Coronavirus

Old Jan 12th 2022, 2:12 am
  #5851  
BE Enthusiast
 
Joined: Dec 2020
Location: Ontario
Posts: 761
Mordko has a reputation beyond reputeMordko has a reputation beyond reputeMordko has a reputation beyond reputeMordko has a reputation beyond reputeMordko has a reputation beyond reputeMordko has a reputation beyond reputeMordko has a reputation beyond reputeMordko has a reputation beyond reputeMordko has a reputation beyond reputeMordko has a reputation beyond reputeMordko has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Coronavirus

Alberta, from the above link:
  • 66.2% of cases (207,953/314,272) since Jan 1, 2021 were unvaccinated or diagnosed within two weeks from the first dose immunization date
  • 79% of hospitalized cases (10,219/12,929) since Jan 1, 2021 were unvaccinated or diagnosed within two weeks from the first dose immunization date

85% of over 12s are fully vaccinated.

Staggering.

Another option would be to introduce private healthcare. In the US many companies are charging unvaccinated workers more for their healthcare benefits.
Mordko is offline  
Old Jan 12th 2022, 4:26 am
  #5852  
Lost in BE Cyberspace
 
Almost Canadian's Avatar
 
Joined: Aug 2005
Location: South of Calgary
Posts: 13,380
Almost Canadian has a reputation beyond reputeAlmost Canadian has a reputation beyond reputeAlmost Canadian has a reputation beyond reputeAlmost Canadian has a reputation beyond reputeAlmost Canadian has a reputation beyond reputeAlmost Canadian has a reputation beyond reputeAlmost Canadian has a reputation beyond reputeAlmost Canadian has a reputation beyond reputeAlmost Canadian has a reputation beyond reputeAlmost Canadian has a reputation beyond reputeAlmost Canadian has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Coronavirus

Originally Posted by Mordko
Alberta, from the above link:
  • 66.2% of cases (207,953/314,272) since Jan 1, 2021 were unvaccinated or diagnosed within two weeks from the first dose immunization date
  • 79% of hospitalized cases (10,219/12,929) since Jan 1, 2021 were unvaccinated or diagnosed within two weeks from the first dose immunization date

85% of over 12s are fully vaccinated.

Staggering.

Another option would be to introduce private healthcare. In the US many companies are charging unvaccinated workers more for their healthcare benefits.
That time period doesn't assist with the current situation as vaccines were not available to most in Alberta until well after June of 2021. Due to my condition, I was able to obtain mine far earlier than most. I obtained both of mine as early as I could (far sooner than most) and I did not receive my second shot until June 15, 2021.
Almost Canadian is offline  
Old Jan 12th 2022, 5:02 am
  #5853  
BE Enthusiast
 
Joined: Dec 2020
Location: Ontario
Posts: 761
Mordko has a reputation beyond reputeMordko has a reputation beyond reputeMordko has a reputation beyond reputeMordko has a reputation beyond reputeMordko has a reputation beyond reputeMordko has a reputation beyond reputeMordko has a reputation beyond reputeMordko has a reputation beyond reputeMordko has a reputation beyond reputeMordko has a reputation beyond reputeMordko has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Coronavirus

Originally Posted by Almost Canadian
That time period doesn't assist with the current situation as vaccines were not available to most in Alberta until well after June of 2021. Due to my condition, I was able to obtain mine far earlier than most. I obtained both of mine as early as I could (far sooner than most) and I did not receive my second shot until June 15, 2021.
Fair enough. Let’s look at Tables 6 and 8 which give data over the last 120 days per 100K people. The difference in risk is 1 to 2 orders of mag, particularly for ICU usage. Still staggering.

Insurance premiums are typically based on risk rather than actual costs. Someone who is higher risk pays more even if he hasn’t totalled the car yet. And premiums can be driven by factors which are not self-inflicted (eg gender, age).
Mordko is offline  
Old Jan 12th 2022, 6:01 am
  #5854  
Lost in BE Cyberspace
 
Gozit's Avatar
 
Joined: Sep 2013
Location: SW Ontario, Canada
Posts: 6,960
Gozit has a reputation beyond reputeGozit has a reputation beyond reputeGozit has a reputation beyond reputeGozit has a reputation beyond reputeGozit has a reputation beyond reputeGozit has a reputation beyond reputeGozit has a reputation beyond reputeGozit has a reputation beyond reputeGozit has a reputation beyond reputeGozit has a reputation beyond reputeGozit has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Coronavirus

Originally Posted by Mordko
Fair enough. Let’s look at Tables 6 and 8 which give data over the last 120 days per 100K people. The difference in risk is 1 to 2 orders of mag, particularly for ICU usage. Still staggering.

