EU Digital/paper! Certs, the Megathread - threadbans in OP

AdamD

Deleted User wrote: »

There is a huge difference between a vaccine being a requirement to travel and a vaccine being a requirement to take part in society.

pjohnson wrote: »

Thats their choice. Accept the consequences of their choice.

This isn't true either. There is a blatant downside for people who, depending on age and occupation will not see a vaccine for another few months, versus others who have already gotten them.

Its not just anti-vaccers who will have an issue with this if it goes beyond international travel

is_that_so

Dressoutlet wrote: »

I have vaccine passports for all my children already. This is not some new concept

To go to a local restaurant, pub, shop or hotel? That would be new.

FileNotFound

AdamD wrote: »

This isn't true either. There is a blatant downside for people who, depending on age and occupation will not see a vaccine for another few months, versus others who have already gotten them.

Its not just anti-vaccers who will have an issue with this if it goes beyond international travel

In fairness - as one of those due to age, good health and employment (WFH) who won't see a vaccine for a good while.


I really cannot argue that we should avoid the chance to let the economy open if we can, after all my bloody tax will be paying for every day it closes.


Would be a small minded approach from me if i demanded everyone stay home cause i have to. Spiting myself.

sydthebeat

is_that_so wrote: »

To go to a local restaurant, pub, shop or hotel? That would be new.

That restaurant / shop / hotel would be forced to stay closed for longer without this policy being used

is that what you want??

Dressoutlet

See.
Not used to go to play centres and such but if there was a severe measles pandemic all of a sudden I would happily bring my vaccinated children everywhere we could.

Picture won't upload but look here to see what they look like.
https://www.google.com/search?q=hse+immunisation+passport&client=ms-android-huawei-rev1&prmd=insv&sxsrf=ALeKk0373PX3-or0w-26yxxmQ_4XDygGLA:1617697971976&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjSxuTHmunvAhVCsXEKHWsPAbAQ_AUoAXoECAIQAQ&biw=360&bih=647&dpr=3#imgrc=8yjXHU_ectYYPM

olestoepoke

sydthebeat wrote: »

If you're referring to the people who chose not to get the vaccination, then that's not a downside of the quicker opening up of society....

.... As nothing they would do would open society quicker.

So no, theres literally no downside to this.

Again, no downside unless you choose not to be vaccinated. A better way to phrase it would be 'literally no downside for those who choose to be vaccinated'

AdamD

sydthebeat wrote: »

That restaurant / shop / hotel would be forced to stay closed for longer without this policy being used

is that what you want??

Who do you think works in these shops, hotels and restaurants? You will have non-vaccinated young people, not allowed to attend these places with their friends, but working there to serve vaccinated old people.

What I want is the country to open up in a way that allows everyone to avail of the services allowed to open.

sydthebeat

olestoepoke wrote: »

Again, no downside unless you choose not to be vaccinated.

i wont win the lotto if i choose not to do it ??

i wont win a medal if i choose not to take part in sports ??

what is difficult to comprehend about this?

is_that_so

sydthebeat wrote: »

That restaurant / shop / hotel would be forced to stay closed for longer without this policy being used

is that what you want??

Anything that gets them open seem to be the rationale here not health. You can see how people would slide into wild CTs on this. And the unvaccinated kids? Who enforces all of this?

sydthebeat

sydthebeat wrote: »

That restaurant / shop / hotel would be forced to stay closed for longer without this policy being used

is that what you want??

Restaurants, shops, hotels and cafés have been open for the past year in Sweden, Norway, and other countries, without vaccine passports.

is_that_so

Dressoutlet wrote: »

See.
Not used to go to play centres and such but if there was a severe measles pandemic all of a sudden I would happily bring my vaccinated children everywhere we could.

Measles has an R0 of 16 so there is really no comparison at all.

sydthebeat

AdamD wrote: »

Who do you think works in these shops, hotels and restaurants? You will have non-vaccinated young people, not allowed to attend these places with their friends, but working there to serve vaccinated old people.

What I want is the country to open up in a way that allows everyone to avail of the services allowed to open.

great then...

we'll take the socialist view of "no one can have it until everyone can have it" and delay the opening of these premises until the required herd immunity figures are reached... so everyone together can avail at the same time....

and force the business to remain shut until that date (lets call it 1st october)

OR

we can let people who have been vaccinated to avail of these business in ever growing numbers and allow these business to reopen , lets say 1st June

i dont know about you, but i think business have suffered enough already and it would only be wanton cruelty to force them to remain shut longer than absolutely necesary

sydthebeat

Deleted User wrote: »

Restaurants, shops, hotels and cafés have been open for the past year in Sweden, Norway, and other countries, without vaccine passports.

