Finding the balance between the common good, personal rights and the ability to freely express an opinion that is devoid of hate and malice.

[Ken Gargett]

24 minutes ago, Fuzz said:

Shhh! That was a covert meeting to discuss high level government plans to supply Thailand with Australian macadamia nuts. The advisor was showing the Thai agent the nuts he clandestinely smuggled in his pants.

actually fuzz, it was a dodgy mate from Uni who later became a very dodgy advisor and may have spent some stints on the front page. 

[LordAnubis]

I look at vaccination like i look at smoking. Tax is brought in to "balance the health costs"... we all know how much merit that is. If they abolished the  tobacco tax and said all health treatments for smokers was charged out of pocket, i'd be for that. similarly i'd be for a proposed no vax you pay scenario. 

The balance though is in people, and nothing else. People now days have more ability to make stupid decisions, no matter what the situation, not jsut tlaking vaccinations here. So much simply untrue material makes it to the internet, and the deniers jsut take it and run with it. A classic case, a few weeks ago there was uproar within some antivaxxer people i know about how "administration of a posion" was used to term giving covid vaccines, yet they dont understand that the term posion refers to all things, including paracetamol.

I think personal rights and expression of opnion is easy. You should have the right to make medical decisions for yourself. Your choice is not devoid of acceptance of the consequences however. And your opinoins and choices are no business of anyone else.

The whole public good thing is much trickier. A person not taking a vaccine has large implications to the handling of that spicific illness. I see no harm that a person who doesnt take a vaccine should have limited rights and freedoms. You make the choice and acept the cosequences of your choice.

I find it funny how now all of a sudden mandatory vaccinations are a big issue. When vaccines were manadatory for afirca in the last few decades, no one cared. When cartoons were printed about prophets for whom it is expressly forbidden to draw images of for billions of followers aroudn the world, it was all fair play and chaos about how there was no freedom of speech. Now when it impacts the white man suddenly its uproar.

This particualr cartoon, is pretty politicised and i personally dont feel it is offensive or anything, but as they say in the media, dont let the truth get in the way of a good story. 

Ultimately i think there are now more avenue for people to get upset,  they have a larger platform to voice their butthurt, and humans being humans don't like it when people have differing opinions regardless of facts and reasoning. We live in a world of "look at me" people make videos and posts for likes, not for any other reason. They get paid to make tik tok videos and youtube videos doing moronic things and so, people being people, will create content no matter how real or fake, simply to get atention. Thats what i think it all comes down to, grabbing attention.

[Ken Gargett]

7 minutes ago, BrightonCorgi said:

Denying of forcing someone to pay for medical bills that would not normally be an issue due to vaccination status is pure evil.  Are you going to weight everyone and decide if their diabetes or heart disease could've been prevented?  How about if their genetic make up is more susceptible to certain afflictions?  Why should we have to pay for either?

health systems around the world are different and obviously there would need to be adjusting to make it work in many cases, but in general, as to a suggestion that this would be evil, i could not disagree more.

surely genetic make-up was addressed by our friend above in the case of covid. i don't need to repeat that. 

and there are a million other examples like your weight one - lung issues and looking at tobacco, coal stations and cars. and a million more. 

in this case, they have chosen not to be vaxxed. i find it infinitely more evil that someone who has done the right thing then cannot get the care they need - whether it be covid related or otherwise - because the non-vaxxers are clogging the system. it is not a simple issue but i know which way i'd come down. 

[LordAnubis]

44 minutes ago, BrightonCorgi said:

Denying of forcing someone to pay for medical bills that would not normally be an issue due to vaccination status is pure evil.  Are you going to weight everyone and decide if their diabetes or heart disease could've been prevented?  How about if their genetic make up is more susceptible to certain afflictions?  Why should we have to pay for either?

Like Ken, i disagree to an extent.

Genetic issue are not your fault and hence not subject to your costs.

Where there is a perfectly preventable outcome, where you have made a choice to go down a path, why should other people pay for your choices? 

