https://www.nhtsa.gov/risky-driving/drunk-driving
261 per day from excessive alcohol use
https://www.cdc.gov/alcohol/features/excessive-alcohol-death...
Alcohol consumption directly affects people who do not consume it in a multitude of ways from the monetary cost of increased demand on the health care system, police, prisons and damage to public property to the emotional and psychological burden of interacting with the inebriated or dependent to the physical impact of abuse and accidents caused by intoxication.
A scarier argument that I saw yesterday was something called a welfare check or something in which a police officer and a jail doctor can just declare you something like insane and you no longer have any medical autonomy.
You don't have to reach for hypotheticals about how we will ban people from eating a second cookie or a full size candy bar. This is the law we have today. People with mental health issues apparently have effectively no rights. Imagine making the wrong people angry and you end up drugged up in a strait jacket... Or if you want to go conspiracy theorist, a specific set of photos appears in your iCloud account and you face prison time where you are very likely to face abuse from the guards and other prisoners alike. This is also the reality we already have, no need to reach for hypotheticals.
That’s a fantastic idea: Start holding the unvaccinated criminally responsible, if they’re the likely point of infection for someone else.
Thanks for the idea.
Do you also want prison time for unvaccinated people who repeatedly go out in public? I support you if you do.
I don't think we should make distinction if person spreading virus was vaccinated or not if we start to punish for that. That should not affect the punishment or how guilty person is. I see absolutely no reason why being vaccinated should protect you from criminal charges in case we start to charge for spreading covid. The person is as guilty without or with vaccine. They should have gone be tested or taken actions to not spread it.
They did the breathalyzer several times on me, zero each time. I didn't have a drop to drink. I didn't cause an accident. I was not driving recklessly. In fact, I was stopped on the shoulder.
If I have to pay almost five hundred dollars in fines and court fees even though I didn't do anything other than drive a friend's car home, I don't see why people who refuse to take the vaccine for no reason shouldn't have to pay even if we don't have any proven incidence they spread the disease.
Point is, our legal system is very inconsistent and you can't scare me with the slippery slope like today covid vaccine and tomorrow I am in legal trouble for a second serving of fries.
It’s the likelihood, and willful the personal choice that leads to a higher of incident which society decides whether or not to tolerate.
Otherwise it’s civil penalties at most
The false premise that we should care about other people's health is annoying at this point. The vaccinated can still spread the virus, so we should make the decision to get vaccinated for ourselves, and those who don't make the orthodox decision should not be vilified.
People are quite tired of the unvaccinated who choose to opt-out without medical or traditional religious reasons; it’s worn thin because the decision affects people who want to get vaccinated but can’t.
You don’t have worry about government mandates, though that’s inevitable.
The unvaccinated won’t be able to find a job; or even conduct business the way things are going.
And soon, you won’t get ICU beds either. These choices have consequences.
A lot of the consequences of those choices are artificial. They are authoritarian measures designed to elicit compliance, not natural consequences.
Also, the very fact that there are people who can't get vaccinated means that the vaccines are dangerous. You have decided that the folks who decide to skip the vaccines are doing so because they don't get it, when in reality, a lot of them probably understand the dangers. While the people who can't get vaccinated would be merely inconvenienced by changing their lives to avoid the virus, those who take the shot could have life-changing consequences.
Also, you claim that people like me will not be able to get a job. I laugh at this. There is already a hospital that won't deliver babies because they can't get enough staff after so many quit over a vaccine mandate. If you and the authoritarians push us out of the economy, be prepared for the consequences. The natural consequences.
We'll see how long the mandates last.
Kids 11 and under can’t get vaccinated. Not because its dangerous but because our agency is being extremely thorough.
These same kids cannot do anything to mitigate, when they are also in class throughout the day.
Oh and masking? That largely prevents spread. by the infected; not so great at preventing someone masked from getting infected. Also, even this level of temporary mandate is being fought.
Meanwhile and this point hundreds of millions (billions) of shots; and the risk factors are well-known. Yet this information doesn’t seem matter.
> Also, you claim that people like me will not be able to get a job. I laugh at this. There is already a hospital that won't deliver babies because they can't get enough staff after so many quit over a vaccine mandate.
Good luck working when insurance companies forces high premiums.
> If you and the authoritarians push us out of the economy, be prepared for the consequences. The natural consequences.
This is a veiled threat. I’m not an authoritarian at all, but in any society it’s give and take.
Some want all of the benefits of society without doing their part, and that will have natural consequences as well.
That isn’t a threat. That’s just the market correcting itself because it can’t support the level of welfare you’re advocating.
Kids 11 and under are in basically zero danger from COVID.
> Oh and masking? That largely prevents spread. by the infected; not so great at preventing someone masked from getting infected. Also, even this level of temporary mandate is being fought.
When masks are worn properly and changed often. That does not happen in the real world. And cloth masks are largely ineffective against viruses like COVID.
> Meanwhile and this point hundreds of millions (billions) of shots; and the risk factors are well-known. Yet this information doesn’t seem matter.
There is a difference between "heavy testing" (what COVID vaccines have gotten) and proper testing. Proper testing includes heavy samples over a long period. We haven't had a long enough period.
> Good luck working when insurance companies forces high premiums.
Insurance companies will not raise premiums any more than they have to because insurance is heavily competitive. If people start cancelling insurance plans because they raise the premiums on the unvaccinated, you can bet they'll acquiesce.
> This is a veiled threat. I’m not an authoritarian at all, but in any society it’s give and take.
Not a veiled threat. I'm talking about the consequences of locking 10% or more of the able people out of the workforce. The economy will suffer. A natural consequence.
> Some want all of the benefits of society without doing their part, and that will have natural consequences as well.
> That isn’t a threat. That’s just the market correcting itself because it can’t support the level of welfare you’re advocating.
I know it's not a threat, but again, the market will correct itself the other way: if people won't work, the mandates will magically disappear. If insurance is not bought, the surcharges will magically disappear.
Someone who infects another after getting vaccinated falls into the same bucket.
They did their due diligence by being responsible. The infector in that case isn’t at fault.
In your analogy, the vaccine is the taxi driver.
The virus is an invisible agent spreading exponentially throughout society, putting the health system under a massive stress. That’s of course not what smoking, drinking, or over-eating is about…