Biden Drops the Hammer on Unvaccinated

[Ana the Ist]

If someone is simply refusing vaccination because they dont want to be "experimented" on, I hate to tell them this, but they are in the experiment. You're known as the control group. If someone cannot get a vaccine because of other medical conditions, the unvaccinated DO affect them.

And the vaccinated...since they can pass the plague to them as well.

This pandemic has had a major effects on hospital staff. They are already stressed out and quitting faster than we can replace them. We've had patients that refuse to acknowledge that Covid is real, even as they were gasping for air and being put on a vent. We've had patients threaten to kill our staff when we tell them they have to wear a mask. Some of my friends are now struggling with long-term health issues from contracting Covid and now have damaged lungs. Since we are short staffed, we can't open up more beds. So we're now starting to delay elective surgeries again, even though the surgery might be life changing such as a joint replacement.

We have an addition to the litanies every Sunday

For our deliverance from all affliction, wrath, danger and distress, and from the peril of the coronavirus against us, let us pray to the Lord. ( Lord, have mercy. )

For our brethren, those who lead the fight against the coronavirus, the doctors, the medical workers and the scientists, let us pray to the Lord. ( Lord, have mercy. )

If they are too stressed they should quit. I understand that they may not have expected to deal with a plague....but it's a possibility they should have considered.

I have a friend who is in the Border Patrol. According to him, his station has been between 500%-1000% over capacity since the beginning of the year. He's seen dead people the entire year. He thinks that his coworkers are all looking for the door.

Be happy, at least your crisis isn't being ignored.

 

[iluvatar5150]

Such as?

Such as the enforcing of property rights. Even the most strident libertarian still winds up using government violence as a means to enforce property rights and punish those who would violate them. IME, Libertarians like to tell themselves that by removing regulating they're maximizing freedom, when what they're really doing is merely transferring power from government to the wealthy/powerful and eliminating tools by which the aggrieved could seek recourse.

How can a system that explicitly allows complete freedom of action save only that a person is not allowed to defraud someone else or use force against them be at all what you're talking about?

The Libertarian fantasy of maximizing freedom through the elimination of regulation only works when negative externalities don't exist. When negative externalities do exist, some mechanism must be put in place to prevent people from imposing harms on others, otherwise, you'll have folks being harmed all over the place. A very shallow-minded Libertarian approach to COVID would see the vaccine as a personal medical choice not to be interfered with by others, whereas a more realistic Libertarian approach would factor in the massive negative externalities caused by the decision to not vaccinate and the elevated risk that decision imposes on the rest of society.

A vaccine mandate may seem tyrannical since the power to impose it is concentrated in a single individual, but due to these negative externalities, there's also a tyranny being wielded against society by the unvaccinated. The elevated risk they cause harms our businesses and kills our loved ones. As I noted earlier, about 69,000 people have died of covid since the vaccine became available to the general public. You may not like the vaccine mandate, but it's not going to kill tens of thousands of people, er go it's less tyrannical than the alternative.

 

[mark46]

Not at the expense of people constitutional rights. This will be decided in the courts.

As with most Trump nonsense, it will be decided in the Court, again and again and again and again. An employer has the right to require vaccinations. This has been decided many times.

The ONLY real POSSIBLE loss is with regard to OSHA having the power to regulate health conditions in the workplace. Can OSHA protect the workers against working with the unvaccinated. The courts will indeed decide.

All federal workers will be vaccinated.
All those working on federal contracts will be vaccinated.
All members of the military will be vaccinated.
All health workers will be vaccinated.
All workers at nursing homes will be vaccinated.
Boosters will be approved soon.
Vaccines for young children soon will be approved.
======
SUBJECT TO CHANGE: all workers for companies with more than 100 workers will be vaccinated. It is possible that the court will allow companies to restrict such workers from any contact with other workers or the public. The Court could even strike down this provision, allowing the companies to proudly have the unvaccinated infecting others.

This would be fine. These companies can deal with the public. Many, many companies (INCLUDING FOX) already require vaccinations.

The unvaccinated will find work at many companies who will proudly allow their employees to infect the public, This will be allowed at companies with fewer than 100 employees. Many sports or entertainment venues will decided what is better for their businesses.
==========
SHAME ON BIDEN
for not requiring transportation companies to require vaccinations for their employees! [and for their customers].
=============
AN APPEAL WAS MADE TO STATES AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS WITH REGARD
to state and local government employees, especially schools. Thousands of schools will be closed down in the next few weeks because of Republican policies with regard to schools. Republicans should really understand how important the schools are as babysitters for their children. Any respect for knowledge is long, long gone.
=============
LET US SIT BACK AND PONDER
that McConnell and several Republican governors are begging for the public to be vaccinated.
Trump has openly recommended vaccinations, and has been booed by his base.
The govs of FL and TX have been vaccinated. Their vaccination rates are NOT among the lowest.

.

