Vaccine

[whatithink]

Again, when it comes to workers, the left is supposed to be the "good guys".




If it's a closed shop, you can't negotiate that T&C, even if the employer is amenable. That's like Polly demanding that if she works there, Molly can't be given more PTO. Polly can ask for MFN (if anyone gets more PTO, I get it too), though even the MFN rules are getting complicated now. Actions such as these run a foul of various legal rules such as interference with contractual expectancy and antitrust that unions have exemptions from.

And particularly if you already work there, you don't get a choice....lose the election, lose your job......if an employer took that position with an action you didn't like (vote for Trump or lose your job) you'd be screaming the red revolution and workers rights.

It's why there are two ways to skin this cat: Right to work...you can't be forced to join a union (particularly for a public employer union) and the trade off I'd be in favor of is make it easier to certify the union (if Fred and John want to form a union in the mail room, more power to them....if they negotiate a better deal more people will want to join the union). The other way is to make it democratic year over year....prior to concluding a new deal every year, have people vote to see if they want to keep the union. My preference if the former, rather than the latter because the latter is just so much more complicated and subject to employer shenanigans.

You do love your labels and then slotting people into them to suit whatever "argument" you are trying to make, I find it pretty bizarre but each to their own.

The "left" as you label them do tend to give a crap about workers more than others. That doesn't give them a free pass on f-cking things up or being held responsible for it, anymore than anyone else.

Pretty sure, this whole back & forth is because Polly is demanding to work there but doesn't want to join a union even though that's a condition of joining. If the existing workers want to change that, then they can, onerous though it may be. If the union is not working for them, then I expect they would - it is America after all.

Generally, as I've said, I have no issues with unions, but have never been in one so have little practical experience of them. I can see, and experience daily, the good things they have delivered to everyone.

 

[Grace T.]

Early Denmark data shows no benefit against severe illness to being boosted relative to shot two except for > 70 year olds.

I'd say it's enough so that mandates for the young should be paused.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1478853178699354112

 

[Grace T.]

You do love your labels and then slotting people into them to suit whatever "argument" you are trying to make, I find it pretty bizarre but each to their own.

The "left" as you label them do tend to give a crap about workers more than others. That doesn't give them a free pass on f-cking things up or being held responsible for it, anymore than anyone else.

Pretty sure, this whole back & forth is because Polly is demanding to work there but doesn't want to join a union even though that's a condition of joining. If the existing workers want to change that, then they can, onerous though it may be. If the union is not working for them, then I expect they would - it is America after all.

Generally, as I've said, I have no issues with unions, but have never been in one so have little practical experience of them. I can see, and experience daily, the good things they have delivered to everyone.

So much wrong:

1. the problem with the left and workers those is they are being hypocritical about it. The right, well you'd expect as much. You don't get to be a devil and then claim you are angel.
2. in the hypothetical, it's not a condition set by the employer. It's set by other employees, which but for the union exemption, would be illegal (you are not allowed to interfere with others ability to contract generally....it's a tort).
3. the point as to the existing workers changing that is that the unions specifically lobbied to make it difficult. If it's not a big deal and you believe in democracy make it easier...vote yearly. It is America after all.
4. Unions are great. That's not the issue. The issue is whether you can be coerced to join one or if you have the liberty to decline. Particular for the public unions (e.g. being a cop or fireman or even teacher in some areas), my choice may be union or change careers.
5. Most of the good things that have been delivered have actually been delivered through changes in the employment laws, which have been a much more universal force for change, as opposed to unions, which act selfishly for their workers (as that is their primary source of agency). I'm not complaining here.....that is indeed their function.

 

[what-happened]

Early Denmark data shows no benefit against severe illness to being boosted relative to shot two except for > 70 year olds.

I'd say it's enough so that mandates for the young should be paused.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1478853178699354112

ahhh, the waning will of mandates, especially for children. Instead the adults will strike/sick out for reasons only known to them. Unfortunately the messaging filled with fear and despair drove many to vaccinate children prematurely. The dark winter of death, or something uplifting like that.

 

[whatithink]

So much wrong:

1. the problem with the left and workers those is they are being hypocritical about it. The right, well you'd expect as much. You don't get to be a devil and then claim you are angel.
2. in the hypothetical, it's not a condition set by the employer. It's set by other employees, which but for the union exemption, would be illegal (you are not allowed to interfere with others ability to contract generally....it's a tort).
3. the point as to the existing workers changing that is that the unions specifically lobbied to make it difficult. If it's not a big deal and you believe in democracy make it easier...vote yearly. It is America after all.
4. Unions are great. That's not the issue. The issue is whether you can be coerced to join one or if you have the liberty to decline. Particular for the public unions (e.g. being a cop or fireman or even teacher in some areas), my choice may be union or change careers.
5. Most of the good things that have been delivered have actually been delivered through changes in the employment laws, which have been a much more universal force for change, as opposed to unions, which act selfishly for their workers (as that is their primary source of agency). I'm not complaining here.....that is indeed their function.

