28 ms·

Unvaccinated workers who lose jobs ineligible for unemployment benefits (Canada)

171 points by peteradio 5y ago

fasteddie31003 5y ago
And should people who crash in cars without wearing their seatbelt not get any government benefits from their injuries?
- dahart 5y ago
  Personally, I don’t think so, but I do think it’s worth asking the question and exploring the space a little bit. There is a certain hypocrisy to refusing to accept safety measures from the government while expecting emergency treatment from the same people when not abiding by the safety measures causes predictable and avoidable harm. There are cases where people are injured while accidentally not having a seatbelt on, and there are cases where people dogmatically refuse to wear seatbelts and refuse to accept the safety statistics. Maybe it makes sense to differentiate between those kinds of cases somehow? Maybe people who consciously choose to refuse safety measures should still be treated but should be prioritized lower than people who are accepting safety measures? One of the problems with people who refuse to accept safety policies is they make emergency treatment more expensive for everyone, and they reduce the probability that someone who’s been safe can get emergency treatment in a timely manner. Part of the question is why it’s fair for people who’ve accepted the safety measures to have a non-zero chance not being able to get emergency treatment because someone who refused to be safe got hurt and is already in the only ER/bed left in the hospital.
  - dontcare007 5y ago
aserdf 5y ago
Is unemployment in Canada an insurance as it is in the US? Can you opt out, are premiums taken from your paycheck?
- soupbowl 5y ago
  You cannot opt out even if you are not allowed to use the service. Such as self employed people or 'anti vaxxers'.
TigeriusKirk 5y ago
The social consequences of this policy overwhelmingly outweigh the benefits. Incredibly harmful action.
b3nji 5y ago
I don't understand, if the vaccines work then why the issue? However the vaccines don't stop you catching or spreading the virus, so why is this banning of the unvaccinated a thing? Very odd.
- scrollaway 5y ago
  > However the vaccines don't stop you catching or spreading the virus Vaccines reduce spread. Even if it doesn’t stop spread completely it’s still a significant factor.
  - moralestapia 5y ago
    >Vaccines reduce spread. In this case, they don't.
    - whimsicalism 5y ago
      Uh, source? Media very much likes to simplify these things, but if you think of this in a probabilistic/continuous manner, rather than a "yes spread vs no spread" approach, the vaccines obviously reduce spread?
      - moralestapia 5y ago
        https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-risk-of-vaccinated-covid-transmission-is-not-low/ https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-risk-of-vacci... You're right that there's no definite answer to this, but the general consensus among doctors is that it doesn't prevent the virus from spreading.
        scrollaway 5y ago
        “Doesn’t prevent” isn’t the same thing as “doesn’t reduce”.
        5y ago
NDizzle 5y ago
- micromacrofoot 5y ago
  vaccines reduce transmission and severity, this virus has killed over 5 million people in 2 years
  - WaxedChewbacca 5y ago
  - crisdux 5y ago
    - jashmatthews 5y ago
      It's dramatically effective in reducing spread. Unvaccinated people are driving 85-90% of the spread in Germany. https://rocs.hu-berlin.de/publication/maier-2021-germany/ https://rocs.hu-berlin.de/publication/maier-2021-germany/
      - peteradio 5y ago
        Pre-omicron.
      - crisdux 5y ago
        That is low quality evidence. It's folks doing some mathematical modeling. Mathematical modeling has had a very bad track record during this pandemic. Did you even read the paper you are linking?
    - tylersmith 5y ago
    - djdjjrjrjr 5y ago
      You can have a high case load in vaccinated countries and still have vaccines that reduce transmissions. Those two ideas don’t conflict. It just means the vaccines we have don’t reduce transmission by 100% and you have a disease that is highly infectious. Just because a medical intervention doesn’t work 100% of the time doesn’t mean it’s 0% effective. Most interventions (vaccines, drugs, procedures, surgeries) don’t work at 100.0%. From the data I’ve seen it appears the mRNA vaccines have some effect in reducing transmission while the other vaccines don’t. It is correct to say that the efficacy against transmission has dropped significantly, but that doesn’t mean it’s 0%.
kolanos 5y ago
> The department said if an employee doesn’t report to work or is suspended or terminated for refusing to comply with a vaccine mandate, the employer should indicate that they quit, took a leave of absence or were dismissed – potentially disqualifying them from collecting EI. Why isn't this fraud?
- vidarh 5y ago
  Why would it be?
  - cmmeur01 5y ago
    Because they were fired for refusing to comply they didn’t quit. If you refused to do a task and were removed by the company for it were you fired or did you quit?
    - scott_w 5y ago
      “were dismissed” is a reason you can give, so it’s true.
- peteradio 5y ago
  Fraud would require prosecution. Is Edmonton going to prosecute Minister of Employment for the directive? Or the HR dept for the illegal classification (is it illegal if given a Minister directive)? Does this get challenged in Canadian courts?
- randomdata 5y ago
  EI has always disqualified those who were dismissed for misconduct. This just clarifies that refusing to be vaccinated is considered misconduct.
PopeUrbanX 5y ago
Good. Take away their free healthcare, too, so that they stop taking up ICU beds that smarter people might need.
- loudtieblahblah 5y ago
  Good. Do fat people, smokers, and drinkers next.
  - Reichhardt 5y ago
    Paradoxically, those people actually use fewer healthcare resources, and pension resources, since they die earlier after retirement. Healthy people with long, drawn-out illnesses use the greatest healthcare and pension resources. https://taxfoundation.org/new-study-shows-smokers-and-obese-actually-save-government-health-care-costs/ https://taxfoundation.org/new-study-shows-smokers-and-obese-... Vitamin D and air quality is the major underlying factor behind COVID severity - its why the virus exhibits such seasonality. Pushing vaccines doesn't address underlying public health problems.
  - seized 5y ago
    Except they aren't jamming up hospitals all at once due to their choices. That's the critical difference.
    - loudtieblahblah 5y ago
      Hospitals are being jammed up by liberals hopped up on fear porn, going to the ER bc they have a positive covid test but little to no symptoms.
- SamoyedFurFluff 5y ago
  I would like to push against moral judgement being used to determine if treatment should be offered at all. (To be clear: I’m a fully vaccinated and boosted person that masks consistently.) My understanding is that the field of medicine is heavily against this because they have historical cases where moral judgement to deprive care have resulted in human rights abuses and medical neglect due to bigotry. It might end up disproportionately affecting the homeless, those afflicted with addiction, single mothers, and the poor.
ddon 5y ago
Government is sending a clear message - get vaccinated! end of story...
- WaxedChewbacca 5y ago
pcdoodle 5y ago
stefanwlb 5y ago
theodorejb 5y ago
It seems we are heading in a direction where those who don't take the jab will be blocked from receiving government services, prevented from patronizing various businesses, and even restricted from traveling and the ability to work. Are most citizens really okay with this medical apartheid, or are they afraid of speaking out against it?
- bmeski 5y ago
  I work for a major news organization in the US and am willing to lose my highly paid job to assert my rights. I desperately urge others who are also capable to take such a hit to follow suit. Edit: Note, I'm also vaccinated. J&J March 2020.
  - mwattsun 5y ago
    Could you elaborate a bit on what right you are asserting? I don't think I'm alone in not understanding what right you are fighting for. You're asking me to take a stand without telling me what I'm taking a stand for.
    - bmeski 5y ago
      Mandated COVID-19 vaccination of individuals with the current EUA approved vaccines. The devil is in the details. The EUA designation was pushed through because there was no other, "obvious" treatment (despite proven efficacy of a combination of prophylactic treatments). They are testing this thing on us. Even if it works I do not consent to be tested on.
      - mwattsun 5y ago
        Where do you derive your right to consent or not? I could say I have the right to not have my body put in jail, but I have no basis for that.
