This is where I take issue. The vaccine, especially with a booster has shown to reduce infection. Is it 100% no, but we've gone over that over and over again. Every study, and every Bay Area county, has it around 70-75% reduction in infection. The data is clear. The counter argument you always come back with is natural immunity. Again, uninformed and misguided. The vaccine is much safer than taking a chance on getting infected and hoping you just have mild symptoms. On top of that, the vaccine helps reduce strain on our systems. The natural immunity path is not as predictable and there's no way to reverse course once you go that direction.
I personally don't care if y'all get the vaccine or not. Your choice. I've been clear about that since day one. I'm not pro-mandate. I am pro-logic. The politicization of this issue is the real drag -- and is abundantly present on this thread.
The problem is that it's not as cut and dry as you think it is. While they may reduce infection, 1) the effect seems to be only temporary, and 2) it isn't enough to control mass outbreaks (see Vermont, Spain, Ireland, Gibraltar, Germany, Israel, the United Arab Emirates). It means we don't really have much of a choice...in the end natural immunity, whether you like it or not, will be the only way out of it as it moves towards endemic status. You claim you don't like politicization, but then don't realize it is exactly what you are doing too by only focusing on on side of the situation. For some groups, the vaccine might not be warranted (like Norway has concluded for all but the most immunocompromised kids) and for others boosting may not be warranted (such as young men, particularly with Moderna). But yes, everyone over 40 that hasn't had it should get vaccinated (those over 30 should seriously consider it) and anyone over 70 should get boosted (those over 60 should seriously consider it) due to disease severity.