If the health system becomes incapacitated, and we have to push people out of ICUs to make way for the "freedom fighter" who won't vaccinate (which is already happening in some areas), then everyone suffers -- not just "mid 30s adults".
>If the health system becomes incapacitated
If the health care system isn't working, then we need to look at expanding healthcare; perhaps by eliminating a lot of the regulations that drag it down. You don't have the right to force someone to make sure there are beds at a hospital. I don't think the answer is compelling non-consensual activity in private business such as masks.
------------------
>It's not that they "seek healthcare". But that they expect to have critical resources like ICU beds available to them (and therefore, denied to others) so they can enjoy their "freedom" (to ignore common sense) -- that folks take issue with.
You're seriously complaining that when someone seeks healthcare they are using a bed? You know how many people using beds are there for non-essential activities (motorcycling, roofing a non-essential shed, snake bite because they went hiking, whatever). Should we outlaw any non-essential activity that could send you to the ED?
It's 'common sense' to me that my (almost) 2 year old's speech development will be harmed if she can't see me speak (and at least one initial study suggests that is correct), so I don't wear a mask anywhere when she's with me nor do I enter establishments that require me to. Maybe that makes me a 'freedom fighter' for my kid's development.
Not happening in the short term.
complaining that people seek healthcare when they are ill.
It's not that they "seek healthcare". But that they expect to have critical resources like ICU beds available to them (and therefore, denied to others) so they can enjoy their "freedom" (to ignore common sense) -- that folks take issue with.
Why not? It's an emergency. It's completely possible to fix this short term in a way that lets us move on without all these socially toxic and corrosive restrictions. Probably would cost an order of magnitude less, even.
That's not what people in healthcare say. But hey, you can say whatever you want.
If hospital capacity was an issue caused by covid surges, we'd have fixed it already.
This is supposed to be an emergency, right? Give me a break. Covid specific healthcare capacity can easily be scaled up with the amount of resources we are pouring in this dumpster fire. Figure it out.
So I find that a very, very weird implication for you to make.
I interpreted you were holding them accountable to answer the question of expanding/fixing health care in the short term. Clearly their answers are going to be in the context of their limited power to change the whole system without the cooperation of others. They need the cooperation of both the capital holders / owners of the health care industry as well as regulators and legislators. I think when you answering this question, they are answering it within the context of working within their current constraints, which can be quite tight.
To say they are the one to answer the question, in my opinion, is to shift the onus on them to answer it. In fact we need the feedback of these workers, and they're critical in us solving current problems. They need our cooperation. But I think framing the question as something they're supposed to answer, as you have done, narrows the focus on people not to be blamed for the constraints that hold them back and thus force an otherwise unreasonable answer.
Along with the second most critical resource that we expect them to have for us: empathy. Especially for those who won't vax.
If somebody says it isn’t possible, fire them and find somebody who can figure it out. It’s a fucking emergency, remember? It’s completely possible. Saying otherwise is an excuse. Figure it the fuck out.
Zero excuses.
(Or the more simple answer is there actually isn’t a problem with hospital capacity because otherwise we’d have fixed it. You know… because it is something that could be fixed… with money alone)
No, not when they "seek healthcare". But when they go out and inevitably get themselves covid because they think they're making bold, individualist statement (as many of these people apparently do think) by not masking and not getting vaccinated.
Would you agree with this analogy:
"Going out into crowded public spaces unmasked and unvaccinated ... is not unlike riding a motorcycle without a helmet. And with a busted taillight and bad brakes too, because you're also putting other people at risk."
Being vaccinated is a strong tail light (having already had COVID before may be a strong tail light too). Being unvaccinated but never caught COVID is a legal but moderate tail light. Being deathly ill but sneezing on the produce is no tail light.
Also, the discussion in that podcast is a bit strange (for a bunch of reasons). For one thing, it seems to reduce the "mask question" to one of individual (or close family) risk -- "If I'm comfortable with the risk level (as affects me and my family), I should be able to decide whether to wear a mask or not (paraphrasing)" -- and completely sidesteps the community risk issue (especially in crowded public settings). Which is very different, and is of course what mask mandates (whether you agree with them or not) are designed to address.
For another, it dwells a lot on the "shame" and (what they think of) as quasi-religious aspects of mask wearing - this idea that people expect others to wear masks because those who do not are "unclean". Which may be what some people think, but to suggest that this is what most people think or that this should be part of the policy debate is just ... werid.