The difference here is the choice. yes smoking, eating unhealthy, not exercise is all a choice... and i think these things should be exempt from public health costs... hard to police sure, but i see it as fair. I don't see it as evil in any way.

[El Presidente]

As a cigar lover, I am  naturally sceptical about majority rule. 

Larry Flint said it well. 

 

Now Obese people are not going to make me physically ill or cause illness to my immunocompromised family/friends. I have a few.  Mind you I am not sure obese/overweight are in the minority and hence government would be wary. 

Smokers can knowingly make choices as to where and how they indulge in their habit and take others into account. 

Both the above are unlikely to flood the emergency rooms of hospitals. They can be managed as they always have been although it is still a challenge. 

 

 

 

[NSXCIGAR]

What's disturbing to me is the portrayal of people who object to mandates as being "anti-vax". Honestly, the number of people who are truly "anti-vax" is pretty insignificant. I don't know of any. I guess it's probably about the same number as all the white supremacists we're told are everywhere. 

This is a common propaganda technique throughout history pointed out most notably by Frederic Bastiat in The Law. They do the same thing to people who question public schools claiming they are anti-education or people who question the welfare system as those who want people to starve in the streets. 

[Ken Gargett]

1 minute ago, NSXCIGAR said:

What's disturbing to me is the portrayal of people who object to mandates as being "anti-vax". Honestly, the number of people who are truly "anti-vax" is pretty insignificant. I don't know of any. I guess it's probably about the same number as all the white supremacists we're told are everywhere. 

This is a common propaganda technique throughout history pointed out most notably by Frederic Bastiat in The Law. They do the same thing to people who question public schools claiming they are anti-education or people who question the welfare system as those who want people to starve in the streets. 

that is a really interesting perspective and probably not one that those who oppose what they see as the anti-vaxxers don't really consider that much. but in that case, are you saying that the vast majority of these people are refusing to get vaxxed because they simply do not like being told that they should? otherwise, what reason? if that is the case, then i'd argue that most of them are even dumber than we imagined. it goes back to the seatbelt argument as an example. people objected because they did not want to be told that they had to wear one. even though it was very clear that this saved lives. plenty of examples throughout history, including earlier vaccines. 

seinfeld nailed this when he pointed out the existence of helmets was evidence we were not smart. we had to invent the helmet because we were involved in lots of activities which caused damage to our heads. so instead of avoiding these activities, we needed to invent a helmet. but of course then so many people refused to wear the helmet that we needed the helmet law. we had to pass a law to preserve a brain whose judgement is so poor it does not even try and protect itself from cracking open the skull within which it is. 

far more seriously, not sure exactly where the comparison of anti-vaxxers (or whatever they are) and white supremacists comes from? but i would argue that there are, sadly, a great many more white supremacists around, of varying degrees and including many in governments and administrations around the world than we might believe. 

[El Presidente]

26 minutes ago, NSXCIGAR said:

What's disturbing to me is the portrayal of people who object to mandates as being "anti-vax". Honestly, the number of people who are truly "anti-vax" is pretty insignificant. I don't know of any. I guess it's probably about the same number as all the white supremacists we're told are everywhere. 

This is a common propaganda technique throughout history pointed out most notably by Frederic Bastiat in The Law. They do the same thing to people who question public schools claiming they are anti-education or people who question the welfare system as those who want people to starve in the streets. 

 

Divide and conquer. Red herring. Dog Whistle.  All tried and proven techniques that have been honed to a fine point in the social media age. 

[El Presidente]

14 minutes ago, Ken Gargett said:

that is a really interesting perspective and probably not one that those who oppose what they see as the anti-vaxxers don't really consider that much. but in that case, are you saying that the vast majority of these people are refusing to get vaxxed because they simply do not like being told that they should? 

Absolutely 

 

15 minutes ago, Ken Gargett said:

t i would argue that there are, sadly, a great many more white supremacists around, of varying degrees and including many in governments and administrations around the world than we might believe. 