        bmeski 5y ago
        Item 1 of the Nuremberg Code. "The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential. This means that the person involved should have legal capacity to give consent; should be so situated as to be able to exercise free power of choice, without the intervention of any element of force, fraud, deceit, duress, over-reaching, or other ulterior form of constraint or coercion; and should have sufficient knowledge and comprehension of the elements of the subject matter involved, as to enable him to make an understanding and enlightened decision. This latter element requires that, before the acceptance of an affirmative decision by the experimental subject, there should be made known to him the nature, duration, and purpose of the experiment; the method and means by which it is to be conducted; all inconveniences and hazards reasonably to be expected; and the effects upon his health or person, which may possibly come from his participation in the experiment."
yostrovs 5y ago
I've been asking friends that believe in such punishments whether they would have punished gay people in the 1990s that got AIDS. Condoms are extremely effective at preventing transmission. Invariably no one wants to go there. Gay people with AIDS that didn't use a condom are to be cried over in our society, while those with COVID that didn't take the vaccine are to be punished.
- loudtieblahblah 5y ago
  - onos 5y ago
    In USA at least vaccination rates strongly correlate with class and so races with more poverty have higher unvaccinated rates - blacks and Hispanics. But the advocates here seem to follow the meme that the unvaccinated are all trump supporting deplorables…
    - lalaland1125 5y ago
      That's outdated. Due to better vaccine outreach the vaccination rates between races have mostly equalized.
      - onos 5y ago
        Thanks. I found a good article with visuals showing things have improved, as you say. https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/covid-vaccine-tracker-global-distribution/us-vaccine-demographics.html https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/covid-vaccine-tracker-glo...
- scott_w 5y ago
  You can’t spread HIV just by sitting next to someone. Your analogy also doesn’t hold at all because countries DO punish people for knowingly infecting others with HIV.
14 5y ago
This is complete BS and I say that as a vaccinated health care worker. They are now considering putting sick but vaccinated workers back to work instead of not sick but unvaccinated. How can they justify that? It seems pretty obvious they are not worried about public health but rather some sort of control over people. Do as we say or you will be punished. I am feeling disgraced as a Canadian. And am sorry for my fellow workers who choose not to get vaccinated and lost their jobs.
kstenerud 5y ago
To clarify for non-Canadians: EI benefits are generally only given if you lose your employment through no fault of your own (didn't quit or get fired). What this policy does is clarify that losing work hours or your job due to vaccine refusal after a workplace vaccination mandate (outside of medical exemptions) does NOT count as "through no fault of your own", and instructs employers to indicate as such. So: For the duration of the pandemic, if your workplace mandates COVID vaccination and you refuse and then get fired over it, you're not eligible for EI any more than you would be if you got fired for cause.
- LaunchAway1 5y ago
  That's an interesting point to make and defendable but these declarations mentioned in another comment, I will assume to be true, coming from Trudeau, Canada's president: “They don’t believe in science/progress and are very often misogynistic and racist....This leads us, as a leader and as a country, to make a choice: Do we tolerate these people?" I have taken both shots, and will take the third but these declarations are appropriate for a mad man, not a country leader.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - finite_jest 5y ago
    FYI, Canada does not have a president. Trudeau is the prime minister. However, you are right in that his quote (which I think was in French originally) is just awful name-calling.
  - criticaltinker 5y ago
    Yes and this type of doublespeak is coming from the top down in many countries. It’s alarming because “they don’t believe in science” has become a divisive weapon that hand waves away all scientific nuance. The vast majority of young healthy people are completely asymptomatic, they don’t need a vaccine, nor would it be a wise investment of limited doses. Also, previous infection confers protection that is at least as effective as vaccination. This has been consistently observed since the beginning of the pandemic. Vaccines can save the lives of many vulnerable people though; it’s an amazing tool and its use is certainly justified by science. But using economic and financial engineering to force everyone to get vaccinated? There is no scientific evidence supporting that decision, and the second and third order consequences are completely unstudied. (evolution of viral resistance is one example; many experts are aware of the phenomenon but commenters here have been misled to believe that an airborne virus circulating the planet can be eradicated ‘if only everyone got vaccinated’)
guidovranken 5y ago
In other festive COVID news from Canada: >Canada's Justin Trudeau on the unvaccinated: >“They don’t believe in science/progress and are very often misogynistic and racist....This leads us, as a leader and as a country, to make a choice: Do we tolerate these people?" https://twitter.com/KevinBardosh/status/1476838517007257600 https://twitter.com/KevinBardosh/status/1476838517007257600 My patience with COVID cultists is starting to run quite thin.
- charlieyu1 5y ago
  There is no science if doubts aren’t allowed.
  - MiroF 5y ago
    - q1w2 5y ago
      These policies are punitive - they are not based on science. There is no science demonstrating that withholding unemployment reduces transmission rates.
      - MiroF 5y ago
        There is social science indicating that employment mandates increase vaccination rates. There is science indicating that vaccines reduce transmission rates. Regardless, this is a different point than the original comment.
        MrRiddle 5y ago
        > vaccines reduce transmission rates With current experience from UK and France, this line (even though true up to a point) is irrelevant.
  - egberts1 5y ago
    There is no science if the facts are not allowed either.
iqanq 5y ago
A year ago this would've been called a conspiracy theory. Saying that this would happen on Facebook or Twitter would've been called misleading or even got you banned.
- scrollaway 5y ago
  A year ago, the thought that so many people would reject vaccines that can help end the pandemic was unrealistic. Soooo…
  - guilhas 5y ago
    Wrong, a year ago all countries vaccination target was lower Initially started with the medicine standard herd immunity of 65%, which includes vaccinated and recovered And now even 90% vaccinated is supposedly unacceptable https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-56722186 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-56722186
    - Daishiman 5y ago
      Because the disease has changed. Are you ignorant of that?
      - lordloki 5y ago
        The disease has changed to reduce the effectiveness of the vaccines to the point where they don't show any significant ability to stop the spread. The current vaccines may help the individual against Omicron but does nothing to help the collective. Are you ignorant of that?
        eli_gottlieb 5y ago
        Right, the solution is to improve and update the vaccines.
        guilhas 5y ago
brightball 5y ago
I’m sure this precedent will lead to no future consequences or abuse.
chippy 5y ago
- throemdiwo 5y ago
- MiroF 5y ago
  > The reason the powers of states in the west were limited to a degree - it was because the person was held as sacred. Most of the old judges deeply understand this. The politicians don't. This conception is more mythos than reality. You should look at some of the early laws passed in many of these countries if you think we had a tradition of "strong" natural rights that are only being abrogated in our modern era. It used to be illegal to publish content critical of the government [0], not to mention the fact that the franchise was restricted to those holding property, and definitely not considering ongoing active slavery. I don't understand your connection to demonization of the poor. [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alien_and_Sedition_Acts https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alien_and_Sedition_Acts
kif 5y ago