 

[Aldebaran]

Covid Live Updates: Biden Unveils Vaccine Mandate Plan Covering Two-Thirds of U.S. Workers

"Drops the hammer"? Sounds rather violent and insensitive.
But it's nice that some people are willing to cheerlead a guy who wants to "drop the hammer" on 80 million people. It doesn't make him much of a unifier though. Biden Called For Unity In His Inaugural Address. He Might Find It Hard To Come By

 

[Albion]

The Libertarian fantasy of maximizing freedom through the elimination of regulation only works when negative externalities don't exist. When negative externalities do exist, some mechanism must be put in place to prevent people from imposing harms on others, otherwise, you'll have folks being harmed all over the place. A very shallow-minded Libertarian approach to COVID would see the vaccine as a personal medical choice not to be interfered with by others, whereas a more realistic Libertarian approach would factor in the massive negative externalities caused by the decision to not vaccinate and the elevated risk that decision imposes on the rest of society.

That's the argument. Prior restraint. But if that is accepted as just, the totalitarians among us will say that regulations backed up by a police state that has virtually unlimited power over all the people and everything about them is necessary because otherwise disease will spread, people will die, and so on.

The question, therefore, may be "Which one of these systems is more unjust as well as imperfect?"

The slave state approach would be worse than allowing people to protect themselves, and we know that the economy works better when there is something to work for. But if there are what you call "negative externalities" that cause risk to some people, no authoritarian state has yet eliminated them anyway, even with the use of extensive control over the citizenry.

Those systems succeed only in theory. In theory, they're paradise realized. In reality, they still deprive the people of the natural human rights that all men are entitled to exercise.

 

[Hammster]

Such as the enforcing of property rights. Even the most strident libertarian still winds up using government violence as a means to enforce property rights and punish those who would violate them. IME, Libertarians like to tell themselves that by removing regulating they're maximizing freedom, when what they're really doing is merely transferring power from government to the wealthy/powerful and eliminating tools by which the aggrieved could seek recourse.

If that’s your example, then all you are talking about is being just.

 

[GreekOrthodox]

And the vaccinated...since they can pass the plague to them as well.

If they are too stressed they should quit. I understand that they may not have expected to deal with a plague....but it's a possibility they should have considered.

So if nurses quit and you or a family member needs a hospital bed? Too bad?

 

[Ana the Ist]

So if nurses quit and you or a family member needs a hospital bed? Too bad?

That's the breaks.

 

[GreekOrthodox]

That's the breaks.

Unless of course you've got money which you can pay for private care.

 

[JacksBratt]

So you support "my body, my choice"??? Are you pro-choice?

I support "my body my choice".

1/ for those who don't wish to get vaccinated.
2/ for those who wish to get vaccinated.
3/ for the unborn infant who cannot speak for their self. Everyone forgets about the rights that they have.

 

[JacksBratt]

For "normal" employers (not US Govt, US Govt contractors, medical facilities receiving Medicare/caid payments) it is vaccinate, or weekly test. The test can be require of any employee entering a company facility once per week. One would not need testing if they were on a 2-week vacation either.

So there's your loop hole. Work remotely and get tested if you enter a company workspace occupied by other workers. Now you are free to infect about the community. Congrats.

Who are you going to infect?

If the vaccine is any good... you are only going to infect others who are not vaccinated.

If the vaccinated people are worried... then the vaccine must be no good.. so why force people to get a vaccine that doesn't protect you?

Does nobody else see the illogical nonsensical reasoning here?

 

[JacksBratt]

They get infected and have to be hospitalized. You get in a car wreck and need to be hospitalized, but there are no beds available, and you die. Or maybe they are the breadwinner for their household and now the children have to live on the street due to lack of income after Mom dies.

People smoke cigarettes and end up being a burden to the medical system.
People who overeat and get obese and have heart conditions, are a burden to the medical system.
People drink and drink and get cirrhosis of the liver and become a burden to the medical system.

Looks like a slippery slope to banning smoking, drinking and overeating.

Abortions don't harm anyone. Lack of vaccination does.

Tell the unborn child that.

 

[Lifelong_sinner]

This just means, that i have a choice to either; work for a company with under 100 employees, or just dont go back to work at all and live in my car. Seems like things are right on track.

 

[JacksBratt]

Biden did not say he WOULDN'T mandate vaccinations. He said he didn't want to make them mandatory. Giving Americans the choice to do the right thing to help America recover from the pandemic. Many Americans refused to get vaccinated and are actually helping the coronavirus linger and kill our neighbors unnecessarily. This is why we need a leader willing to protect ALL Americans by making tough decisions that ignore politics and consequences for the next election. Some things are more important than political maneuvering for votes!

Check that one again.

 

[JacksBratt]

This just means, that i have a choice to either; work for a company with under 100 employees, or just dont go back to work at all and live in my car. Seems like things are right on track.

In Canada, the company cannot mandate you to get vaccinated if you want to work. If you refuse, however, they have the right to terminate your employment and pay the proper legal amount of severance pay.

Not getting vaccinated does not warrant a "for cause" termination.