Insurance premiums are typically based on risk rather than actual costs. Someone who is higher risk pays more even if he hasn’t totalled the car yet. And premiums can be driven by factors which are not self-inflicted (eg gender, age).
Ok, but if one is a high risk driver and doesn't want to pay the associated insurance cost, one can simply not drive, and they are not penalised for taking public transport instead.

One can't simply choose to opt out of paying taxes and paying into the health system, so this mandatory tax on the unvaccinated doesn't really offer a comparison to automobile insurance. Mandatory is the key word here - auto insurance is not mandatory to be a part of society, it is mandatory to drive a car.

The appropriate analogy would be requiring vaccination to participate in certain activities (restaurants, gyms, etc) since you can choose to opt out of those activities. But making it mandatory against penalty is not on.
Gozit is offline  
Old Jan 12th 2022, 6:27 am
  #5855  
Oscar nominated
 
BristolUK's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2008
Location: Moncton, NB, CANADA
Posts: 51,717
BristolUK has a reputation beyond reputeBristolUK has a reputation beyond reputeBristolUK has a reputation beyond reputeBristolUK has a reputation beyond reputeBristolUK has a reputation beyond reputeBristolUK has a reputation beyond reputeBristolUK has a reputation beyond reputeBristolUK has a reputation beyond reputeBristolUK has a reputation beyond reputeBristolUK has a reputation beyond reputeBristolUK has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Coronavirus

I have mixed feelings on this and I note that what Quebec is talking about - at least what I heard on CBC radio - is not being charged for treatment but some contribution towards it. Perhaps enough to persuade someone to get vaccinated but not enough to ruin them.

I'm also aware of Siouxie's issue with her health - anyone up on what caused her strange banning, by the way? - and a member of my family has needle phobia so is not vaccinated. Enquiries regarding the nasal version draw a blank.

I feel there are two differences with the smoking/drinking/driving/skiing issue. For decades and more we've all been encouraged to smoke, drink, drive and ski etc. Millions of ££$$ and time and effort have been spent convincing us that these things are cool, sexy, attractive, exciting, essential, practical, safe, glamorous and so on.

It's been lessened regarding smoking, but it's still there.

Conversely we have never been encouraged to not get vaccinated or go out and try to get the virus in the same way, so it's easy to argue the vax issue is not like the other examples.

The second point here is one of a state of emergency. I know not every province/region/state/nation has necessarily declared it as such but these are not normal times and what we usually take for granted doesn't necessarily apply anymore.

It's not only times of war where some sacrifices have been made regarding what people are normally free to do.
BristolUK is offline  
Old Jan 12th 2022, 7:39 am
  #5856  
BE Enthusiast
 
Joined: Dec 2020
Location: Ontario
Posts: 761
Mordko has a reputation beyond reputeMordko has a reputation beyond reputeMordko has a reputation beyond reputeMordko has a reputation beyond reputeMordko has a reputation beyond reputeMordko has a reputation beyond reputeMordko has a reputation beyond reputeMordko has a reputation beyond reputeMordko has a reputation beyond reputeMordko has a reputation beyond reputeMordko has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Coronavirus

Originally Posted by Gozit
Ok, but if one is a high risk driver and doesn't want to pay the associated insurance cost, one can simply not drive, and they are not penalised for taking public transport instead.

One can't simply choose to opt out of paying taxes and paying into the health system, so this mandatory tax on the unvaccinated doesn't really offer a comparison to automobile insurance. Mandatory is the key word here - ……
As I understand the Quebec proposal, taxpayers who are high risk of covid can simply get vaccinated so they won’t be penalized for imposing unnecessary risk on the public healthcare system.