Supposition 

[Ken Gargett]

2 minutes ago, El Presidente said:

 

Supposition 

supposition, perhaps, but we won't go further - in other words, i can't offer arguments which might offer more than supposition - without transgressing forum rules. and as you know, i would never want to do that. 

[El Presidente]

Just now, Ken Gargett said:

supposition, perhaps, but we won't go further - in other words, i can't offer arguments which might offer more than supposition - without transgressing forum rules. and as you know, i would never want to do that. 

...I rest my case your Honour 

[NSXCIGAR]

1 hour ago, Ken Gargett said:

but in that case, are you saying that the vast majority of these people are refusing to get vaxxed because they simply do not like being told that they should? otherwise, what reason?

Most of the people I've seen or heard who are the most outspoken against mandates are actually vaccinated themselves. 

Obviously, if one is choosing not to get vaccinated they're ostensibly against mandates. And it's certainly understandable that someone who has already had COVID or was relatively young and healthy would choose not to get a vaccine, but would not object to a diabetic overweight 75 year old getting vaccinated. 

My point is that there may be several logical reasons for an individual to choose not to get a vaccine and not be against vaccines for others as a general rule. 

I can tell you that if I had a healthy child under 10 years old I see absolutely no reason for them to get this vaccine.

Personally, I made my choice to get vaccinated based on two factors: I want to travel and I do not want to lose my sense of smell and taste. Dying or even being hospitalized didn't factor into my decision at all. 

[Edicion]

I'm neither a physician nor expert so this is just my own thoughts. To me it's not a matter of personal principles or convictions, it's a decision based on a limited set of proactive steps that we can take at the moment to combat covid 19:

A - socially distance ourselves in some form (travel / individual / area / city / country) to avoid getting infected and not infect others if we are sick

B - take preventive drugs or drugs that reduces the effects of the disease (vaccine is the only option at the moment) 

C - get infected (throw a covid party) to build a resistance and pray that the disease does not put you in the ICU or damages your body permanently or kills you

D - pray that Covid will not be a recurring disease like malaria or gets worse every time you get it like dengue fever ie if reinfection occurs, it's milder and does not cause stronger effects

In the near future we might have other options to consider like a pill but for now this is what is available and I took a proactive approach of A+B. 

Everyone is welcome to make their choices and weigh the pros and cons, add or remove as you wish, but waiting to see what will happen does not get rid of Covid, and the way things are going in some places it's a matter of time for some people to either get covid via a shot in the arm or from another person. Apparently all lions at the Singapore zoo now have covid so animals can be another risk going forward. 

I wish cigars could help against the disease, we would all be pretty much immune by now. 

[Ginseng]

Would someone be so kind as to provide a link to the cartoon in question? All I see is an empty placeholder box.

<<Doh, of  course the link was right there. Forgive me as I had only  had half my coffee at that point>>

Edited November 10, 2021 by Ginseng
Stupidity. Of course the link was right there. :p

[BrightonCorgi]

8 hours ago, LordAnubis said:

Where there is a perfectly preventable outcome, where you have made a choice to go down a path, why should other people pay for your choices?

Because we are all children of Abraham, humans, and should be given the same care & privilege regardless of our choices, lifestyle, or socioeconomic background. 

Should we not treat an accident victim if we found out they were speeding or fell asleep at the wheel?  How about exclude any paying for any treatment of a sports related injury?  It was their choice to play sports.  Why should the rest of society pay for this?

Picking and choosing who gets care or under what pretense is plain wrong, shameful, and totally selfish behavior.

 

[anacostiakat]

Fine discussion.  Just got our booster shots a couple weeks ago.  So fully vaxxed here.  I'll protect myself you do what is right for you within the law.  

[dominattorney]

2 hours ago, NSXCIGAR said:

Most of the people I've seen or heard who are the most outspoken against mandates are actually vaccinated themselves. 

Obviously, if one is choosing not to get vaccinated they're ostensibly against mandates. And it's certainly understandable that someone who has already had COVID or was relatively young and healthy would choose not to get a vaccine, but would not object to a diabetic overweight 75 year old getting vaccinated. 