its the biggest indictment of this and previous governments that we do not have a health service like Sweden's and our ability to cope with this in our health infrastructure was pathetic

heads should roll after all this is done, and we should never accept a mess like the HSE has created again

Antares35

sydthebeat wrote: »

great then...

we'll take the socialist view of "no one can have it until everyone can have it" and delay the opening of these premises until the required herd immunity figures are reached... so everyone together can avail at the same time....

and force the business to remain shut until that date (lets call it 1st october)

OR

we can people who have been vaccinated to avail of these business in ever growing numbers and allow these business to reopen , lets say 1st June

i dont know about you, but i think business have suffered enough already and it would only be wanton cruelty to force them to remain shut longer than absolutely necesary

Really good point. As a 37 year old lucky enough to be without health conditions, I'm far far down the list when it comes to vaccines (hoping I'll get one for Christmas! ) and if I'm honest when I first heard the idea of vaccine passports I was a little annoyed, thinking "hey why do others get to do stuff I cant." but you're right, it makes no sense to say nobody should do anything until we can all do it. Business are crippled and the longer they are closed, the more people on PUP, the longer we will all be paying for it anyway.

daydorunrun

Many measures in everyday life were brought in as an emergency measure- VAT, USC are two financial ones that spring to mind. Remember flying before 9/11? Many things changed after that- some necessary of course, but I still have to knock back my drink or toss it before departure. My point is no matter what they bring in now it will likely be with us for good as emergency measures are rarely rowed back on fully.
In fact it may be seen as a tool to stop unwanted immigration - no vaccine passport -no entry, regardless of race or circumstance.

FileNotFound

Antares35 wrote: »

Really good point. As a 37 year old lucky enough to be without health conditions, I'm far far down the list when it comes to vaccines (hoping I'll get one for Christmas! ) and if I'm honest when I first heard the idea of vaccine passports I was a little annoyed, thinking "hey why do others get to do stuff I cant." but you're right, it makes no sense to say nobody should do anything until we can all do it. Business are crippled and the longer they are closed, the more people on PUP, the longer we will all be paying for it anyway.

As someone in the exact same position, I fully agree with you.


Lets get the country open and forget the selfish attitudes. Getting people back to work or out spending where possible will help reduce the overall costs. I am all for that.

josip

FlubberJones wrote: »

So that means the over 70s will be able to travel quicker and enjoy a "more active life" than the younger people awaiting the vaccine... brilliant.

Yes, a whole 2-3 months sooner.
The clock is ticking louder for them than the younger people though, they need to get a move on if they want want to hike the Inca Trail and do the Oktoberfest before the Grim Reaper gets a hold of them.
I have no problems with them getting their license to thrill before I do.

olestoepoke

sydthebeat wrote: »

i wont win the lotto if i choose not to do it ??

i wont win a medal if i choose not to take part in sports ??

what is difficult to comprehend about this?

Why is it so difficult for you to admit that there is a section of the population who choose not to be vaccinated and hence will experience a 'downside'. So again, the statement that there is literally no downside is subjective and doesn't apply to those who choose not to be vaccinated. So a better statement would be 'there is literally no downside for those of us who choose to be vaccinated'.:D

Nozebleed

sydthebeat wrote: »

Another thread infected by the conspiracy theory nuts I see. Can't just debate the issue for what it actually is with the "oh my god, thin end of the wedge" bullish!t

but there is no conspiracy theory here..vaccinate the eldery and vulnerable if they want to be vaccinated. for all other citizens it should be by choice without consequence to their living standards or rights. there's absolutely no reason to make it mandatory seeing as 99% of people dont and wont suffer any serious effects from C-19.

any attempt to bring in a mandatory vaccine passport will create serious division among society..

sydthebeat

olestoepoke wrote: »

Why is it so difficult for you to admit that there is a section of the population who choose not to be vaccinated and hence will experience a 'downside'. ...

there is no downside because if you choose not to get vaccinated then the advantage do not apply to you.

how do you find it difficult to understand that if you do not take part, then you cannot suffer a downside ?

in order for there to be a "downside" there MUST be an upside... they go hand in hand.

people who choose not to take part, and therefore cannot get any "upside" then automatically, by definition, cannot suffer a downside.... jesus this stuff is not difficult.

josip

bucketybuck wrote: »

If we are all going to be vaccinated within a few months, then why do we need all these "vaccine passport" type measures?

Why are we implementing costly and long term measures for something that should be managed in a few months time?

Because many people will chose not to get vaccinated.
This is a big problem in many other countries.
If a significant percentage of people chose not to get vaccinated, then it will be very difficult to reach herd immunity without vaccinating under 18/16s.
And I think EMA approval for U18/U16s with Pfizer is at least 5-8 months away.

is_that_so

josip wrote: »

Because many people will chose not to get vaccinated.
This is a big problem in many other countries.
If a significant percentage of people chose not to get vaccinated, then it will be very difficult to reach herd immunity without vaccinating under 18/16s.
And I think EMA approval for U18/U16s with Pfizer is at least 5-8 months away.