Avoidable taxes designed to alter risky behaviour are not particularly unusual. In this case its a very neat solution
Mordko is offline  
Old Jan 12th 2022, 7:51 am
  #5857  
Lost in BE Cyberspace
 
Gozit's Avatar
 
Joined: Sep 2013
Location: SW Ontario, Canada
Posts: 6,960
Gozit has a reputation beyond reputeGozit has a reputation beyond reputeGozit has a reputation beyond reputeGozit has a reputation beyond reputeGozit has a reputation beyond reputeGozit has a reputation beyond reputeGozit has a reputation beyond reputeGozit has a reputation beyond reputeGozit has a reputation beyond reputeGozit has a reputation beyond reputeGozit has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Coronavirus

Originally Posted by Mordko
As I understand the Quebec proposal, taxpayers who are high risk of covid can simply get vaccinated so they won’t be penalized for imposing unnecessary risk on the public healthcare system.

Avoidable taxes designed to alter risky behaviour are not particularly unusual. In this case its a very neat solution
I disagree. I do not think this will pass muster to a Charter challenge.

Who is liable if someone is forced to get vaccinated and then subsequently is one of the few people that have a critical reaction to the vaccine?
Gozit is offline  
Old Jan 12th 2022, 8:16 am
  #5858  
Lost in BE Cyberspace
 
Almost Canadian's Avatar
 
Joined: Aug 2005
Location: South of Calgary
Posts: 13,380
Almost Canadian has a reputation beyond reputeAlmost Canadian has a reputation beyond reputeAlmost Canadian has a reputation beyond reputeAlmost Canadian has a reputation beyond reputeAlmost Canadian has a reputation beyond reputeAlmost Canadian has a reputation beyond reputeAlmost Canadian has a reputation beyond reputeAlmost Canadian has a reputation beyond reputeAlmost Canadian has a reputation beyond reputeAlmost Canadian has a reputation beyond reputeAlmost Canadian has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Coronavirus

Originally Posted by Mordko
As I understand the Quebec proposal, taxpayers who are high risk of covid can simply get vaccinated so they won’t be penalized for imposing unnecessary risk on the public healthcare system.

Avoidable taxes designed to alter risky behaviour are not particularly unusual. In this case its a very neat solution
I am willing to bet that there are those that are vaccinated that then attend crowded events and disobey other health restrictions (having more people around for Christmas lunch that were permitted to), just as I am willing to bet that there are those that are unvaccinated (because the choose to, rather than because of medical reasons) that have worked from home throughout, purchase their groceries online with curbside delivery and adhere to all health restrictions. You'll have to explain to me how one's conduct is so bad, when compared to the other's, that they deserve financial punishment.

Any class action lawyer worth their salt will find such an unvaccinated plaintiff and will make whatever government wishes to impose such measures look very foolish in Court particularly when, as I have shown above, the numbers causing issues with the healthcare system are vaccinated. If only the unvaccinated were in hospital, they may have more of a chance but that isn't the case. Tarring everybody with same brush doesn't work in most Courts that I have experience of.
Almost Canadian is offline  
Old Jan 12th 2022, 8:57 am
  #5859  
limey party pooper
 
Joined: Jul 2012
Posts: 9,986
bats has a reputation beyond reputebats has a reputation beyond reputebats has a reputation beyond reputebats has a reputation beyond reputebats has a reputation beyond reputebats has a reputation beyond reputebats has a reputation beyond reputebats has a reputation beyond reputebats has a reputation beyond reputebats has a reputation beyond reputebats has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Coronavirus

Originally Posted by Paul_Shepherd
This is different though....I am going to offer another perspective. I don't necessarily think a tax is the right approach, but something needs to be done.

Smoking or drinking health related issues don't cause hospital capacity issues, it doesn't ruin people business's and take their jobs through having to lockdown.... we are all paying the price for people choosing not to be vaccinated. 50% of all hospitalisations with covid now are unvaccinated people,.... why should a cancer patient miss out on life saving surgery because someone made the choice not to be vaccinated. They call it pro choice... I have no problem with that....but if they get sick, then that was their choice, A cancer sufferer doesn't get to make that choice... (except maybe a heavy smoker but thats only a fraction of cases), life saving surgeries are being cancelled and people are dying, thats not fair is it? you see what I mean?

The vaccine obviously works... so let it do its job in keeping people out of hospitals
you make some valid points but I'm still opposed to the idea. And not can I think of an alternative.