My point is that there may be several logical reasons for an individual to choose not to get a vaccine and not be against vaccines for others as a general rule. 

I can tell you that if I had a healthy child under 10 years old I see absolutely no reason for them to get this vaccine.

Personally, I made my choice to get vaccinated based on two factors: I want to travel and I do not want to lose my sense of smell and taste. Dying or even being hospitalized didn't factor into my decision at all. 

I agree with this wholeheartedly. I am anti mandate, yet vaccinated. I had covid early in in 2020 and it didn't do too much to me luckily.  Kind of a pretty bad flu. I got it a second time just before the moderna Vax was released. Second time it was just the sniffles with loss of taste and smell that persisted 5 days. I recognize this makes me lucky, as not everyone got off so easy.

When the Vax came out I was not about to be the first one to try it, for a number of personal reasons. Not least of which is that I am a student of history and recall that Thalidomide was hailed as a cure all wonder drug upon first release. After observing a lack of significant side effects in those that chose to take the vaccine, I made the decision to get the Pfizer Vax, finishing up my second shot last week. Not that i have to justify my decision, but I am 35, with a roughly 570kg big three total, and a 18 minute mile swim time (that's not that strong or fast really, I know. Sue me), and feel as If a third run at the virus would leave me no worse for the wear.  This doesn't make me, or folks of like kind, insane. Have you seen pictures of thalidomide babies? Why do we all of a sudden trust the government and large multinational companies now, when 24 months ago the nanny state and corporate jagoffs were the butts of countless jokes? At that time in my life, the risk of the unknown side effects of an untested vaccine outweighed my fear of getting covid a third time. For whatever reason covid didn't effect me that badly, so I decided to wait it out. My parents jumped on the Vax immediately and it has given them a sense of security. To each his own. 

I am friends with folks that have strong religious objections to the vaccines. Evidently they are developed by using stem cells. I haven't researched this because it is just the tip of the iceberg regarding my disagreements with these fine people, but I respect their decisions and anyone with a deeply held belief. I ultimately disagree with anyone who would refuse vaccination under any circumstances, but I am not aware of of many folks like that.  I see no way that forcing vaccinations is ultimately in the public good. Next thing you know they're coming for your cigars. And other collections that are not allowed to be discussed on this forum per the rules. 

@Ken Gargettmentioned the Seinfeld quote about the helmet laws. I have noticed that human stupidity knows few limits. Folks who hid in their homes for about a year got the vaccine and now you see them cavorting about without masks and going to concerts. If you're scared of the virus, you should protect yourself by wearing a mask and avoiding public gatherings, in my opinion. The vaccination is not going to keep you from getting the virus, and the jury is out how effective it is at preventing you from getting sick from it. The vaccine has offered many the illusion of safety, and an excuse to carry on as normal pretending a legitimate risk is nothing but a persistent annoyance. That is the crux of the helmet joke. We have helmets so we skydive with impunity. I wear a seat belt so why not take that blind curve at 85?

[rcarlson]

11 hours ago, Ken Gargett said:

i would have thought the previous posts showed the exact opposite?? leave aside whether or not getting vaxxed limits the disease, protects others etc, because i think that is now a dead horse here and elsewhere, other than to say i suspect you are aware that many do not agree with you.

given the stress on health systems around the world, with many places stopping certain procedures and simply not having the fit and healthy staff to deal with others, if joe bloggs gets vaxxed and therefore does not get covid and so does not have to go to hospital and take up a bed and resources and staff time and the doctors can allocate their time to others, whether covid related or not, how on earth is that not benefiting someone else's well-being? i would have thought it the very definition of benefiting other members of the community? what am i missing? 

 

I didn't realize that "many" disagree that the vaccines are not as effective as advertised.  But I guess I shouldn't be surprised at that.