I can understand why the push for vaccines even though they don't stop spreading and catching it. They seem to improve chances of survival and lessen chances of severe disease. That said, if the government takes away benefits, then it should give back all the taxes withheld on one's salary before it does that. On another note, personally I don't see any other solution to the pandemic, other than everybody/most people gaining some kind of natural immunity. Places requiring some form of green pass are none other than VIP superspreader events, where the Green Pass is the VIP ticket. People holding the Green Pass, will then go to meet others who may or may not be vaccinated, but who will eventually catch Covid.
- scott_w 5y ago
  > they don't stop spreading and catching it Not true, they do reduce infection and spread. > That said, if the government takes away benefits, then it should give back all the taxes withheld on one's salary before it does that. That’s not how government, taxes or being part of civil society works at all. > personally I don't see any other solution to the pandemic, other than everybody/most people gaining some kind of natural immunity This is scientifically illiterate as Omicron bypasses all “natural” immunity whereas a vaccine gives stronger protection. What’s to stop future variants doing exactly the same?
  - peteradio 5y ago
    > vaccine gives stronger protection Maybe if youre boosted and its been 14 days but not greater than 45 days. But citation needed anyway. Natural immunity was not totally bypassed. South Africa kicked Omicron's ass with regard to case fatality rate.
    - scott_w 5y ago
      Citation? I literally just watched the deputy chief medical officer for England (Van Tam) explain how infection and the vaccines work on BBC iPlayer last night.
xxpor 5y ago
- bmeski 5y ago
- LaunchAway1 5y ago
- hrhrhrhrhr 5y ago
  Violating NAP requires taking some action, you can't just "aggress" by not doing anything.
  - jquery 5y ago
    - hrhrhrhrhr 5y ago
      No, NAP is pretty clear. It's just some people treat it as a silver bullet, when it's only a fundamental building block. Libertarians are not against having contractual jurisdictions which would mandate being vaccinated on a certain territory, as long as you can quit that jurisdiction at any time. It's not clear that getting vaccinated would stop you from spreading the virus though.
      - jquery 5y ago
        > as long as you can quit that jurisdiction at any time. Nobody is going door to door and arresting unvaccinated people. It’s not like the anti-choice law in Texas that criminalizes two people working together to stop a woman from being pregnant against her will. You still have your freedom under the NAP. But as soon as you present a threat to infect other people by being unvaccinated, there are reasonable restrictions in place. Edit: I’m seeing replies saying the NAP is strictly about physical violence. To that I ask, are bioweapons fine to use in libertarianland? Can I hold a city hostage with weaponized anthrax because the libertarianism is, at its root, a cover for voting Republican and not a coherent political philosophy?
throemdiwo 5y ago
sh4un 5y ago
moron4hire 5y ago
We have systems in place for people who want to refuse standard vaccinations: live in a religious enclave like the Amish. You don't want to participate in our society? Then don't participate in our society. Go be Amish and see how that works out for you.
ukj 5y ago
- iqanq 5y ago
  Taking the current COVID vaccines won't end any pandemics, either.
  - ukj 5y ago
    Do you have a better strategy, or are you just practicing fallacies? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nirvana_fallacy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nirvana_fallacy
    - iqanq 5y ago
      I am responding to your comment - you say that asserting your rights by not taking the vaccine won't end the pandemic, while I am saying that taking it won't end it either.
      - ukj 5y ago
        Almost as if reducing mortality/hospitalization is an irrelevant metric to you. Almost as if an abstract social construct as “rights” is more important to you than actual health.
        iqanq 5y ago
        Yes, personal freedom is to me infinitely more important than the health of others.
        maxerickson 5y ago
        Is your freedom primary? Like if a group of people banded together and said that they didn't want to associate with unvaccinated people, should they have the freedom to do that without interference from the unvaccinated?
egberts1 5y ago
More healthcare professionals for the United States (or as some would say, Red States).
crisdux 5y ago
Lots of people in this thread are arguing the "do the vaccines reduce spread thing" as justification for or against this policy. I don't think that even matters. These vaccines have risks that are not being opening discussed. There is an unprecedented systematic campaign of censorship, deception and propaganda aimed at people who question anything about these vaccines. Vaccine injuries are real. The performance of these vaccines are not meeting expectations. They should not be mandated, full stop. We need a system based on informed consent, not coercion.
- simonh 5y ago
  There have been extensive studies of the risks of these vaccines, both during their trials and after public use, and these studies are continuing. The regulators on several counties including the US have even publicly registered concerns about several of the vaccines, particularly the J&J single dose vaccine. None of these studies have been suppressed or censored, and they are ongoing and I see debate about them going on in the press and on forums like this all the time. Some social media platforms ban provably false statements on this and other topics, and sometimes those restrictions go too far. That is not the same thing as banning all public debate.
  - peteradio 5y ago
    > That is not the same thing as banning all public debate. It is throwing water on discussion at critical times simultaneous to strong government intervention which resets the discussion to the new overton window. You don't need to ban public debate you just play talk to the hand and call anyone who disagrees with you probably racist and or russian dissonance.
  - commandlinefan 5y ago
    > extensive studies of the risks of these vaccines How and when? This time last year (when trump said a vaccine was less than a year away) these same medical professionals were warning us that vaccine testing takes years in the best case.
    - 5y ago
occz 5y ago
- peteradio 5y ago
- throwaway55421 5y ago
  Well, when you invent a slur and define it to mean whatever you want you can find many examples of it. I have had three coronavirus jabs. I think mandates are hysterical and counterproductive and I resist surveillance. Being anti lockdown, anti surveillance, anti discrimination... generally just anti hysteria, is the only correct choice.
- theduder99 5y ago
mercy_dude 5y ago
Where is the court system? The court system has been very much in lines with these stupidities we have been seeing around mandates and so on, which makes me make a much more cynical claim. Leaders like Justin Trudeau don’t give a damn about science/progress and public health and well being for example. If they did, we wouldn’t be this far along the crisis and still be talking about this. My thinking is they are setting these things as a precedent (through legislative and court system rubber stamping these policies) for the next crisis. Could it be a looming debt crisis and using that crisis as a pretext to have more control on property rights and other basic rights in the constitution? Who knows. But if one thing, if a set of “experts” (who have been proven wrong in many instances and have done a terrible job in public communication) calls something a crisis then all your basic rights in constitution can be annulled using that as a pretext. That precedent has been established clearly and sadly court system has done nothing but rubber stamping this.
- Radim 5y ago
  It's pretty short-sighted, too. I was born and lived under one rule of tyranny (communist Czechoslovakia), and the legal & judicial professions suffered tremendously there. In fact, they were among the first to go, replaced by something truly heinous. Like, what do these judges and lawyers who keep silent expect will happen, once basic civil liberties & human rights are disbanded? (no matter whether disbanded directly or through some bullshit round-about "we didn't kill you, we just hired mercenaries / didn't let you live / work / travel; if you don't like it why didn't you emigrate?")
  - inglor_cz 5y ago
    Indeed, and one of the legacies of the Czechoslovak Socialist Republic is lingering distrust towards authorities even 30 years after the regime collapsed. Past injustices cast long shadows.
