*sigh* The unfortunate reality of wanting to live in a compassionate society is that even when complete f-cking dipsh-ts make decisions that negatively impact their own health and place unnecessary strain on the publicly-funded healthcare system, our society's mandate must be to provide care for them.
This is the case whether we are talking about a total dumbass who won't get their vaccines to prevent and/or reduce risk and complications, or we are talking about the heroin-zombies and fentanyl-folders that downtown is inundated with. These really are the same thing; both made poor decisions that led them to requiring care and a compassionate society must care for both, no matter how much of a f-cking pain in the ass they are. One got there by being too f-cking stupid and credulous to make good decisions, the other is probably a little more complicated than that, but they're both a drain and a net-negative on our society -- and yet, we must help them.
This doesn't sound very compassionate.
The Following User Says Thank You to Amethyst For This Useful Post:
Or maybe as you put already, "stay the #### out of there choices" and "don't tell them what healthcare they can have access to."
This is why we have a healthcare system staffed and run by professionals who can actually make medically necessary choices and provide necessary services based on prioritizing needs and not based on emotional response/overreaction.
That’s a pretty oversimplification of his point.
If someone’s choice borne purely out of stupidity poses a danger to innocent people ie immunocompromised individuals and strains a system that cannot support everyone else, then it’s not as much of a grey area as you think it is.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hockey Fan #751
The Oilers won't finish 14th in the West forever.
Eventually a couple of expansion teams will be added which will nestle the Oilers into 16th.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Point Blank For This Useful Post:
Or maybe as you put already, "stay the #### out of there choices" and "don't tell them what healthcare they can have access to."
This is why we have a healthcare system staffed and run by professionals who can actually make medically necessary choices and provide necessary services based on prioritizing needs and not based on emotional response/overreaction.
Why the #### should I? They've proven they don't give a #### about anyone else, so my reaction is to not give a #### about them. It's not like I'm protesting with a sign outside a hospital. And yes, despite my personal position I'll still respect the decisions of the professionals, because I'm not a ####ing turnip head. I just think they should be last in line if they've contributed to the problem through nothing but selfishness. Ultimately I don't think we should have a line to worry about, and it wouldn't be an issue, but people like that have left us where we are needing to ration care.
There are plenty of other examples. The people I see riding motorcycles with no safety gear surely never end up needing expensive medical care. And as a society we have a whole specialty surgical wing at a mountain hospital dedicated mostly to people who have screwed up their knees doing extreme sports. Then there's the people who smoke, drink, or eat too much - plenty of preventable publicly funded medical care there.
Also coming up is the mental health burden on the system from people who have let youtube and tiktok parent their children.
And yet, there are laws surrounding helmet use, and people who choose not to follow it can be fined. There’s laws on cigarette advertising and zones where cigarette smoke is not allowed. There’s nutrition labels that must be prominently displayed in food.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hockey Fan #751
The Oilers won't finish 14th in the West forever.
Eventually a couple of expansion teams will be added which will nestle the Oilers into 16th.
Caring for them by way of using resources to fix what ails them and restore them to a state of good health and safety is all that is owed. I feel zero need to placate their bruised egos due to stupid decisions by putting a hand on their knee and consoling them, "aw, I'm so sorry you f-cked yourself up because you didn't bother to do the bare minimum to protect your health by getting a tiny little vaccine poke".
__________________
-James
GO FLAMES GO.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Azure
Typical dumb take.
The Following User Says Thank You to TorqueDog For This Useful Post:
And yet, there are laws surrounding helmet use, and people who choose not to follow it can be fined. There’s laws on cigarette advertising and zones where cigarette smoke is not allowed. There’s nutrition labels that must be prominently displayed in food.
Those all sound pretty equivalent to the governmemt recommending vaccines and offering them in schools, and running drug prevention programs/public service announcements.
The government can try and get people to make healthy choices, and can tax unhealthy choices, but ultimately people have free will, and since we have public healthcare I think you have to care for everyone even if they make bad choices.
Caring for them by way of using resources to fix what ails them and restore them to a state of good health and safety is all that is owed. I feel zero need to placate their bruised egos due to stupid decisions by putting a hand on their knee and consoling them, "aw, I'm so sorry you f-cked yourself up because you didn't bother to do the bare minimum to protect your health by getting a tiny little vaccine poke".
I'm not saying anyone needs to do that. I just think if you're going to claim we're providing healthcare because we're a compassionate society and then list a bunch of things others are doing wrong, it's doesn't sound very compassionate.
