4 ms·

goal posts keep moving to fit the agenda of handing a select few billions of dollars at our expense.

TOMDM 5y ago
Unless you mean a very literal "at our expense" as in dollars paid for a highly effective vaccine, are you implying that the vaccine has been a net negative?
- iammisc 5y ago
  When it first came out, the data made the vax an obviously net positive. Given what we now know about cases amongst the vaccinated and how they can spread it... It's no longer an obvious positive. The vax has made covid more pervasive because of bad data at the beginning.
  - TOMDM 5y ago
    I could maybe buy people being lax about masks and social distancing because of the vaccine, but surely you don't think the vaccine itself has made the virus more pervasive?
    - iammisc 5y ago
      Well what is the effect and purpose of the vax other than to make people lax about social distancing and masks. The vaccine was correctly developed expressly for the purposes of rendering both unnecessary. If the vax had worked to sterilize or mostly sterilize the virus as originally it was sold to us as, then this would be okay. Instead it did not really work, thus spreading covid more. So in the end, we locked down and destroyed the economy in hopes of a vaccine, but the vaz didn't fully work and now we're going to have to open anyway to avert major economic and social disaster.
      - TOMDM 5y ago
        The vaccine does work. It lowers your chance of getting it and thus spreading it significantly and it severely lowers your chance of having a severe reaction in the case of a breakthrough infection. The only reason it hasn't worked at a societal level is that not enough people have taken it.
        tacitusarc 5y ago
        It is not obvious to me this is the case. All available data suggest that between the vaccine and natural immunity, we would have reached herd immunity if such a thing were possible. But we have not, indicating the primary benefit of the vaccine is, and will likely always be, some personal protection. Put differently, we will all get COVID eventually, and would have even if everyone was vaccinated, and the question is just one of the severity of individual cases.
    - unanswered 5y ago
      If the vaccine actually prevents getting sick enough to notice, then it means a bunch of vaccinated virus carriers are wandering around in public. Whereas if they were unvaccinated, then by the popular theory that unvaccinated people get very sick from this virus, they would know to stay home.
julianlam 5y ago
It always surprises me when conservatives use the economic argument wrt vaccine deployment because doing so means they assume an intrinsic value of $0 on human lives. Penny wise, pound foolish.
- maxerickson 5y ago
  Even valuing lives at $0 the economic benefits of vaccination are much higher than the costs.

Unless you mean a very literal "at our expense" as in dollars paid for a highly effective vaccine, are you implying that the vaccine has been a net negative?

iammisc 5y ago
When it first came out, the data made the vax an obviously net positive. Given what we now know about cases amongst the vaccinated and how they can spread it... It's no longer an obvious positive. The vax has made covid more pervasive because of bad data at the beginning.
- TOMDM 5y ago
  I could maybe buy people being lax about masks and social distancing because of the vaccine, but surely you don't think the vaccine itself has made the virus more pervasive?
  - iammisc 5y ago
    Well what is the effect and purpose of the vax other than to make people lax about social distancing and masks. The vaccine was correctly developed expressly for the purposes of rendering both unnecessary. If the vax had worked to sterilize or mostly sterilize the virus as originally it was sold to us as, then this would be okay. Instead it did not really work, thus spreading covid more. So in the end, we locked down and destroyed the economy in hopes of a vaccine, but the vaz didn't fully work and now we're going to have to open anyway to avert major economic and social disaster.
    - TOMDM 5y ago
      The vaccine does work. It lowers your chance of getting it and thus spreading it significantly and it severely lowers your chance of having a severe reaction in the case of a breakthrough infection. The only reason it hasn't worked at a societal level is that not enough people have taken it.
      - tacitusarc 5y ago
        It is not obvious to me this is the case. All available data suggest that between the vaccine and natural immunity, we would have reached herd immunity if such a thing were possible. But we have not, indicating the primary benefit of the vaccine is, and will likely always be, some personal protection. Put differently, we will all get COVID eventually, and would have even if everyone was vaccinated, and the question is just one of the severity of individual cases.
  - unanswered 5y ago
    If the vaccine actually prevents getting sick enough to notice, then it means a bunch of vaccinated virus carriers are wandering around in public. Whereas if they were unvaccinated, then by the popular theory that unvaccinated people get very sick from this virus, they would know to stay home.

julianlam 5y ago

It always surprises me when conservatives use the economic argument wrt vaccine deployment because doing so means they assume an intrinsic value of $0 on human lives. Penny wise, pound foolish.

maxerickson 5y ago
Even valuing lives at $0 the economic benefits of vaccination are much higher than the costs.