- Joined
- Feb 20, 2012
- Messages
- 104,354
- Reaction score
- 84,460
- Location
- Biden's 'Murica
- Gender
- Female
- Political Leaning
- Moderate
If your post was intended to be funny, you failed.
If your post was intended to be stupid, you succeeded admirably.
He is as useful then as now. Connect the dots.
In a civil case the standard is preponderance of evidence. The plaintiff has to show is that it's more likely than not. The problem that's going to come up in most real world scenarios is convincing the jury the that the plaintiff had no contact at all with any other unvaccinated people in the days before he tested positive. Sure that's easy if the defendant is the only person the plaintiff had contact with but how often is that going to be the case?I don't think it's true. But even if it is, maybe we need a legal presumption of infection, then -- once the plaintiff shows (1) he/she was vaccinated, (2) he/she nonetheless got infected after having contact with the defendant unvaccinated person, the burden then shifts to the unvaccinated person to prove that he/she didn't infect the plaintiff. These types of legal presumptions are applied in the law when it is unfair to hold a plaintiff to the burden of proving causation.
Since unvaccinated people as a group are responsible for the continuation of COVID at this point, it seems fair to put on them the burden of proof.
I like that. I'd let the anti-vaxxers know that if you refuse to get vaccinated and wind up at the hospital, you better have a huge bank account 'cause you're gonna' need it. Any services for anti-vaxxers will not be paid for by the people who did-the-right-thing. It's time we treat the assholes like assholes.
As one who enjoys universal healthcare I would never support denying healthcare to people based on their choices. Universal is universal. However, I would support premium penalties for the unvaccinate, smokers, the obese etc. Nothing Draconian just reflective of the additional burden they willingly put on the system.Most succinct argument I've ever read against universal health care. I used to support UHC, but he people who want to implement it can't be trusted with the power.
Like many liberals, you are signaling here that you want to control systems so you can freeze out the disobedient.
As one who enjoys universal healthcare I would never support denying healthcare to people based on their choices. Universal is universal. However, I would support premium penalties for the unvaccinate, smokers, the obese etc. Nothing Draconian just reflective of the additional burden they willingly put on the system.
How does the President make that happen?
Nope. Just want to freeze out the American Sociopaths. They've done enough damage to the world. Time for them to go. They deserve it.Like many liberals, you are signaling here that you want to control systems so you can freeze out the disobedient.
Nope. Just want to freeze out the American Sociopaths. They've done enough damage to the world. Time for them to go. They deserve it.
Absolutely not! Single motherhood is not a health choice, smoking is. I am not particularly tied to charging a larger premium for certain health choices but I think it might nudge people into getting something as easy as a vaccination vs smoking and obesity which are more difficult to manage.Do you think unwed mothers should be charged more for prenatal care? I don't.
I ask because the burden of single motherhood on society is quantifiable. If you're going to create tiered systems of care around harm-based reasoning, you open the door to exactly this type of bureaucratic moralizing.
He should do nothing except make the vaccines available to anybody who wants it, which he has already done. I'm good with the Trumpies committing mass suicide by not getting vaccinated. It will make the country a better place.Here's your chance to be president. Feel free to add anything to my list through posting your ideas.
Absolutely not! Single motherhood is not a health choice, smoking is. I am not particularly tied to charging a larger premium for certain health choices but I think it might nudge people into getting something as easy as a vaccination vs smoking and obesity which are more difficult to manage.
Not so sure that premarital sex is any different than post-marital sex from a health perspective. Both have their health risks married men are not necessarily faithful nor are they always concerned about the health and well being of their spouse when it comes to sex.I would argue having premarital sex is definitely a health choice. But thank you for acknowledging my point.
I don't think we'll agree fully on this issue, but at least we seem to be discussing the same terms.
I actually think that one of the reasons Canada is doing so much better at getting vaccinated, currently at 80% nationally with at least one shot and climbing, is largely because universal healthcare results in more people having established relationships with their doctors. It's easy to go, you aren't charged anything out of pocket etc. so most have an ongoing established relationship with doctors.Many of the people -- left and right, black and white -- who don't want get vaccinated do not trust the people urging them to do so.
I actually think that one of the reasons Canada is doing so much better at getting vaccinated, currently at 80% nationally with at least one shot and climbing, is largely because universal healthcare results in more people having established relationships with their doctors. It's easy to go, you aren't charged anything out of pocket etc. so most have an ongoing established relationship with doctors.
Of course, the other reason is Covid has not been politized here.
What about people who ride motorcycles, skydive, rock climb, smoke, eat too much sugar. Want to freeze those sociopaths out too?Nope. Just want to freeze out the American Sociopaths. They've done enough damage to the world. Time for them to go. They deserve it.
What about people who ride motorcycles, skydive, rock climb, smoke, eat too much sugar. Want to freeze those sociopaths out too?
With Covid Cases Rising In All 50 States, ....
And that is reasonable. It is reasonable that society take steps to protect itself from an individual who assumes a risk that may impact others. What is not reasonable is denying medical care to a person because they chose to not get vaccinated.Plug your "what about" examples into an argument responsive to the public health threat described in the thread's OP...
"..Although employers must have written plans ready by August 5, 2021, employers are not required to implement their plans until the New York Commissioner of Health designates a disease as a highly contagious communicable disease that presents a serious risk of harm to public health. If a disease is designated as such, New York employers are required to implement preventive measures where occupational exposure exists, including:NY HERO Act for Infectious Disease Prevention is on the Horizon for Employers
On July 6, 2021, pursuant to the New York Health Essential Rights Act (HERO Act), the New York Department of Labor (NYDOL) published a (1) Minimum Standard and (2) Model Plan for airborne infectious disease exposure prevention.www.natlawreview.com
Offer health screenings at the beginning of the workday pursuant to the State Department of Health and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) guidelines
Follow CDC guidelines related to isolation and quarantine
Provide face coverings at no cost to employees
Implement physical distancing of six feet apart when possible
Provide handwashing facilities, to the extent feasible
Provide hand sanitizer if handwashing facilities are not possible
Implement an appropriate cleaning and disinfection plan depending on facility type
The HERO Act contains a provision prohibiting discrimination or retaliation against employees for refusing to work when the employee reasonably believes that such work may pose an unreasonable risk of exposure to an airborne infectious disease due to working conditions inconsistent with the minimum standard of the Act. Also, employers may be entitled to costs and attorneys’ fees if a claim under the HERO Act is found frivolous..."
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?