We can have a universal healthcare system just because it makes sense. A healthy population functions better and a universal healthcare system leads to better outcomes overall (versus the US where some people have access to amazing healthcare while many others have none).
I'm not saying anyone needs to do that. I just think if you're going to claim we're providing healthcare because we're a compassionate society and then list a bunch of things others are doing wrong, it's doesn't sound very compassionate.
We can have a universal healthcare system just because it makes sense. A healthy population functions better and a universal healthcare system leads to better outcomes overall (versus the US where some people have access to amazing healthcare while many others have none).
Being compassionate doesn't mean taking an uncritical stance toward the causes of the problems, otherwise it is just indifference under the guise of compassion. We already have that.
Stupid f-ckwit anti-vaxxers need healthcare too, I'm afraid, just like their kindred spirits hanging out in Central Memorial Park.
Those all sound pretty equivalent to the governmemt recommending vaccines and offering them in schools, and running drug prevention programs/public service announcements.
The government can try and get people to make healthy choices, and can tax unhealthy choices, but ultimately people have free will, and since we have public healthcare I think you have to care for everyone even if they make bad choices.
Legislating helmet use or bylaws on smoking zones with imposed fines isn’t a recommendation.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hockey Fan #751
The Oilers won't finish 14th in the West forever.
Eventually a couple of expansion teams will be added which will nestle the Oilers into 16th.
Did anyone complete the survey on the raised speed limit?
Maybe I am a buddy buddy but I worry about the numerous uncontrolled access point along the highways.
It may be a result of having to hit the brakes on 2 occasions when someone pulled out onto the highway 2 (near ollds) from those gravel road intersecting the highway.
To me, the key difference is enforcement. Helmet and smoking laws carry legal penalties for noncompliance, that’s what makes them mandatory. Vaccinations, unless required for specific settings (like healthcare work or school entry), don’t have that same legal status right now.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hockey Fan #751
The Oilers won't finish 14th in the West forever.
Eventually a couple of expansion teams will be added which will nestle the Oilers into 16th.
Did anyone complete the survey on the raised speed limit?
Maybe I am a buddy buddy but I worry about the numerous uncontrolled access point along the highways.
It may be a result of having to hit the brakes on 2 occasions when someone pulled out onto the highway 2 (near ollds) from those gravel road intersecting the highway.
No you are not, it totally makes sense. Those level crossings are already death traps. I know what people are saying - but everyone drives 120 already what’s the big deal. Well of course we all know that means people will drive 130-135 as the new normal, there will be greater speed differentials and more incidents. All to save 10 minutes between Edmonton and Calgary.
The Following User Says Thank You to Whynotnow For This Useful Post:
Legislating helmet use or bylaws on smoking zones with imposed fines isn’t a recommendation.
I get the point you are trying to make but I would use different examples.
Life insurance - You can have life insurance but there are a number of things that can prevent you from getting coverage (pre-existing conditions, alcoholism, etc) and there are things that can prevent you from receiving your benefits (extreme sports, illegal activities, suicide)
Organ transplants - you may need an organ transplant but they have rules about whether or not you can get one. If you smoke, drink or have some other kind of substance abuse then they can disqualify you from receiving an organ. If you have active infections, cancer, or other chronic illnesses then they can also disqualify you from receiving an organ.
I would say that those are good examples of health related services being restricted by people's choices because they have limited resources and giving those services to people who actively choose to do things that go against their own health would be a waste of the resources.
If people choose to not get vaccinated against preventable diseases and then get those diseases, then in an environment where our health care system is heavily restricted (because the UCP is aggressively defunding and destroying it) then I would argue that we do not have the resources to help people that have made those choices and we cannot risk them going into a hospital and infecting other people and compounding the issue. (Especially if they infect kids who are too young to be fully vaccinated or people with health issue that make them extra vulnerable)
The other way to look at it is when we tax substances that are bad for your health (in theory to increase health care funding). If 42% of the cost of beer is taxes then that means anyone drinking beer is paying money that should go to health care for when that alcohol eventually puts them in a hospital. Cigarettes are similarly heavily taxed because the people who choose to smoke are a burden on the system.
It is hard to make an anti-vaxxer pay for their choices, so I would argue to either deny them healthcare for being an extra burden and risk on society with their "FREEDUMB" OR consider an answer in taxation. You can increase the tax rate on everyone by 10% and then give a 10% discount to anyone who is fully vaccinated because being vaccinated reduces their burden on society. That way, people who want to opt out of protecting society from diseases can contribute extra money for the privilege of being a burden on society's services.