1. The left & workers is like the right & God/religion - they are both hypocritical
2. Its legal, as you say
3. They can change it, not easily but possible. I'd be fine with it being easier to change.
4. See 3.
5. I agree that Employment law is the best way to do things. I'd say though that workers organized and got local (employer) dispensations first and then got their politicians and got laws passed. There are not many left pols left now though - you need those corporate dollars to run.

 

[Grace T.]

1. The left & workers is like the right & God/religion - they are both hypocritical
2. Its legal, as you say
3. They can change it, not easily but possible. I'd be fine with it being easier to change.
4. See 3.
5. I agree that Employment law is the best way to do things. I'd say though that workers organized and got local (employer) dispensations first and then got their politicians and got laws passed. There are not many left pols left now though - you need those corporate dollars to run.

Your 2 is a statement of fact. That's not the argument. The question is what should happen. But for the union exemption, it's not legal so the rule is different than the default.

 

[Grace T.]

Your 2 is a statement of fact. That's not the argument. The question is what should happen. But for the union exemption, it's not legal so the rule is different than the default.

p.s. more than half the states are right to work states (public employers excepted).

 

[Hüsker Dü]

Your 2 is a statement of fact. That's not the argument. The question is what should happen. But for the union exemption, it's not legal so the rule is different than the default.

Depends on the state. California is not a right to work state.

 

[EvilGoalie 21]

Early Denmark data shows no benefit against severe illness to being boosted relative to shot two except for > 70 year olds.

I'd say it's enough so that mandates for the young should be paused.

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1478853178699354112

FYI the graph you show is for PCR+, not severe disease. It is also not corrected for test frequency. See

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1478482421138046979

for an attempt to properly display the data. Based on this, if the normalized data was converted to odds risk or VE it would probably look pretty similar to what's being reported out of the UK data.

 

[Grace T.]

FYI the graph you show is for PCR+, not severe disease. It is also not corrected for test frequency. See

https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1478482421138046979

for an attempt to properly display the data. Based on this, if the normalized data was converted to odds risk or VE it would probably look pretty similar to what's being reported out of the UK data.

I was more interested in the blub re severity as that goes to the last standing rational for mandates.

One interesting theory being bandied about is that the reason omicron is running high in the vaccinated is because the vaccinated may have less natural immunity. I'm not aware of any data backing that up, though, or the viability of said theory.

 

[Grace T.]

I remember when the left screamed this was a conspiracy theory. At least it doesn't appear serious, if it is yet something again unpleasant.

COVID vaccines may briefly change your menstrual cycle, but you should still get one

The new research affirms what many individuals had reported. But it also shows the changes to the menstrual cycle are mostly minor and brief, more akin to a sore arm than a dangerous reaction.

www.npr.org

 

[EvilGoalie 21]

I was more interested in the blub re severity as that goes to the last standing rational for mandates.

One interesting theory being bandied about is that the reason omicron is running high in the vaccinated is because the vaccinated may have less natural immunity. I'm not aware of any data backing that up, though, or the viability of said theory.

None of the graphs in the thread speak to severity per se. There is a graph on hospital admissions. In the thread I linked, once the data are adjusted for sampling density there is a clear effect of vaccinations and boosters on reducing hospitalizations relative to unvaccinated individuals. That is what the Denmark data show. I will screen shot it at the end, same source, same legend

The graphs you posted do not show omicron is "running high in the vaccinated". What they show is that vaccination is running high in Denmark (insert Hamlet quote here). Once that sampling density issue is adjusted (which, as has come up repeatedly, is why odds risk or VE are much better ways to present the data) it is clear that vaccinated or previously infected individuals fare better than immunologically unexposed people. Since the nAbs induced by infection by prior variants or vaccination do not bind as tightly to omicron S, the only way to offset infection is to have a very high titer of those Abs. This can be achieved by either a recent booster or a recent infection; that's how it's shaping up. The "double synergy" may still provoke the most durable response; I'm sure we will see soon enough.

Until we all get our shiny new anti-omicron Abs (alot of us probably have them already) Omicron is pretty much going to do it wants in terms of infectivity. Our prior immune exposures are not going to slow it down too much. Not particularly virulent, good luck of the draw. If the human to mouse to human hypothesis is right (I think there are serious arguments against it, but it is definitely plausible), that is a worry. The main pandemic is not even over yet, and we may already be getting radically different cViruses shape shifting back and forth between different resevoirs.

 

[Hüsker Dü]

p.s. more than half the states are right to work states (public employers excepted).

Right to work for less.

 

[Ellejustus]

Right to work for less.

True, but gas is half the price, rent is half and you can be free. Sign me up I'm moving sooner or later. My woke friends pride has them by the arm. Mask boys!!!

 

[Kicker 2.0]

Right to work for less.

As was stated earlier, they know the T&C and can make their choice to “work for less” as you call it or look for work elsewhere. Guess the question I have is, less than what? $50k goes a lot further in some states than others.

 

[Grace T.]

Right to work for less.