    - razius 5y ago
sh4un 5y ago
The problem in Canada is that the health care is so bad that people are worried that if something goes wrong you are screwed. My son broke his arm and he has to wait 3 weeks for a cast. I've been waiting for a general doctors appointment for 6 months yet, been waiting 4 years to have a compressed disc looked at. It's sad. To make it worse it's almost impossible to find the vaccine and when you do it's a several hour wait and often it runs out. I think there is more to it than everyone is a racist homophobe trump supporter. Most people who say things like that are often an abortion that failed.
- timbit42 5y ago
  I live in the poorest province in Canada and this doesn't even happen here. You go to Emerg and you get a cast. Canadians don't have to worry that if they get sick that they are 'screwed'. If you haven't had a compressed disc looked at in 4 years, you're not trying. Even if you don't have a family doctor, it's not difficult to get referred to a specialist. As for the vaccine, everyone is in a mad rush for it right now because of Omicron, so there is a delay. I live in the poorest province and made an appointment Thursday to get my booster this Tuesday. This is what I did last summer and they weren't run out when I got there.
  - sh4un 5y ago
    - timbit42 5y ago
AbrahamParangi 5y ago
Does vaccination still offer a public health benefit? To be clear vaccination is good, people should be vaccinated, I have been vaccinated three times, etc, etc but does vaccination still offer a public health benefit vs just being a good idea for your own personal health?
- SamoyedFurFluff 5y ago
  At least in Washington state, unvaccinated people have Covid at 3x the rates at minimum (the most robust cohort). This effect is more exaggerated the older someone is. Deaths are similar. Depending on your definition of benefit, it might be beneficial still.
martythemaniak 5y ago
Breathtaking amount of ignorance in these comments. EI has never and will never cover voluntarily leaving a position. Don't want to meet basic sanitary requirements? You're free to leave.
- axiosgunnar 5y ago
  Please don’t smoke then, as second hand smoke affects us not addicted to nicotine, when you are standing outside of a shop and I have to walk by past you
  - MiroF 5y ago
    Good point. I would be in favor of a similar law regarding smoking as regarding being unvaccinated. You are free to smoke/be unvaccinated outside or in your home, but if you wish to enter an establishment or work in an enclosed space, you must not smoke/be unvaccinated.
    - axiosgunnar 5y ago
      Not smoke at all when at work, because otherwise you are going to take smoking breaks „outside” but actually positioned in such a way next to an open door that the air flow will pull the smoke towards inside and I will still smell it
      - martythemaniak 5y ago
        I don't know where you live, but we have designated smoking areas and bylaws that prohibit smoking entrances. I'm glad we're on the same page now.
  - martythemaniak 5y ago
    If your workplace has banned smoking and you get fired because you refuse to stop smoking there, you're not getting EI. IE is there to protect you from loss of employment through no fault of your own. Always has been.
Radim 5y ago
- random314 5y ago
  - Radim 5y ago
- throw0101a 5y ago
  > TL;DR: Little known but Nazis dressed their prosecution of wrong-groups in health concerns. Both linguistically and visually: "social parasites", "vermin", "plague", "taking resources away, from normal-law-abiding-science-respecting Germans", etc. Yeah: > The vaccine passport is exactly like the Nazi yellow star - if the Nazi yellow star meant that the recipients had received life-saving medicine at no cost to themselves and with maybe some free lottery tickets as a side bonus. * https://twitter.com/davidfrum/status/1437045106121625613 https://twitter.com/davidfrum/status/1437045106121625613 (David Frum, former speech writer for Bush43, is Jewish.)
  - Radim 5y ago
    Do you contest the timeline I posted? Or the sources about Nazi propaganda methods? Please do so directly and concretely. If you post in good faith, I'll be happy to engage. Your glib one-liner adds nothing, throw0101a. It's just a non-sequitur, to score shallow points by a "former speech writer of Bush43". For others reading along, feeling "But surely this is different!" in their gut like maybe you are, an honest question: At what point would you go "I'm not OK with actively doing this to a group of fellow humans, no matter how much of a vermin / plague / waste of resources for the society I feel they are"? If the end of my timeline (Dec 21, 1938) doesn't do it for you – which of the ensuing WW2 years would? What's the line in the sand you would not cross? I realize vaccine passports may not be it for you, that's fine with many – but which of the next (inevitable) steps will be too much? (Please answer internally, no need to respond to me)
huntertwo 5y ago
Is there room for those of us who believe the mRNA vaccines are effective at reducing transmission and severe disease yet don’t want to relegate our fellow citizens to second class status for not wanting to inject themselves with something they’re not sure about? We seem all too ready to ruin the lives of those who don’t want the jab.
- inglor_cz 5y ago
  I am of similar persuasion. Previously Covid-infected, two Pfizers in me, scheduled for the booster on Wednesday, but I definitely feel that forcing people into vaccination by economic and political pressure is going to backfire. If the root problem is lack of trust, use of force will likely make it worse.
- klipklop 5y ago
  There are a lot more of us than the media would lead you to believe. I have 2 shots and have no problem working alongside those with zero. In the US/Canada for most people to keep your house you have to work for a corporation. Having your employer as the vaccine enforcer means they have no real free choice. It’s comply or become homeless. Not working for most is far more damaging than contracting Covid. To deny them government benefits they paid for via taxes because they don’t want to take the vaccine is absurd. The whole “I don’t want the unvaccinated to put me at risk” crowd can just go seal themselves up in a bubble. You can’t avoid contracting Covid forever at this point. There is 3x vaccine shots to protect you and now antiviral cocktails.
- exolymph 5y ago
  Same boat. I'm pro-vaccine, but I have no desire to punish those who disagree.
  - Daishiman 5y ago
    I have a desire to punish the people whose ignorance stress hospital systems all over the world, have made working in healthcare a living hell for the past two years, and who willfully expose themselves to the long-term risks of the disease and leave the rest of us to pick up the pieces.
mannanj 5y ago
Its more of the same tactic in politics as used by chief nazi propagandists: "Propaganda must facilitate the displacement of aggression by specifying the targets for hatred." It still surprises me how efficiently all our worlds leaders shifted blame from them for our shitty covid health response to the unvaccinated as though the vaccine was available from the beginning.
bsaul 5y ago
The scariest part of all this hysteria is that the exact same arguments can be found in (almost) every country. France is turning crazy, germany was, austria, etc. Everybody applies the same « non-vaxxed are a threat to vaxxed » almost absurd statement, without blinking. It really really makes you wonder if western governments are trying to prove conspiracy theoricians right.
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
pleasestepback 5y ago
Anytime you take a plant from the forrest - tearing it from it's roots to plant it inside your green house - if you give it the fertilizer and the ammount of water you think is required while depriving it from it's environment - are you responsible if it's life expectency is drastically shortened and it dies? Agent contraints dictate survival. What about mandating corporate structures to have vaccines distributed to every single person on earth at the lowest cost under threat? The vaccines might just get better too if they need to make fewer doses. Yes evil people exist; I've had the honor to meet a few. Total vaccination will not mitigate what is naively feared as the worst. Creation of these incentive structures is not conducive for the longterm survival of critical thought. I've lost more people to sickness via policy than virus itself. Scientific experimentation has been my life and I will die too. - fellow canadian
theHIDninja 5y ago
So what the Canadian government is they would rather kill you with blood clots than let you take a 1/1000 chance of dying from a terror weapon made by the Chinese.

