. How much reward do we need to convince people to do it?
- josephcsible 6y agoRight now, the reward is close to zero too. Basically the only things the CDC lets you do after being vaccinated are things you've been able to get away with the whole time anyway.
- Sohcahtoa82 6y agoClose to zero? You mean the likelihood of catching COVID dropping to nearly zero is worthless to you? Also, lockdowns are likely to continue until COVID numbers drop. COVID numbers won't drop until more people get vaccinated. The thought of "vaccines are pointless since you'll still have to mask" is extremely short-sighted.
- ryandrake 6y agoIt's like "safer cars are pointless since you still have to wear your seat belt."
- josephcsible 6y agoBut now you have the Prisoner's Dilemma working against you. If things won't go back to normal until 60% or 70% or 80% or 90% of people get the vaccine, and getting it yourself before then doesn't give you anything, the rational but selfish thing to do is say "I'll let everyone else get the vaccine but pass on it myself. I'll get the benefit of normality without the risk of side effects." As for this: > Close to zero? You mean the likelihood of catching COVID dropping to nearly zero is worthless to you? If someone has been offered the vaccine but chose not to get it, I think they would say yes to this.