That’s what I’m saying.
How can my vaxx card give me a free pass?
But it does.
Got a copy laminated. (Not doing the digital crap.)
But I can still catch it and spread it.
Hopefully just not have to go to the hospital.

What’s the Logic?

Picture is acceptable. They say dont laminate. How u gonna get 5th booster if laminated?

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

Anyone ever watch that spouse swapping show?  Maybe we could do that with some of out Politicians AKA "representatives".
I just ran across this guy, Anthony Sabatini (https://twitter.com/AnthonySabatini).  Maybe we could set up an temporary exchange program.

Here ya go Dr. Dumbass,  who actually helped Biden draft his Royal Decree yesterday, doesn't have a real answer to a real question. I don't know, Just take the Jab!

https://mobile.twitter.com/tomselliott/status/1436366439901024262

That’s what I’m saying.
How can my vaxx card give me a free pass?
But it does.
Got a copy laminated. (Not doing the digital crap.)
But I can still catch it and spread it.
Hopefully just not have to go to the hospital.

What’s the Logic?

Percentages. The chance to get and have covid is less, thus you are less of a threat.  Also the chances of hospitalization is less too. Its about improving the odds.   

Picture is acceptable. They say dont laminate. How u gonna get 5th booster if laminated?

Yeah.
I got a picture too, but don’t want to bust out my phone.
Laminated a copy. Not the OG.
So I can still get my third, fourth, fifth……..
Eventually will need two cards the way this is going.

Percentages. The chance to get and have covid is less, thus you are less of a threat.  Also the chances of hospitalization is less too. Its about improving the odds.   

Percentages.
Odds are you can become a super spreader if vaxxed because no symptoms and no testing.
My opinion.

Percentages.
Odds are you can become a super spreader if vaxxed because no symptoms and no testing.
My opinion.

That would not be any different if an unvaxxed had no symptoms.  Just that they would get over covid slower etc.

That would not be any different if an unvaxxed had no symptoms.  Just that they would get over covid slower etc.

But they wouldn’t get a free pass to these “high risk” environments.
And yet they’re not any different transmission wise.

Logic for free pass?
Less likely to get the disease? Haven’t seen those prolonged studies.
We know vaxxed can catch it and spread it.
More likely, possibly, because of lesser symptoms and minimal testing and access to crowded places.

And if the unvaxxed had no symptoms what are they taking longer getting over ?

Logic.
Ponder.
Research.
In my opinion.

Words to consider.

Still no proof that I as an individual can or will inflict life altering / threatening consequences on another person by not following the US governments China Virus protocols.

 Everyone is literally being subjugated and  punished  as a group for something that 'might happen' because of bad math that is missing an enormous amount of data points. 

Literally having our lives controlled by 'theoretically possible from idiots starring at microfractions thinking they can see predict the macro level,  and not looking at a single thing in between those scales.


We live in an Era of Irrational Stupidity. Even the people selling it aren't buying it.

Uh, that extends beyond healthcare, waaaayyyyy beyond.

Indeed. "Fair" can be quite subjective.

When you start treating people differently for health categories they fall into, you're crossing the line between equal treatment and scapegoating.

I'm not referring to the guy who never goes to the hospital and the one getting a heart transplant.  I'm talking about the gouging of one class of people simply based on a disease they don't have, which they may never get, and if they do get it, have a low chance of dying from.

The extra premium idea here is to offset not the risk to the insured, but to offset the perceived risk to others they might infect.  Please name another disease that insurance companies tack on additional premiums for that affect people other than the insured.

That mentality is no different than requiring firearm insurance that's supposedly in place to pay for the medical costs of people gun owners may shoot -- intentionally or not.  As I discussed elsewhere, that's not a realistic understanding of how insurance works.  No insurance company is going to pay out if I intentionally shoot an attacker.

Before Obamacare people could be denied coverage or charged extra for preexisting conditions. They could also charge old people more due to increased costs associated with health care costs for the elderly but that was also eliminated or greatly restricted by Obamacare. (One of the reasons health care got more expensive for younger people because the cost got spread around more)

Outside of smoking I am not sure if and single specific health choice affected a person's premium costs but the fact they can and do charge more for smokers is a sort of justification and framework that could be applied to covid.

And sure, an additional premium could absolutely be used to offest the risk of an unvaccinated insurance customer. An insurance company sees the data, they know that a vaccinated person is much less likely to need to be admitted to the hospital and therefore if/when the unvaccinated person catches covid they will have to pay more vs if/when the vaccinated person catches covid.

Slightly different but on a similar level is people on waiting lists for liver transplants. If someone still has a drinking problem they are not going to be placed high on the list. This is treating someone different based on a health related activity choice.

You can't have universal healthcare in a destroyed system, which is exactly what the policies that you support are going to accomplish.

So do you actually like universal/subsidized/socialized health care? I am just asking to clarify because the objections you raised are typically ones seen on the left side of the health care issue.

Still no proof that I as an individual can or will inflict life altering / threatening consequences on another person by not following the US governments China Virus protocols.

How do you reason? I think there is quite a bit of proof, more here less there, but still a fair amount of proof.