171 points by peteradio 5y ago

fasteddie31003 5y ago

And should people who crash in cars without wearing their seatbelt not get any government benefits from their injuries?

dahart 5y ago
Personally, I don’t think so, but I do think it’s worth asking the question and exploring the space a little bit. There is a certain hypocrisy to refusing to accept safety measures from the government while expecting emergency treatment from the same people when not abiding by the safety measures causes predictable and avoidable harm. There are cases where people are injured while accidentally not having a seatbelt on, and there are cases where people dogmatically refuse to wear seatbelts and refuse to accept the safety statistics. Maybe it makes sense to differentiate between those kinds of cases somehow? Maybe people who consciously choose to refuse safety measures should still be treated but should be prioritized lower than people who are accepting safety measures? One of the problems with people who refuse to accept safety policies is they make emergency treatment more expensive for everyone, and they reduce the probability that someone who’s been safe can get emergency treatment in a timely manner. Part of the question is why it’s fair for people who’ve accepted the safety measures to have a non-zero chance not being able to get emergency treatment because someone who refused to be safe got hurt and is already in the only ER/bed left in the hospital.
- dontcare007 5y ago

aserdf 5y ago

Is unemployment in Canada an insurance as it is in the US? Can you opt out, are premiums taken from your paycheck?

soupbowl 5y ago
You cannot opt out even if you are not allowed to use the service. Such as self employed people or 'anti vaxxers'.

TigeriusKirk 5y ago

The social consequences of this policy overwhelmingly outweigh the benefits. Incredibly harmful action.

b3nji 5y ago

I don't understand, if the vaccines work then why the issue? However the vaccines don't stop you catching or spreading the virus, so why is this banning of the unvaccinated a thing? Very odd.

scrollaway 5y ago
> However the vaccines don't stop you catching or spreading the virus Vaccines reduce spread. Even if it doesn’t stop spread completely it’s still a significant factor.
- moralestapia 5y ago
  >Vaccines reduce spread. In this case, they don't.
  - whimsicalism 5y ago
    Uh, source? Media very much likes to simplify these things, but if you think of this in a probabilistic/continuous manner, rather than a "yes spread vs no spread" approach, the vaccines obviously reduce spread?
    - moralestapia 5y ago
      https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-risk-of-vaccinated-covid-transmission-is-not-low/ https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-risk-of-vacci... You're right that there's no definite answer to this, but the general consensus among doctors is that it doesn't prevent the virus from spreading.
      - scrollaway 5y ago
        “Doesn’t prevent” isn’t the same thing as “doesn’t reduce”.
        5y ago

NDizzle 5y ago

micromacrofoot 5y ago
vaccines reduce transmission and severity, this virus has killed over 5 million people in 2 years
- WaxedChewbacca 5y ago
- crisdux 5y ago
  - jashmatthews 5y ago
    It's dramatically effective in reducing spread. Unvaccinated people are driving 85-90% of the spread in Germany. https://rocs.hu-berlin.de/publication/maier-2021-germany/ https://rocs.hu-berlin.de/publication/maier-2021-germany/
    - peteradio 5y ago
      Pre-omicron.
    - crisdux 5y ago
      That is low quality evidence. It's folks doing some mathematical modeling. Mathematical modeling has had a very bad track record during this pandemic. Did you even read the paper you are linking?
  - tylersmith 5y ago
  - djdjjrjrjr 5y ago
    You can have a high case load in vaccinated countries and still have vaccines that reduce transmissions. Those two ideas don’t conflict. It just means the vaccines we have don’t reduce transmission by 100% and you have a disease that is highly infectious. Just because a medical intervention doesn’t work 100% of the time doesn’t mean it’s 0% effective. Most interventions (vaccines, drugs, procedures, surgeries) don’t work at 100.0%. From the data I’ve seen it appears the mRNA vaccines have some effect in reducing transmission while the other vaccines don’t. It is correct to say that the efficacy against transmission has dropped significantly, but that doesn’t mean it’s 0%.

kolanos 5y ago

> The department said if an employee doesn’t report to work or is suspended or terminated for refusing to comply with a vaccine mandate, the employer should indicate that they quit, took a leave of absence or were dismissed – potentially disqualifying them from collecting EI. Why isn't this fraud?

vidarh 5y ago
Why would it be?
- cmmeur01 5y ago
  Because they were fired for refusing to comply they didn’t quit. If you refused to do a task and were removed by the company for it were you fired or did you quit?
  - scott_w 5y ago
    “were dismissed” is a reason you can give, so it’s true.
peteradio 5y ago
Fraud would require prosecution. Is Edmonton going to prosecute Minister of Employment for the directive? Or the HR dept for the illegal classification (is it illegal if given a Minister directive)? Does this get challenged in Canadian courts?
randomdata 5y ago
EI has always disqualified those who were dismissed for misconduct. This just clarifies that refusing to be vaccinated is considered misconduct.

PopeUrbanX 5y ago

Good. Take away their free healthcare, too, so that they stop taking up ICU beds that smarter people might need.

loudtieblahblah 5y ago
Good. Do fat people, smokers, and drinkers next.
- Reichhardt 5y ago
  Paradoxically, those people actually use fewer healthcare resources, and pension resources, since they die earlier after retirement. Healthy people with long, drawn-out illnesses use the greatest healthcare and pension resources. https://taxfoundation.org/new-study-shows-smokers-and-obese-actually-save-government-health-care-costs/ https://taxfoundation.org/new-study-shows-smokers-and-obese-... Vitamin D and air quality is the major underlying factor behind COVID severity - its why the virus exhibits such seasonality. Pushing vaccines doesn't address underlying public health problems.
- seized 5y ago
  Except they aren't jamming up hospitals all at once due to their choices. That's the critical difference.
  - loudtieblahblah 5y ago
    Hospitals are being jammed up by liberals hopped up on fear porn, going to the ER bc they have a positive covid test but little to no symptoms.
SamoyedFurFluff 5y ago
I would like to push against moral judgement being used to determine if treatment should be offered at all. (To be clear: I’m a fully vaccinated and boosted person that masks consistently.) My understanding is that the field of medicine is heavily against this because they have historical cases where moral judgement to deprive care have resulted in human rights abuses and medical neglect due to bigotry. It might end up disproportionately affecting the homeless, those afflicted with addiction, single mothers, and the poor.

ddon 5y ago

Government is sending a clear message - get vaccinated! end of story...