I also believe that the hospitals are flooded with vaxed and unvaxed.  According to the CDC, the US vax rate is approximately 79% and it is quite apparent to anyone paying attention that transmission rates are not confined to unvaxed by any measure.  As I expected, but perhaps many others did not, there are spikes and declines in hospitalizations and deaths that do not correlate with vaccination rates.  Even if one accepts that the numbers are not exaggerated (e.g. hospitalized/dying "from covid" versus "with covid"), the majority of hospitalizations and deaths belong to the vaccinated, though I suppose you may choose to disagree with that too.  Not sure why, but I don't think it matters.  You couldn't get unanimity on whether chocolate milk comes from chocolate cows.      

There are a multitude of reasons why people choose not to be vaxed, such as known medical risks, religious, previous infection, distrust etc.  You may sweep those aside, but I do not.  So, if you're comfortable with the efficacy and universal administering of the vax regardless of other considerations, it's unlikely that the title of this post will reflect its content.  The paradox is that greater confidence in the efficacy of the vaccines strengthens my point, if my comment is read fairly.          

[Edicion]

6 minutes ago, clint said:

Some other options:

A - Spend time with family and friends,  live and laugh.

B- Eat a healthy diet, drink lots of water,  and get plenty of sleep.

C- Get outside in the fresh air and sunshine.  Take of the mask.

D- Exercise,  and take vitamans/supplements that you may be lacking.

E- Stop living in fear.   Turn off the t.v.

F- Pray to God and be thankful for all our blessings.

Agree that this is very good advice for a healthy lifestyle and also mental well-being but I disagree that it's an option to a proactive approach to fight covid. 

[Grateful13]

The bottom line is the vaccine is not anywhere close to as effective or as safe as promised. Yet another lie in a long list of lies told by the authorities on covid. At this point, only blind fools still believe what they are told about it from governments and the pharmaceutical companies who make billions while shielded from all liability. 
 

And now these same ghouls are trying to push their poison onto children, who are effectively at zero risk from covid. Truly evil people. 

[cigaraholic]

If your not smart enough to save your own life that’s OK with me, unless your stupidity can take someone else’s. 

[SCgarman]

13 hours ago, LordAnubis said:

Like Ken, i disagree to an extent.

Genetic issue are not your fault and hence not subject to your costs.

Where there is a perfectly preventable outcome, where you have made a choice to go down a path, why should other people pay for your choices? 

The difference here is the choice. yes smoking, eating unhealthy, not exercise is all a choice... and i think these things should be exempt from public health costs... hard to police sure, but i see it as fair. I don't see it as evil in any way.

Perfectly preventable outcome? That is your subjective opinion. Can you emphatically state nobody has not died from taking a covid vaccine? Can you state nobody can become infected or spread the virus after being vaxxed? You know, we are not all made the same. Some people for one reason or another cannot tolerate vaccines. They may be allergic and may die. This vaccine is not a one size fits all for everyone. 

[HDGSN]

2 hours ago, Grateful13 said:

The bottom line is the vaccine is not anywhere close to as effective or as safe as promised. Yet another lie in a long list of lies told by the authorities on covid. At this point, only blind fools still believe what they are told about it from governments and the pharmaceutical companies who make billions while shielded from all liability. 
 

And now these same ghouls are trying to push their poison onto children, who are effectively at zero risk from covid. Truly evil people. 

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/idaho-reports-1st-child-death-covid-infant-rcna5065

[NSXCIGAR]

2 hours ago, Grateful13 said:

The bottom line is the vaccine is not anywhere close to as effective or as safe as promised.

I don't know what exactly was promised. To my mind, it's simply a cost-benefit calculation. Trust doesn't factor into it for me. I will say the lack of resistance or questioning of giving this to children is extremely disturbing. 

 

[El Presidente]

7 hours ago, dominattorney said:

and the jury is out how effective it is at preventing you from getting sick from it. 

No it's not. 

From Ireland/UK/Oz/Canada/Germany/France

Over 90% of people in ICU today from Covid symptoms are unvaccinated. 

Game over on that argument.