Take the vaccine for example, the data shows that even though you can still catch covid and spread it while vaccinated, a vaccinated person usually has a much smaller viral load than an unvaccinated person which therefore means that an unvaccinated person is more of a threat to others than a vaccinated person (all other things being equal)

Before Obamacare people could be denied coverage or charged extra for preexisting conditions. They could also charge old people more due to increased costs associated with health care costs for the elderly but that was also eliminated or greatly restricted by Obamacare. (One of the reasons health care got more expensive for younger people because the cost got spread around more)

Outside of smoking I am not sure if and single specific health choice affected a person's premium costs but the fact they can and do charge more for smokers is a sort of justification and framework that could be applied to covid.

And sure, an additional premium could absolutely be used to offest the risk of an unvaccinated insurance customer. An insurance company sees the data, they know that a vaccinated person is much less likely to need to be admitted to the hospital and therefore if/when the unvaccinated person catches covid they will have to pay more vs if/when the vaccinated person catches covid.

Slightly different but on a similar level is people on waiting lists for liver transplants. If someone still has a drinking problem they are not going to be placed high on the list. This is treating someone different based on a health related activity choice.

To be fair to barrycare, my premium went up by 400% in 2 years. No health changes at all.

So more of a blanket increase and not an increase due to a condition.

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

How do you reason? I think there is quite a bit of proof, more here less there, but still a fair amount of proof.

Take the vaccine for example, the data shows that even though you can still catch covid and spread it while vaccinated, a vaccinated person usually has a much smaller viral load than an unvaccinated person which therefore means that an unvaccinated person is more of a threat to others than a vaccinated person (all other things being equal)

What he is stating is 1 has to first catch covid. And until they do, there is zero chance of affecting someone else. If im understanding him correctly.

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

To be fair to barrycare, my premium went up by 400% in 2 years. No health changes at all.

So more of a blanket increase and not an increase due to a condition.

Exactly.  Instead of making healthcare cheaper for everyone AS PROMISED,
ACA/Obamacare made a minority of people better off while making healthcare more expensive for most.

Benefit < Cost.

Ok if you want to really want to walk down the road following this overblown made up Scarcity of Medical Resources meme. Why would you prioritize care based on ingesting a single medicine? Need to triage based on long term and what is 'best' for society.

 Old people getting sick will always need more and longer care and they had their time on the planet already, back of the line,
 Drug Addicts, Fatties, Smokers, Drinkers they are bringing bad health on themselves, back of the line.
 What about the long term sustainability of society and its tax base to fund the medical programs? Unemployed, Retired, Welfare recipients folks dont pay in to keep the machine humming, back of the line.
 Is your trade, profession, occupation a necessity in society to keep the lights on, food in mouths and shelter over head? If you can probably be replaced by AI or Automation well tough luck, we will talk about you if we have anything left over ....

I listened to an interesting podcast about triaging which patients to give ventilators when they were in short supply  which touched on this. There are many ways a hospital could try to triage and each is going to change who gets seen first, second, third, etc.

With the ventilator a Dr. might give it based on:
Who needs it the most (most likely to die without it)
Who is most likely to survive
Who is going to get the most life out of being saved (young person might live 40 more years while an old person only live 10 more years)
Who can be taken off the ventilator the earliest (so trying to treat the less serious cases thereby freeing it up sooner and thereby helping more patients overall)
Etc.

This can all be applied to deciding whether to treat the unvaccinated covid patient or the patient suffering some other health problem.  People assume that rejecting the unvaccinated covid patient would be a moral judgement but it is also possible that a logisital argument could be made too. So for example if a Dr. knows 1 covid patient will take up an average of 3 weeks in an ICU but a heart attack patient takes up an average of 1 week in the ICU then the Dr. might decide to try and save 3 heart attack patients vs 1 covid patient.

I think that a Hopsital should never make it official policy that a triage choice be based on a moral judgement, that there must be some sort of logic framework guiding their decision, but I also know that moral judgement can still creep in on a staff's subconscious decisions.

To be fair to barrycare, my premium went up by 400% in 2 years. No health changes at all.

So more of a blanket increase and not an increase due to a condition.

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk

A big part of the increase many people saw is because Obamacare no longer allowed insurance companies to charge old people a lot more. Before that insurance companies could set premiums of 80 year olds based on the costs of insuring 80 year olds and the same with 20 year olds. Under Obamacare there was a limit, insurance companies could not charge the 80 year olds more than a certain amount higher than the 20 year olds (very rough explanation). This saved the 80 year olds but all the 20 year olds had to pay more to cover the costs. There were other things that added to the overall cost of healthcare too of course such as requiring insurance companies to cover pre-existing conditions.

So as it relates to the idea of insurance surrounding covid is it fair to spread the cost around amongst everyone or is it fair to charge more to the groups that are more likely to incur more costs?

Not sure if I mentioned this before but there was a news story about a company that banned its employees from smoking because smokers are more expensive to cover.

Do you fit in the "old" category?

Indeed. "Fair" can be quite subjective.

Uh, “subjective”… not really…

How does your logic apply to health insurance? As applies to the nation?

And that’s just to start…

So do you actually like universal/subsidized/socialized health care? I am just asking to clarify because the objections you raised are typically ones seen on the left side of the health care issue.

It would have been a better use of the money than 20 years in Afghanistan, but is no longer possible now that our economic system has been destroyed.