WaxedChewbacca 5y ago

pcdoodle 5y ago

stefanwlb 5y ago

theodorejb 5y ago

It seems we are heading in a direction where those who don't take the jab will be blocked from receiving government services, prevented from patronizing various businesses, and even restricted from traveling and the ability to work. Are most citizens really okay with this medical apartheid, or are they afraid of speaking out against it?

bmeski 5y ago
I work for a major news organization in the US and am willing to lose my highly paid job to assert my rights. I desperately urge others who are also capable to take such a hit to follow suit. Edit: Note, I'm also vaccinated. J&J March 2020.
- mwattsun 5y ago
  Could you elaborate a bit on what right you are asserting? I don't think I'm alone in not understanding what right you are fighting for. You're asking me to take a stand without telling me what I'm taking a stand for.
  - bmeski 5y ago
    Mandated COVID-19 vaccination of individuals with the current EUA approved vaccines. The devil is in the details. The EUA designation was pushed through because there was no other, "obvious" treatment (despite proven efficacy of a combination of prophylactic treatments). They are testing this thing on us. Even if it works I do not consent to be tested on.
    - mwattsun 5y ago
      Where do you derive your right to consent or not? I could say I have the right to not have my body put in jail, but I have no basis for that.
      - bmeski 5y ago
        Item 1 of the Nuremberg Code. "The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential. This means that the person involved should have legal capacity to give consent; should be so situated as to be able to exercise free power of choice, without the intervention of any element of force, fraud, deceit, duress, over-reaching, or other ulterior form of constraint or coercion; and should have sufficient knowledge and comprehension of the elements of the subject matter involved, as to enable him to make an understanding and enlightened decision. This latter element requires that, before the acceptance of an affirmative decision by the experimental subject, there should be made known to him the nature, duration, and purpose of the experiment; the method and means by which it is to be conducted; all inconveniences and hazards reasonably to be expected; and the effects upon his health or person, which may possibly come from his participation in the experiment."

yostrovs 5y ago

I've been asking friends that believe in such punishments whether they would have punished gay people in the 1990s that got AIDS. Condoms are extremely effective at preventing transmission. Invariably no one wants to go there. Gay people with AIDS that didn't use a condom are to be cried over in our society, while those with COVID that didn't take the vaccine are to be punished.

loudtieblahblah 5y ago
- onos 5y ago
  In USA at least vaccination rates strongly correlate with class and so races with more poverty have higher unvaccinated rates - blacks and Hispanics. But the advocates here seem to follow the meme that the unvaccinated are all trump supporting deplorables…
  - lalaland1125 5y ago
    That's outdated. Due to better vaccine outreach the vaccination rates between races have mostly equalized.
    - onos 5y ago
      Thanks. I found a good article with visuals showing things have improved, as you say. https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/covid-vaccine-tracker-global-distribution/us-vaccine-demographics.html https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/covid-vaccine-tracker-glo...
scott_w 5y ago
You can’t spread HIV just by sitting next to someone. Your analogy also doesn’t hold at all because countries DO punish people for knowingly infecting others with HIV.

14 5y ago

This is complete BS and I say that as a vaccinated health care worker. They are now considering putting sick but vaccinated workers back to work instead of not sick but unvaccinated. How can they justify that? It seems pretty obvious they are not worried about public health but rather some sort of control over people. Do as we say or you will be punished. I am feeling disgraced as a Canadian. And am sorry for my fellow workers who choose not to get vaccinated and lost their jobs.

kstenerud 5y ago

To clarify for non-Canadians: EI benefits are generally only given if you lose your employment through no fault of your own (didn't quit or get fired). What this policy does is clarify that losing work hours or your job due to vaccine refusal after a workplace vaccination mandate (outside of medical exemptions) does NOT count as "through no fault of your own", and instructs employers to indicate as such. So: For the duration of the pandemic, if your workplace mandates COVID vaccination and you refuse and then get fired over it, you're not eligible for EI any more than you would be if you got fired for cause.

LaunchAway1 5y ago
That's an interesting point to make and defendable but these declarations mentioned in another comment, I will assume to be true, coming from Trudeau, Canada's president: “They don’t believe in science/progress and are very often misogynistic and racist....This leads us, as a leader and as a country, to make a choice: Do we tolerate these people?" I have taken both shots, and will take the third but these declarations are appropriate for a mad man, not a country leader.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- finite_jest 5y ago
  FYI, Canada does not have a president. Trudeau is the prime minister. However, you are right in that his quote (which I think was in French originally) is just awful name-calling.
- criticaltinker 5y ago
  Yes and this type of doublespeak is coming from the top down in many countries. It’s alarming because “they don’t believe in science” has become a divisive weapon that hand waves away all scientific nuance. The vast majority of young healthy people are completely asymptomatic, they don’t need a vaccine, nor would it be a wise investment of limited doses. Also, previous infection confers protection that is at least as effective as vaccination. This has been consistently observed since the beginning of the pandemic. Vaccines can save the lives of many vulnerable people though; it’s an amazing tool and its use is certainly justified by science. But using economic and financial engineering to force everyone to get vaccinated? There is no scientific evidence supporting that decision, and the second and third order consequences are completely unstudied. (evolution of viral resistance is one example; many experts are aware of the phenomenon but commenters here have been misled to believe that an airborne virus circulating the planet can be eradicated ‘if only everyone got vaccinated’)

guidovranken 5y ago

In other festive COVID news from Canada: >Canada's Justin Trudeau on the unvaccinated: >“They don’t believe in science/progress and are very often misogynistic and racist....This leads us, as a leader and as a country, to make a choice: Do we tolerate these people?" https://twitter.com/KevinBardosh/status/1476838517007257600 https://twitter.com/KevinBardosh/status/1476838517007257600 My patience with COVID cultists is starting to run quite thin.

charlieyu1 5y ago
There is no science if doubts aren’t allowed.
- MiroF 5y ago
  - q1w2 5y ago
    These policies are punitive - they are not based on science. There is no science demonstrating that withholding unemployment reduces transmission rates.
    - MiroF 5y ago
      There is social science indicating that employment mandates increase vaccination rates. There is science indicating that vaccines reduce transmission rates. Regardless, this is a different point than the original comment.
      - MrRiddle 5y ago
        > vaccines reduce transmission rates With current experience from UK and France, this line (even though true up to a point) is irrelevant.
- egberts1 5y ago
  There is no science if the facts are not allowed either.

iqanq 5y ago

A year ago this would've been called a conspiracy theory. Saying that this would happen on Facebook or Twitter would've been called misleading or even got you banned.

scrollaway 5y ago
A year ago, the thought that so many people would reject vaccines that can help end the pandemic was unrealistic. Soooo…
- guilhas 5y ago
  Wrong, a year ago all countries vaccination target was lower Initially started with the medicine standard herd immunity of 65%, which includes vaccinated and recovered And now even 90% vaccinated is supposedly unacceptable https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-56722186 https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-56722186
  - Daishiman 5y ago
    Because the disease has changed. Are you ignorant of that?
    - lordloki 5y ago
      The disease has changed to reduce the effectiveness of the vaccines to the point where they don't show any significant ability to stop the spread. The current vaccines may help the individual against Omicron but does nothing to help the collective. Are you ignorant of that?
      - eli_gottlieb 5y ago
        Right, the solution is to improve and update the vaccines.
        guilhas 5y ago

brightball 5y ago

I’m sure this precedent will lead to no future consequences or abuse.