My opinion: It is disgusting that a Libertarian-style person would want to have all of the freedom to choose not to participate in society's requirements to be a responsible member of society and then demand that they get the benefits of our socialist health care system. On top of that they also do not want to have to pay for that health care via taxes or being handed a bill with crushing medical debt after being treated. They want all of the benefit without contributing to the system that provides the benefit.
__________________
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Wolven For This Useful Post:
Make AHC cards electronic, and then tie them to your vaccination status. If you go because your kid got measles, and you didn't vaccinate them, then there's a cost. If you go because you got COVID and didn't vaccinate, then there's a cost. (yes I know COVID vax don't prevent COVID) We don't have to make it $US style costs, but significant enough that people stop and think about their choices. If they want to continue being reckless members of society, then they pay for it. The system isn't offl imits to you, but there's now a cost.
The Following User Says Thank You to woob For This Useful Post:
Make AHC cards electronic, and then tie them to your vaccination status. If you go because your kid got measles, and you didn't vaccinate them, then there's a cost. If you go because you got COVID and didn't vaccinate, then there's a cost. (yes I know COVID vax don't prevent COVID) We don't have to make it $US style costs, but significant enough that people stop and think about their choices. If they want to continue being reckless members of society, then they pay for it. The system isn't offl imits to you, but there's now a cost.
Smith chose the opposite. To charge people who want to take preventative measures, and take care for free all the ones who don't.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Fuzz For This Useful Post:
Smith chose the opposite. To charge people who want to take preventative measures, and take care for free all the ones who don't.
Yep classic conservatism there, laissez faire liberalism followed by robust social safety nets to catch the people who fall down for lack of personal responsibility.
Spoiler!
Wait, you mean the united conservatives are a bunch of short sighted hypocritical libertarians who couldn't define the conservatism if they tired? Who could have seen that coming?
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to #-3 For This Useful Post:
Resolution
e. Adopt health care improvements by implementing all recommendations from the January 2025 Alberta
Pandemic Data Review Task Force Report and also:
i. prohibit vaccination from being used as a condition of employment or membership in any provincially-funded
institution, organization, ministry, agency, professional association, or regulatory bodies governed by provincial
legislation,
ii. educate the public about vaccine injuries attributed to the Covid-19 mRNA injections and provide physicians in
the province with peer reviewed preventative and detoxing protocols that have been published since these
vaccines were administered to the public at large, and
iii. ensure equal access to health care for all Albertans, regardless of vaccination, physical, or genetic status.
Rationale
The Alberta UCP has outlined a vision for a health care system that prioritizes access to safe therapeutics and
respects individual choice. The Alberta Pandemic Data Review Task Force Report provides several
recommendations to achieve this. Key priorities include:
Pause the use of mRNA vaccines in Alberta until safety is independently verified.
Establish clear protocols for full disclosure of vaccine safety and eƯectiveness to ensure informed consent.
Ensure access to safe repurposed therapeutics, both pharmaceutical and non-pharmaceutical.
Protect physicians’ rights to collaborate with patients on treatment decisions and to participate in public discourse without reprisal.
Currently, Albertans lack full access to information necessary for informed health decisions, particularly regarding mRNA vaccines. Data on vaccine safety, including injuries and adverse outcomes, is incomplete. Greater transparency and accessibility of information are needed.
Several jurisdictions have already adopted similar measures, such as suspending certain COVID-19 vaccines. In Canada, vaccine mandates remain in some sectors, and access to medical treatment, including organ
transplants, has at times been aƯected by vaccine status. These issues highlight the need for policies that ensure transparency, protect choice, and avoid discrimination based on vaccination status.
This will kill people. Transplants are incredibly expensive, resource intensive life altering procedures. Allowing patients to choose which vaccines they have while being immune suppressed around other immune suppressed vulnerable people will cause them to needlessly die. If you don't care about the people, I'm sure you can find a way to care about the money. This goes against all known science are global standards around organ transplantation. It's a policy invented by ####ing morons who have no business discussing healthcare.
#### them and #### you for supporting them.
And that doesn't even get into the monstrous position of pausing mrna vaccines that would put more vulnerable people at risk for...reasons of being more like RFKjr.
Why in the ever loving #### do you people support this conspiracy drivelled nonsense? Y'all flat earthers, too? Con-trails?
####ing dumb. Stop being morons, or #### the hell off to dumb####istan down south already. I'm so goddamned sick of this ####.
The Following 7 Users Say Thank You to Fuzz For This Useful Post:
