The problem is the vaccines are not 100% effective, we don’t know how long it lasts for, and have to consider mutations. So it is not just about protecting people who don’t wear masks/take vaccines.
1 Like
I think for a little while because there are going to lots of non-vaxxers claiming they got the jab and therefore can justify mask free.
I’m ok through 2021 if that what it takes.
Whether we did the right thing is above my paygrade, but I do know that the lockdown had costs of its own. My 12 year old son has suffered the most of anyone in my house. He’s developed anxiety bordering on agoraphobia in the last year and is now being treated for it. It’s going to take a long time for these effects to fade, if they ever do.
6 Likes
Nothing is every really 100% effective. There’s a point where that extra 0.1% is just not worth the effort and it’s okay to let some preventable deaths occur.
I’m talking about whatever scientists say is enough. If they decide you only need to vaccinate 18+, then go with that.
1 Like
WTF Rhode Island? Get it together.
Id vote no but with a caveat, need case counts to get to very low levels too. Id be very cautious about when the mask mandates get removed (dont expect a '21 event), just dont think they are/should be permanent.
Rhode Island is being dumb about indoor dining. They allow 50% capacity with tables of up to eight people from up to two households.
(That being said, I will probably accept invitations to go out to dinner after I get vaxxed.)
Caring about the people who don’t wear masks and don’t get vaccinated is the only correct reaction. Dehumanizing others like that is a edgelord bullshit that I refuse to believe good people would believe that in a real world example. On top of back humanism reasons, as long as the virus persists it’s in our best interests to mask and take basic precautions.
1 Like
And just to reiterate something, because this thread is really bugging the shit out of me right now. US cases 7dma is above the summer peak, when you all were freaking out. It’s time to pump the breaks more than a little bit on this. Mistakes now result in massive amount of completely unnecessary deaths.
6 Likes
As I often point out, I’m not a good person. I view these things through more of a political lens, where dehumanizing others is a winning tactic. That’s more game theory than edgelord bullshit.
If we’re talking about people who refuse masks and will refuse vaccination, of course I hope they don’t get infected, but that’s only because I don’t want them to infect others or tie up resources. Otherwise, fuck em.
I don’t think of myself as a super edgelord, but these people have made my and everyone else’s life a lot worse over the last 12 months (and I’m fortunate in that I still have a job, no one I know got infected, my mental state is okay, etc.).
I only have so much “give a shit” in me. Sorry, but it’s reserved for people who aren’t assholes.
1 Like
That would evaporate in a second IRL opposed to online.
1 Like
What is going to change at the end of 2021? Antivaxers aren’t going to get vaccinated or become more reliable. And COVID isn’t going to go away absent near-universal vaccination.
Posting online in a private small forum isn’t political game theory. You have a far grander view of what your actions here actually are.
I basically believe that who needs a shot is a medical decision and I’m not qualified to make that decision, but I can treat that decision as a black box and I am qualified to talk about using the outputs of that black box in a political decision.
I didn’t leave a lot of nuance in my poll. It’s a simple yes-no. The whole point is that the political decision can’t be based on simply minimizing the number of preventable deaths. There are other concerns and, at some point, those concerns may dominate the concerns of the small number of people who can’t be vaccinated. This isn’t the same as current anti-maskers, who seem to think that their own personal concerns should be weighted more heavily than people they don’t know.
Not sure what you mean.
I’m not going to overtly (or covertly) cheer for their deaths, if that’s what you think my position is.
But am I supposed to feel bad about a guy who drives with a 0.3 BAC and crashes into a tree? No, I’m just thankful he didn’t hurt anyone else. Same shit applies here.
My opinions on what ought to be done are strongly influenced by math. I’m applying how I think about everything else to how I think about COVID.
Out of curiosity, can you explain what math you use to not care about other human’s lives?
It’s probably my real world experience here, but as someone who has taken care of kids who have died because of a drunk driver and lost the drunk driver too, you will feel sad when both die if you experience in actual real life… even if you’re pissed at the drunk driver.
Mistakes and bad decisions aren’t, and shouldn’t be, death sentences. People can be redeemed. That’s a core fundamental tenet for so many other people’s positions on criminal justice reform. It’s very much true in other situations as well.
5 Likes