chippy 5y ago

throemdiwo 5y ago
MiroF 5y ago
> The reason the powers of states in the west were limited to a degree - it was because the person was held as sacred. Most of the old judges deeply understand this. The politicians don't. This conception is more mythos than reality. You should look at some of the early laws passed in many of these countries if you think we had a tradition of "strong" natural rights that are only being abrogated in our modern era. It used to be illegal to publish content critical of the government [0], not to mention the fact that the franchise was restricted to those holding property, and definitely not considering ongoing active slavery. I don't understand your connection to demonization of the poor. [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alien_and_Sedition_Acts https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alien_and_Sedition_Acts

kif 5y ago

I can understand why the push for vaccines even though they don't stop spreading and catching it. They seem to improve chances of survival and lessen chances of severe disease. That said, if the government takes away benefits, then it should give back all the taxes withheld on one's salary before it does that. On another note, personally I don't see any other solution to the pandemic, other than everybody/most people gaining some kind of natural immunity. Places requiring some form of green pass are none other than VIP superspreader events, where the Green Pass is the VIP ticket. People holding the Green Pass, will then go to meet others who may or may not be vaccinated, but who will eventually catch Covid.

scott_w 5y ago
> they don't stop spreading and catching it Not true, they do reduce infection and spread. > That said, if the government takes away benefits, then it should give back all the taxes withheld on one's salary before it does that. That’s not how government, taxes or being part of civil society works at all. > personally I don't see any other solution to the pandemic, other than everybody/most people gaining some kind of natural immunity This is scientifically illiterate as Omicron bypasses all “natural” immunity whereas a vaccine gives stronger protection. What’s to stop future variants doing exactly the same?
- peteradio 5y ago
  > vaccine gives stronger protection Maybe if youre boosted and its been 14 days but not greater than 45 days. But citation needed anyway. Natural immunity was not totally bypassed. South Africa kicked Omicron's ass with regard to case fatality rate.
  - scott_w 5y ago
    Citation? I literally just watched the deputy chief medical officer for England (Van Tam) explain how infection and the vaccines work on BBC iPlayer last night.

xxpor 5y ago

bmeski 5y ago
LaunchAway1 5y ago
hrhrhrhrhr 5y ago
Violating NAP requires taking some action, you can't just "aggress" by not doing anything.
- jquery 5y ago
  - hrhrhrhrhr 5y ago
    No, NAP is pretty clear. It's just some people treat it as a silver bullet, when it's only a fundamental building block. Libertarians are not against having contractual jurisdictions which would mandate being vaccinated on a certain territory, as long as you can quit that jurisdiction at any time. It's not clear that getting vaccinated would stop you from spreading the virus though.
    - jquery 5y ago
      > as long as you can quit that jurisdiction at any time. Nobody is going door to door and arresting unvaccinated people. It’s not like the anti-choice law in Texas that criminalizes two people working together to stop a woman from being pregnant against her will. You still have your freedom under the NAP. But as soon as you present a threat to infect other people by being unvaccinated, there are reasonable restrictions in place. Edit: I’m seeing replies saying the NAP is strictly about physical violence. To that I ask, are bioweapons fine to use in libertarianland? Can I hold a city hostage with weaponized anthrax because the libertarianism is, at its root, a cover for voting Republican and not a coherent political philosophy?

throemdiwo 5y ago

sh4un 5y ago

moron4hire 5y ago

We have systems in place for people who want to refuse standard vaccinations: live in a religious enclave like the Amish. You don't want to participate in our society? Then don't participate in our society. Go be Amish and see how that works out for you.

ukj 5y ago

iqanq 5y ago
Taking the current COVID vaccines won't end any pandemics, either.
- ukj 5y ago
  Do you have a better strategy, or are you just practicing fallacies? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nirvana_fallacy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nirvana_fallacy
  - iqanq 5y ago
    I am responding to your comment - you say that asserting your rights by not taking the vaccine won't end the pandemic, while I am saying that taking it won't end it either.
    - ukj 5y ago
      Almost as if reducing mortality/hospitalization is an irrelevant metric to you. Almost as if an abstract social construct as “rights” is more important to you than actual health.
      - iqanq 5y ago
        Yes, personal freedom is to me infinitely more important than the health of others.
        maxerickson 5y ago
        Is your freedom primary? Like if a group of people banded together and said that they didn't want to associate with unvaccinated people, should they have the freedom to do that without interference from the unvaccinated?

egberts1 5y ago

More healthcare professionals for the United States (or as some would say, Red States).

crisdux 5y ago

Lots of people in this thread are arguing the "do the vaccines reduce spread thing" as justification for or against this policy. I don't think that even matters. These vaccines have risks that are not being opening discussed. There is an unprecedented systematic campaign of censorship, deception and propaganda aimed at people who question anything about these vaccines. Vaccine injuries are real. The performance of these vaccines are not meeting expectations. They should not be mandated, full stop. We need a system based on informed consent, not coercion.

simonh 5y ago
There have been extensive studies of the risks of these vaccines, both during their trials and after public use, and these studies are continuing. The regulators on several counties including the US have even publicly registered concerns about several of the vaccines, particularly the J&J single dose vaccine. None of these studies have been suppressed or censored, and they are ongoing and I see debate about them going on in the press and on forums like this all the time. Some social media platforms ban provably false statements on this and other topics, and sometimes those restrictions go too far. That is not the same thing as banning all public debate.
- peteradio 5y ago
  > That is not the same thing as banning all public debate. It is throwing water on discussion at critical times simultaneous to strong government intervention which resets the discussion to the new overton window. You don't need to ban public debate you just play talk to the hand and call anyone who disagrees with you probably racist and or russian dissonance.
- commandlinefan 5y ago
  > extensive studies of the risks of these vaccines How and when? This time last year (when trump said a vaccine was less than a year away) these same medical professionals were warning us that vaccine testing takes years in the best case.
  - 5y ago

occz 5y ago

peteradio 5y ago
throwaway55421 5y ago
Well, when you invent a slur and define it to mean whatever you want you can find many examples of it. I have had three coronavirus jabs. I think mandates are hysterical and counterproductive and I resist surveillance. Being anti lockdown, anti surveillance, anti discrimination... generally just anti hysteria, is the only correct choice.
theduder99 5y ago

mercy_dude 5y ago

Where is the court system? The court system has been very much in lines with these stupidities we have been seeing around mandates and so on, which makes me make a much more cynical claim. Leaders like Justin Trudeau don’t give a damn about science/progress and public health and well being for example. If they did, we wouldn’t be this far along the crisis and still be talking about this. My thinking is they are setting these things as a precedent (through legislative and court system rubber stamping these policies) for the next crisis. Could it be a looming debt crisis and using that crisis as a pretext to have more control on property rights and other basic rights in the constitution? Who knows. But if one thing, if a set of “experts” (who have been proven wrong in many instances and have done a terrible job in public communication) calls something a crisis then all your basic rights in constitution can be annulled using that as a pretext. That precedent has been established clearly and sadly court system has done nothing but rubber stamping this.