[QUOTE=Mordko;13087637]Facts beg to differ. Higher taxes on cigarettes and alcohol are there because of negative impacts on health. So says the government. These taxes are jacked up using Health Canada recommendations.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/cig...pott-1.4410518

https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/new-...dget-1.5393362

I think the case of cigarette taxes helping public healthcare isn’t as strong though. In the case of Covid vaccination we have a public health emergency, the system isn’t coping, so the logic is more obvious and sound.[/QUOTE

Still uncomfortable with the idea. As AC says someone could be unvaccinated and exercising caution so shoukd they be penalised?
bats is offline  
Old Jan 12th 2022, 9:33 am
  #5860  
Tea Drinker
 
Danny B's Avatar
 
Joined: Nov 2006
Location: Kamloops, BC
Posts: 5,387
Danny B has a reputation beyond reputeDanny B has a reputation beyond reputeDanny B has a reputation beyond reputeDanny B has a reputation beyond reputeDanny B has a reputation beyond reputeDanny B has a reputation beyond reputeDanny B has a reputation beyond reputeDanny B has a reputation beyond reputeDanny B has a reputation beyond reputeDanny B has a reputation beyond reputeDanny B has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Coronavirus

May as well tax drug poisoning survivors while we are at it

Not sure what the rest of Canada is like, but here in BC, paramedics responded to a drug poisoning call every 15 minutes, 24x7x365 during 2021.

Cannot tax the dead, but overdoses are the leading cause of death in B.C. for people between 19 and 39 and the second-leading cause for people 40 to 59.
Danny B is offline  
Old Jan 12th 2022, 9:49 am
  #5861  
Oscar nominated
 
BristolUK's Avatar
 
Joined: Jan 2008
Location: Moncton, NB, CANADA
Posts: 51,717
BristolUK has a reputation beyond reputeBristolUK has a reputation beyond reputeBristolUK has a reputation beyond reputeBristolUK has a reputation beyond reputeBristolUK has a reputation beyond reputeBristolUK has a reputation beyond reputeBristolUK has a reputation beyond reputeBristolUK has a reputation beyond reputeBristolUK has a reputation beyond reputeBristolUK has a reputation beyond reputeBristolUK has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Coronavirus

Originally Posted by Almost Canadian
I am willing to bet that there are those that are vaccinated that then attend crowded events and disobey other health restrictions (having more people around for Christmas lunch that were permitted to), just as I am willing to bet that there are those that are unvaccinated (because the choose to, rather than because of medical reasons) that have worked from home throughout, purchase their groceries online with curbside delivery and adhere to all health restrictions. You'll have to explain to me how one's conduct is so bad, when compared to the other's, that they deserve financial punishment.
That's possibly true although the numbers of each are likely so small as to be of no relevance. In particular, anti-vaxers appear to be very vociferous in their stance and perhaps less likely to be goody-two-shoes while also out shouting about freedoms.

as I have shown above, the numbers causing issues with the healthcare system are vaccinated.
I'm sorry, what?
When you gave those figures you added "I fully understand the argument that the numbers are skewed by the percentages of the population that are vaccinated/unvaccinated" so how can you claim to show anything with skewed data?

From BBC "Only about 12.8% of Quebec residents are not vaccinated, but they make up nearly a third of all hospital cases."

Your argument that "the numbers causing issues with the healthcare system are vaccinated" reminds me of that old joke about one third of traffic accidents are caused by drunk drivers so since two thirds involved sober drivers it is safer that people drive while drunk.
BristolUK is offline  
Old Jan 12th 2022, 10:18 am
  #5862  
BE Enthusiast
 
Joined: Dec 2020
Location: Ontario
Posts: 761
Mordko has a reputation beyond reputeMordko has a reputation beyond reputeMordko has a reputation beyond reputeMordko has a reputation beyond reputeMordko has a reputation beyond reputeMordko has a reputation beyond reputeMordko has a reputation beyond reputeMordko has a reputation beyond reputeMordko has a reputation beyond reputeMordko has a reputation beyond reputeMordko has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Coronavirus

Originally Posted by Almost Canadian
I am willing to bet that there are those that are vaccinated that then attend crowded events and disobey other health restrictions (having more people around for Christmas lunch that were permitted to), just as I am willing to bet that there are those that are unvaccinated (because the choose to, rather than because of medical reasons) that have worked from home throughout, purchase their groceries online with curbside delivery and adhere to all health restrictions. You'll have to explain to me how one's conduct is so bad, when compared to the other's, that they deserve financial punishment.