Support for such vaccine passports is at about 65% in Germany and lower in other countries, so even that measure is likely to have problems.

sydthebeat

Nozebleed wrote: »

but there is no conspiracy theory here..vaccinate the eldery and vulnerable if they want to be vaccinated. for all other citizens it should be by choice without consequence to their living standards or rights. there's absolutely no reason to make it mandatory seeing as 99% of people dont and wont suffer any serious effects from C-19.

any attempt to bring in a mandatory vaccine passport will create serious division among society..

im referring to those posters who are saying people will "never be allowed to travel again", and that some people will be "locked up forever"

those posts are still here and posted today... so yes, conspiracy theory nuts

olestoepoke

sydthebeat wrote: »

its the biggest indictment of this and previous governments that we do not have a health service like Sweden's and our ability to cope with this in our health infrastructure was pathetic

heads should roll after all this is done, and we should never accept a mess like the HSE has created again

Yes I agree, and although the current government will never admit it, I'd wager that the reason that we have the longest most restrictive lockdown in Europe and the 4th longest in the world even though we are an island nation with a tiny population in comparison is directly linked to our failing healthcare system. Maybe the government implemented these draconian lockdowns because they were afraid the virus would expose years of neglect and mismanagement in healthcare.

josip

timmyntc wrote: »

Half of the posts in this thread are yours - sounds like conspiracy theory nuts live rent free in your head.

Anyways, its not a good look for personal freedoms in this country when you will be excluded from society based on vaccination status.
If they bring this in before vaccination roll out is complete - discriminatory against younger people who wont have gotten a chance to get vaccinated.
If they bring it in after all have been vaccinated - whats the point?

For me, the intention of the passport is for a part of the Covid timeframe that you've missed in your above scenarios.
It's for when everyone has been offered a vaccine but an insufficient number have taken it up to reach herd immunity.
There isn't any discrimination and it is still needed in order to incentivise the vaccine-reluctant.

is_that_so

olestoepoke wrote: »

Yes I agree, and although the current government will never admit it, I'd wager that the reason that we have the longest most restrictive lockdown in Europe and the 4th longest in the world even though we are an island nation with a tiny population in comparison is directly linked to our failing healthcare system. Maybe the government implemented these draconian lockdowns because they were afraid the virus would expose years of neglect and mismanagement in healthcare.

Any yet none of this encouraged people to spend time with many others, thus spreading the virus.

olestoepoke

sydthebeat wrote: »

there is no downside because if you choose not to get vaccinated then the advantage do not apply to you.

how do you find it difficult to understand that if you do not take part, then you cannot suffer a downside ?

in order for there to be a "downside" there MUST be an upside... they go hand in hand.

people who choose not to take part, and therefore cannot get any "upside" then automatically, by definition, cannot suffer a downside.... jesus this stuff is not difficult.

So a person who chooses not to get vaccinated, is unable to take part in certain activities or possibly go on their yearly family holiday abroad because they are not vaccinated and thats not a downside? Is that difficult for you to understand?

is_that_so

josip wrote: »

For me, the intention of the passport is for a part of the Covid timeframe that you've missed in your above scenarios.
It's for when everyone has been offered a vaccine but an insufficient number have taken it up to reach herd immunity.
There isn't any discrimination and it is still needed in order to incentivise the vaccine-reluctant.

Incentivize here meaning force? They are more likely to be in court challenging it all.

Nozebleed

josip wrote: »

For me, the intention of the passport is for a part of the Covid timeframe that you've missed in your above scenarios.
It's for when everyone has been offered a vaccine but an insufficient number have taken it up to reach herd immunity.
There isn't any discrimination and it is still needed in order to incentivise the vaccine-reluctant.

to be honest if your trying to suggest the HSE and GOV had somesort of coherant timeline for its response to Covid..you're wrong.

if you think discrimination against certain groups of society is going to improve the uptake of any vaccine you're completely delusional.

Vaccine Passports are a non runner...people should really take a step back and talk to each other about the consequences down the line.

josip

josip wrote: »

For me, the intention of the passport is for a part of the Covid timeframe that you've missed in your above scenarios.
It's for when everyone has been offered a vaccine but an insufficient number have taken it up to reach herd immunity.
There isn't any discrimination and it is still needed in order to incentivise the vaccine-reluctant.

What would incentivise people more, I think, is if getting vaccinated meant no longer having to wear in masks in shops or on public transport.

I actually think this will put people off getting vaccinated.