The economics of this are incredibly complicated. You can’t just compare average wages since this like col and taxes come into play. The question is to what extent do union shop wages (the us doesn’t allow true closed shops) capture through bargaining more money which would otherwise be left on the table without adverse consequences (such as a decrease in supply of jobs which would be dictated by the supply curve). It’s complicated and there’s not a whole lot of consensus v an open shop (though definitely some against a non union shop). It’s whatever this capture is which is the benefit v the cost of forcing people to choose or lose their jobs that you’d analyze (because as we’ve established in this thread the c/b is everything). One thing to note is this analysis only works for a private employer where there is competition in the market. Otherwise it goes to the heart of the matter where we started this discussion: teachers unions trying to close schools (which is not a wage issue) and people having to join a union which stance they disagree with.

 

[what-happened]

. The main pandemic is not even over yet, and we may already be getting radically different cViruses shape shifting back and forth between different resevoirs.

Interesting take. I can guess what your background is (and not in a negative way). The counterargument is this signals endemic, but that has many different definitions depending on the "expert" you talk to. I don't have the chops to formally discuss virul mutations at the levels you present. From a care perspective, this mutation broadens the ability to treat early and to boost/vaccinate the most vulnerable. A bit easier to manage in many ways.

It's a virus we are talking about and we don't know what happens next, if anything. Thanks for your laydown.

 

[watfly]

Live with it. Weird that us non-epidemiologists have been saying this at least since fall 2020.

Former Biden Advisers Urge a Pandemic Strategy for the ‘New Normal’ (Published 2022)

In a striking critique, six prominent health experts who advised President Biden’s transition team called for an entirely new domestic coronavirus strategy.

www.nytimes.com

In three opinion articles published on Thursday in The Journal of the American Medical Association, they called for Mr. Biden to adopt an entirely new domestic pandemic strategy geared to the “new normal” of living with the virus indefinitely, not to wiping it out.

 

[Ellejustus]

Live with it. Weird that us non-epidemiologists have been saying this at least since fall 2020.

Former Biden Advisers Urge a Pandemic Strategy for the ‘New Normal’ (Published 2022)

In a striking critique, six prominent health experts who advised President Biden’s transition team called for an entirely new domestic coronavirus strategy.

www.nytimes.com

In three opinion articles published on Thursday in The Journal of the American Medical Association, they called for Mr. Biden to adopt an entirely new domestic pandemic strategy geared to the “new normal” of living with the virus indefinitely, not to wiping it out.

Yes, I and we have been saying this for over two years. Welcome to the New Normal Norm...lol!!! This is not going away bro. IHU is up next. My old pal and I had a very tough talk yesterday. Dude is worth millions and has had a beach house since he was born and a trust that funds his life forever, so he thinks. He and I are very different and have different backgrounds, but we love each other. He and others want to wear me out so I just obey the rules they make up along the way and just sit in the chair and roll my sleeve up and take my shots for the rest of my life every three months. How many is too many for you Wat Fly? Look man, I need you and many like you badly. I can;t work now and had to pass up opportunity because of the mask rules. I am outside salesman and I can't breath or talk very well with a mask on face all day. No jobs for me man. Oh well, it's just me and my family I guess that said no at the beginning of all this. As long as others have food, a job, shelter and access to all the goods, no need worry about others, right? As long as you obey and keep taking the shots, this will always be Jabhog Day. I keep praying and hoping men will be men again and see how evil this is and has always been. Ruining peoples livelihoods, businesses, reputations and just locked out because of deeply held and sacred tribal reasons to never ever allow foreign substances that we will never know about until 2076 what was actually in the injections. People get fired Wat Fly for not jabbing. Fired!!! let that sink in your brain. Your next unless you keep obeying. People can;t work in this state unless they get jabbed and people can;t buy stuff without a mask on now. Three shots + mask and you can shop until you drop! I got asked to leave a big box grocery store yesterday in a city in OC if no mask. I was super cool and asked why now? Boss lady said she had no idea but she needs to obey the rules and so do I. I told her I didn;t like her low energy attitude and she said she appreciated me for not yelling. I told her I am working on being calm through all this and just no cause issues. I then told her I feel sick when I wear mask too long and that causes a medical condition for me and I feel locked out to buy food for my family. The lovely manager offered to do my shopping me. I was blown away and told her no thanks because that is weird but thank you anyways.

 

[Ellejustus]

Healthy Doctor & Father Dies Hours After Pfizer Jab - MSM Labels it a COVID DEATH

This is a prime example of why I do not see this being stopped. This was a doctor. A DOCTOR. DOCTOR. Most don't get it or just want a paycheck and are willing to murder for it. Source: SayNoWayToTheMRNA. More videos you may like: My God what have they done? 9 hours old and holding his head up...

www.bitchute.com

 

[dad4]

Live with it. Weird that us non-epidemiologists have been saying this at least since fall 2020.

Former Biden Advisers Urge a Pandemic Strategy for the ‘New Normal’ (Published 2022)

In a striking critique, six prominent health experts who advised President Biden’s transition team called for an entirely new domestic coronavirus strategy.

www.nytimes.com

In three opinion articles published on Thursday in The Journal of the American Medical Association, they called for Mr. Biden to adopt an entirely new domestic pandemic strategy geared to the “new normal” of living with the virus indefinitely, not to wiping it out.

Their notion of new normal is not the same as yours. For one, it probably includes masks.