Any class action lawyer worth their salt will find such an unvaccinated plaintiff and will make whatever government wishes to impose such measures look very foolish in Court particularly when, as I have shown above, the numbers causing issues with the healthcare system are vaccinated. If only the unvaccinated were in hospital, they may have more of a chance but that isn't the case. Tarring everybody with same brush doesn't work in most Courts that I have experience of.
I am willing to bet that some people who have discounts on their insurance policies engage in risky behaviours (speeding, unprotected sex with strangers, etc). And yet insurance companies still charge them less, e.g. for age, having winter tires or not having pre-existing conditions. Legally, as far as I can tell. These are just different factors contributing to the overall risk and some of them get the credit while others don't. And lots of people who generate very little garbage, not using schools or causing fires are still paying more tax based on having a more expensive house or a holiday home. Authorities seem to have quite a bit of discretion in this respect.

Certainly a private healthcare system would have imposed extra charges given the staggering level of additional risk (they do in countries which have such systems) so its not at all obvious why a rationed taxpayer funded system shouldn't.

Last edited by Mordko; Jan 12th 2022 at 10:21 am.
Mordko is offline  
Old Jan 12th 2022, 10:47 am
  #5863  
Lost in BE Cyberspace
 
Almost Canadian's Avatar
 
Joined: Aug 2005
Location: South of Calgary
Posts: 13,380
Almost Canadian has a reputation beyond reputeAlmost Canadian has a reputation beyond reputeAlmost Canadian has a reputation beyond reputeAlmost Canadian has a reputation beyond reputeAlmost Canadian has a reputation beyond reputeAlmost Canadian has a reputation beyond reputeAlmost Canadian has a reputation beyond reputeAlmost Canadian has a reputation beyond reputeAlmost Canadian has a reputation beyond reputeAlmost Canadian has a reputation beyond reputeAlmost Canadian has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Coronavirus

Originally Posted by BristolUK
That's possibly true although the numbers of each are likely so small as to be of no relevance. In particular, anti-vaxers appear to be very vociferous in their stance and perhaps less likely to be goody-two-shoes while also out shouting about freedoms.


I'm sorry, what?
When you gave those figures you added "I fully understand the argument that the numbers are skewed by the percentages of the population that are vaccinated/unvaccinated" so how can you claim to show anything with skewed data?

From BBC "Only about 12.8% of Quebec residents are not vaccinated, but they make up nearly a third of all hospital cases."

Your argument that "the numbers causing issues with the healthcare system are vaccinated" reminds me of that old joke about one third of traffic accidents are caused by drunk drivers so since two thirds involved sober drivers it is safer that people drive while drunk.
I wished to avoid the discussion that I anticipated would go along the lines of, "X are vaccinated, Y are unvaccinated so the proportion of those that are not causing issues with the healthcare is higher for those that are vaccinated than those unvaccinated."

Using actual numbers in hospital though, those that are vaccinated are taking up more beds than those without the vaccine, in Alberta. I keep a close watch on those figures. I have no idea what the proportion is in Quebec. Using your figures above, 2/3 of the hospital cases in Quebec are those that are vaccinated.

Last edited by Almost Canadian; Jan 12th 2022 at 11:06 am.
Almost Canadian is offline  
Old Jan 12th 2022, 11:04 am
  #5864  
Lost in BE Cyberspace
 
Almost Canadian's Avatar
 
Joined: Aug 2005
Location: South of Calgary
Posts: 13,380
Almost Canadian has a reputation beyond reputeAlmost Canadian has a reputation beyond reputeAlmost Canadian has a reputation beyond reputeAlmost Canadian has a reputation beyond reputeAlmost Canadian has a reputation beyond reputeAlmost Canadian has a reputation beyond reputeAlmost Canadian has a reputation beyond reputeAlmost Canadian has a reputation beyond reputeAlmost Canadian has a reputation beyond reputeAlmost Canadian has a reputation beyond reputeAlmost Canadian has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Coronavirus

Originally Posted by Mordko
I am willing to bet that some people who have discounts on their insurance policies engage in risky behaviours (speeding, unprotected sex with strangers, etc). And yet insurance companies still charge them less, e.g. for age, having winter tires or not having pre-existing conditions. Legally, as far as I can tell. These are just different factors contributing to the overall risk and some of them get the credit while others don't. And lots of people who generate very little garbage, not using schools or causing fires are still paying more tax based on having a more expensive house or a holiday home. Authorities seem to have quite a bit of discretion in this respect.