 

[iluvatar5150]

That's the argument. Prior restraint. But if that is accepted as just, the totalitarians among us will say that regulations backed up by a police state that has virtually unlimited power over all the people and everything about them is necessary because otherwise disease will spread, people will die, and so on.

The question, therefore, may be "Which one of these systems is more unjust as well as imperfect?"

The slave state approach would be worse than allowing people to protect themselves, and we know that the economy works better when there is something to work for. But if there are what you call "negative externalities" that cause risk to some people, no authoritarian state has yet eliminated them anyway, even with the use of extensive control over the citizenry.

Those systems succeed only in theory. In theory, they're paradise realized. In reality, they still deprive the people of the natural human rights that all men are entitled to exercise.

Yeah, your position seems more reasonable when you strawman everything into its most extreme form. No, no “authoritarian state” has eliminated externalities, but they reduce those externalities all the time. That’s why you didn’t get listeria from your breakfast cereal this morning or cholera from your drinking water.

 

[iluvatar5150]

If that’s your example, then all you are talking about is being just.

I’m glad you see things my way. Being infected by a virus that was transmitted as a result of somebody else’s choices is an example of a negative externality. Implementing impediments to that transmission is an exercise in justice.

 

[driewerf]

What's the punishment non-compliance?

I hope the firing squad.
I am afraid, nothing.

 

[whatbogsends]

But they rarely take up hospital beds.

I think you mean "But they rarely take up hospital beds from Covid according to data in the US".

or maybe: "But fewer vaccinated individuals take up hospital beds due to Covid"

Ireland:

About half of all Covid-19 patients in hospital and in intensive care are fully vaccinated against the disease, new figures show.

Covid: 54% of hospital patients with virus are fully vaccinated (irishtimes.com)

Israel:

What is clear is that “breakthrough” cases are not the rare events the term implies. As of 15 August, 514 Israelis were hospitalized with severe or critical COVID-19, a 31% increase from just 4 days earlier. Of the 514, 59% were fully vaccinated. Of the vaccinated, 87% were 60 or older. “There are so many breakthrough infections that they dominate and most of the hospitalized patients are actually vaccinated,” says Uri Shalit, a bioinformatician at the Israel Institute of Technology (Technion) who has consulted on COVID-19 for the government. “One of the big stories from Israel [is]: ‘Vaccines work, but not well enough.’”

A grim warning from Israel: Vaccination blunts, but does not defeat Delta | Science | AAAS

UK:

60% of all COVID hospitalisations are unvaccinated (yahoo.com)

Unvaccinated hospitalized patients say they regret not getting the shot

The extremely low hospitalization rates reported in the US for vaccinated individuals is an anomaly in terms of data being reported by countries. The data definitely shows vaccine reducing hospitalizations, but not anywhere near the rates reported by the US, and certainly not enough to say the vaccinated "rarely" take up hospital beds in anywhere but the US.

 

[JSRG]

True, but who is to say a "community" is limited to a state?

"...upon the principle of self-defense, of paramount necessity, a community has the right to protect itself against an epidemic of disease which threatens the safety of its members.”

That's not really the issue though. Even if we consider "community" to include the federal government, that's not really the issue. The question is whether the federal government has the constitutional power to mandate vaccination.

Let's go through a quick recap of how the levels of American government work. Congress has a list of powers it has in the enumerated powers. These are chiefly found in Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution, though subsequent amendments have added some extra powers. If a law passed doesn't fall under one of those powers, it's unconstitutional. The Constitution also puts some extra prohibitions on congressional laws found in Section 9 as well as some amendments (e.g. the Bill of Rights is basically a list of stuff congress can't do), meaning that if a law fell under the enumerated powers, it's still unconstitutional if it violates one of the prohibitions.

State law is a different matter. There are restrictions on what state law can do. Article I, Section 10 of the Constitution is a list of things states are prohibited from doing, and some amendments add additional restrictions. State law also cannot contradict federal law or the state constitution. But unlike the federal government, the rule for state law is "it's okay as long as it doesn't contradict one of these things" whereas for federal law, it's "it's okay as long as it doesn't contradict one of these things and falls under the enumerated powers."

Of course, things get more convoluted. For that was a list of powers given to congress. The President is a different branch entirely, and its list of powers is different (and smaller) than that of congress. However, congress does have the power to pass laws granting extra powers to the executive branch. Of course, Congress can't simply use this as a way to run-around its own powers--that is, Congress can't just pass a law saying "the President can set up a state religion" to circumvent the fact the First Amendment applies only to congress--and thus, even if granted by a congressional law, the president cannot take through them take any action that congress could not.

So if Biden, by direct order or through one of the executive agencies, attempts to mandate vaccinations, the following questions arise:
1) Does the president, through a congressional law (no constitutional power seems applicable here), have the power to mandate vaccinations?
2) If so, does the law in question fall under one of the enumerated powers?
3) Finally, does the law or the president's actions through the law not violate any prohibition prescribed by the Constitution?

If the answer to these questions are not all "yes" then it is unconstitutional.

tl;dr version: The Constitution gives different powers to the federal government and state government, just because the state government can do something doesn't mean the federal government can.