Radim 5y ago
It's pretty short-sighted, too. I was born and lived under one rule of tyranny (communist Czechoslovakia), and the legal & judicial professions suffered tremendously there. In fact, they were among the first to go, replaced by something truly heinous. Like, what do these judges and lawyers who keep silent expect will happen, once basic civil liberties & human rights are disbanded? (no matter whether disbanded directly or through some bullshit round-about "we didn't kill you, we just hired mercenaries / didn't let you live / work / travel; if you don't like it why didn't you emigrate?")
- inglor_cz 5y ago
  Indeed, and one of the legacies of the Czechoslovak Socialist Republic is lingering distrust towards authorities even 30 years after the regime collapsed. Past injustices cast long shadows.
  - razius 5y ago

sh4un 5y ago

The problem in Canada is that the health care is so bad that people are worried that if something goes wrong you are screwed. My son broke his arm and he has to wait 3 weeks for a cast. I've been waiting for a general doctors appointment for 6 months yet, been waiting 4 years to have a compressed disc looked at. It's sad. To make it worse it's almost impossible to find the vaccine and when you do it's a several hour wait and often it runs out. I think there is more to it than everyone is a racist homophobe trump supporter. Most people who say things like that are often an abortion that failed.

timbit42 5y ago
I live in the poorest province in Canada and this doesn't even happen here. You go to Emerg and you get a cast. Canadians don't have to worry that if they get sick that they are 'screwed'. If you haven't had a compressed disc looked at in 4 years, you're not trying. Even if you don't have a family doctor, it's not difficult to get referred to a specialist. As for the vaccine, everyone is in a mad rush for it right now because of Omicron, so there is a delay. I live in the poorest province and made an appointment Thursday to get my booster this Tuesday. This is what I did last summer and they weren't run out when I got there.
- sh4un 5y ago
  - timbit42 5y ago

AbrahamParangi 5y ago

Does vaccination still offer a public health benefit? To be clear vaccination is good, people should be vaccinated, I have been vaccinated three times, etc, etc but does vaccination still offer a public health benefit vs just being a good idea for your own personal health?

SamoyedFurFluff 5y ago
At least in Washington state, unvaccinated people have Covid at 3x the rates at minimum (the most robust cohort). This effect is more exaggerated the older someone is. Deaths are similar. Depending on your definition of benefit, it might be beneficial still.

martythemaniak 5y ago

Breathtaking amount of ignorance in these comments. EI has never and will never cover voluntarily leaving a position. Don't want to meet basic sanitary requirements? You're free to leave.

axiosgunnar 5y ago
Please don’t smoke then, as second hand smoke affects us not addicted to nicotine, when you are standing outside of a shop and I have to walk by past you
- MiroF 5y ago
  Good point. I would be in favor of a similar law regarding smoking as regarding being unvaccinated. You are free to smoke/be unvaccinated outside or in your home, but if you wish to enter an establishment or work in an enclosed space, you must not smoke/be unvaccinated.
  - axiosgunnar 5y ago
    Not smoke at all when at work, because otherwise you are going to take smoking breaks „outside” but actually positioned in such a way next to an open door that the air flow will pull the smoke towards inside and I will still smell it
    - martythemaniak 5y ago
      I don't know where you live, but we have designated smoking areas and bylaws that prohibit smoking entrances. I'm glad we're on the same page now.
- martythemaniak 5y ago
  If your workplace has banned smoking and you get fired because you refuse to stop smoking there, you're not getting EI. IE is there to protect you from loss of employment through no fault of your own. Always has been.

Radim 5y ago

random314 5y ago
- Radim 5y ago
throw0101a 5y ago
> TL;DR: Little known but Nazis dressed their prosecution of wrong-groups in health concerns. Both linguistically and visually: "social parasites", "vermin", "plague", "taking resources away, from normal-law-abiding-science-respecting Germans", etc. Yeah: > The vaccine passport is exactly like the Nazi yellow star - if the Nazi yellow star meant that the recipients had received life-saving medicine at no cost to themselves and with maybe some free lottery tickets as a side bonus. * https://twitter.com/davidfrum/status/1437045106121625613 https://twitter.com/davidfrum/status/1437045106121625613 (David Frum, former speech writer for Bush43, is Jewish.)
- Radim 5y ago
  Do you contest the timeline I posted? Or the sources about Nazi propaganda methods? Please do so directly and concretely. If you post in good faith, I'll be happy to engage. Your glib one-liner adds nothing, throw0101a. It's just a non-sequitur, to score shallow points by a "former speech writer of Bush43". For others reading along, feeling "But surely this is different!" in their gut like maybe you are, an honest question: At what point would you go "I'm not OK with actively doing this to a group of fellow humans, no matter how much of a vermin / plague / waste of resources for the society I feel they are"? If the end of my timeline (Dec 21, 1938) doesn't do it for you – which of the ensuing WW2 years would? What's the line in the sand you would not cross? I realize vaccine passports may not be it for you, that's fine with many – but which of the next (inevitable) steps will be too much? (Please answer internally, no need to respond to me)

huntertwo 5y ago

Is there room for those of us who believe the mRNA vaccines are effective at reducing transmission and severe disease yet don’t want to relegate our fellow citizens to second class status for not wanting to inject themselves with something they’re not sure about? We seem all too ready to ruin the lives of those who don’t want the jab.

inglor_cz 5y ago
I am of similar persuasion. Previously Covid-infected, two Pfizers in me, scheduled for the booster on Wednesday, but I definitely feel that forcing people into vaccination by economic and political pressure is going to backfire. If the root problem is lack of trust, use of force will likely make it worse.
klipklop 5y ago
There are a lot more of us than the media would lead you to believe. I have 2 shots and have no problem working alongside those with zero. In the US/Canada for most people to keep your house you have to work for a corporation. Having your employer as the vaccine enforcer means they have no real free choice. It’s comply or become homeless. Not working for most is far more damaging than contracting Covid. To deny them government benefits they paid for via taxes because they don’t want to take the vaccine is absurd. The whole “I don’t want the unvaccinated to put me at risk” crowd can just go seal themselves up in a bubble. You can’t avoid contracting Covid forever at this point. There is 3x vaccine shots to protect you and now antiviral cocktails.
exolymph 5y ago
Same boat. I'm pro-vaccine, but I have no desire to punish those who disagree.
- Daishiman 5y ago
  I have a desire to punish the people whose ignorance stress hospital systems all over the world, have made working in healthcare a living hell for the past two years, and who willfully expose themselves to the long-term risks of the disease and leave the rest of us to pick up the pieces.

mannanj 5y ago

Its more of the same tactic in politics as used by chief nazi propagandists: "Propaganda must facilitate the displacement of aggression by specifying the targets for hatred." It still surprises me how efficiently all our worlds leaders shifted blame from them for our shitty covid health response to the unvaccinated as though the vaccine was available from the beginning.

bsaul 5y ago

The scariest part of all this hysteria is that the exact same arguments can be found in (almost) every country. France is turning crazy, germany was, austria, etc. Everybody applies the same « non-vaxxed are a threat to vaxxed » almost absurd statement, without blinking. It really really makes you wonder if western governments are trying to prove conspiracy theoricians right.

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

pleasestepback 5y ago

Anytime you take a plant from the forrest - tearing it from it's roots to plant it inside your green house - if you give it the fertilizer and the ammount of water you think is required while depriving it from it's environment - are you responsible if it's life expectency is drastically shortened and it dies? Agent contraints dictate survival. What about mandating corporate structures to have vaccines distributed to every single person on earth at the lowest cost under threat? The vaccines might just get better too if they need to make fewer doses. Yes evil people exist; I've had the honor to meet a few. Total vaccination will not mitigate what is naively feared as the worst. Creation of these incentive structures is not conducive for the longterm survival of critical thought. I've lost more people to sickness via policy than virus itself. Scientific experimentation has been my life and I will die too. - fellow canadian

theHIDninja 5y ago

So what the Canadian government is they would rather kill you with blood clots than let you take a 1/1000 chance of dying from a terror weapon made by the Chinese.