Certainly a private healthcare system would have imposed extra charges given the staggering level of additional risk (they do in countries which have such systems) so its not at all obvious why a rationed taxpayer funded system shouldn't.
If the Quebec government does this, let's hope their lawyers come up with better arguments than that when attempting to defend such a law.

I expect those lawyers arguing against the legislation will use the mountains of evidence that those unvaccinated, but that have survived C-19, have protection against C-19. I don't intend to debate that data but there is certainly enough there to show that comparing 2 people (vaccinated and unvaccinated) 9 months after receiving their second shot/recovering from C-19 would likely result in them both having similar protection, or the unvaccinated having better protection (I know that a vaccinated person that has had C-19 has better protection than them both).

That being the case, punishing the unvaccinated purely for being unvaccinated would likely fail. I would expect them to trot out example after example of such incidences.

Unfortunately for all, the vaccines have not resulted in being the magic bullet it was hoped they would be and I believe that politicians would be more useful if they worked to ensure that everyone on the planet that wished to was able to get double vaxxed so that, hopefully, the likelihood of further variants can be greatly reduced.

If they wish to mandate vaccination, they should do so.

If the examples other jurisdictions have experienced, are experienced here, I anticipate that, within the next 2-3 weeks, numbers will dramatically reduce, almost dramatically as they increased.

Last edited by Almost Canadian; Jan 12th 2022 at 11:08 am.
Almost Canadian is offline  
Old Jan 12th 2022, 11:28 am
  #5865  
BE Enthusiast
 
Joined: Dec 2020
Location: Ontario
Posts: 761
Mordko has a reputation beyond reputeMordko has a reputation beyond reputeMordko has a reputation beyond reputeMordko has a reputation beyond reputeMordko has a reputation beyond reputeMordko has a reputation beyond reputeMordko has a reputation beyond reputeMordko has a reputation beyond reputeMordko has a reputation beyond reputeMordko has a reputation beyond reputeMordko has a reputation beyond repute
Default Re: Coronavirus

Originally Posted by Almost Canadian
If the Quebec government does this, let's hope their lawyers come up with better arguments than that when attempting to defend such a law.

I expect those lawyers arguing against the legislation will use the mountains of evidence that those unvaccinated, but that have survived C-19, have protection against C-19. I don't intend to debate that data but there is certainly enough there to show that comparing 2 people (vaccinated and unvaccinated) 9 months after receiving their second shot/recovering from C-19 would likely result in them both having similar protection, or the unvaccinated having better protection (I know that a vaccinated person that has had C-19 has better protection than them both).

That being the case, punishing the unvaccinated purely for being unvaccinated would likely fail. I would expect them to trot out example after example of such incidences.

Unfortunately for all, the vaccines have not resulted in being the magic bullet it was hoped they would be and I believe that politicians would be more useful if they worked to ensure that everyone on the planet that wished to was able to get double vaxxed so that, hopefully, the likelihood of further variants can be greatly reduced.

If they wish to mandate vaccination, they should do so.

If the examples other jurisdictions have experienced, are experienced here, I anticipate that, within the next 2-3 weeks, numbers will dramatically reduce, almost dramatically as they increased.
What arguments X, Y and Z may or may not use isn’t relevant.

What is relevant is that we have a public health emergency, that our rationed healthcare system isn’t coping and that the cost to the overall economy is astronomical. Vaccines did prove to be amazingly effective at reducing the risk and therefore the burden. Its only reasonable that people who decide to take extra risks and impose the additional burden on others get to pay more themselves.

As for making vaccination mandatory- I am all for it but the government does not seem to have the balls.
Mordko is offline  

Contact Us - Manage Preferences - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Your Privacy Choices -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.