Should Pattaya Embrace Segregation?

[Tanomazu]

1 hour ago, johnnybangkok said:

Wow, where to start.

 

Firstly, no one is talking about forcing vacinations on anyone. Please do not try and put words into my mouth. If someone is stupid enough to risk Covid over the miniscule chance of the side-effects of a vaccine (the only reason I hear coming from anti-vaxxers) then have at it. Just don't expect the rest of us to be happy about the cosequences of your decision and be sympathetic when you start to get ostracised. The good of the many absolutely should take precedence over the few when you are talking about big stuff like a worldwide pandemic that has so far cost 4.5 million lives, crippled economies, destroyed businesses and evicted people from their homes. The only way we ALL get out of this mess is when herd immunity is reached (75-85%) and that of course is nigh on impossible when so many are buying into every conspracy theory going or are just simply too selfish to understand that to be a part of a civilised society, you have to occassionally sacrifice for the common good. But yeah, keep banging on about your 'fundamental rights', the slight on your personal freedoms or the supposed erosion on your civil liberties. Whilst you're screeming 'where's my unvaccinated rights' from the comfort of the upper deck, the rest of us are desperately trying to right the sinking ship and get it back on course. 

   

Secondly, you state with far too much confidence and very little reasoning; 'the argument that health services will be overwhelmed has proved to be false one on the whole'. This is completely spurios and demostratably false as the ONLY reason health services have not been overwhelmed is down to the lockdown measures taken. If you remember, the UK started on a misguided and ill thought out 'herd immunity' path until extrapolated numbers clearly showed the expected number of deaths (huge) and the quick overwhelming of the NHS. A quick u-turn, lockdowns, work from home and other measures reversed the trend but there were still times when the strain really showed. It still is showing in many other countries like Brazil, India and even in some US states. People like yourself back up your arguments with a 'it wasn't that bad after all' type argument, whilst conveniently ignoring the reasons WHY it wasn't that bad. We have well informed experts and scientific professionals to thank for that, but of course they are now being ignored and down right villified when it comes to vaccines.

 

And finally can we give the false equivalencies a rest please? If you're going to debate a topic in a civilised manner please at least try and and do so without bringing up frankly absurd comparisons that only work on the feeble-minded and easily led.  Nazis killing disabled people! Disabled and infertile not being part of society? It's ridiculous histronics like this that lower the prospect of any sensible debate and do little for your credibility. 

Whether you're happy with anyone's decision is really irrelevant. You are creating red-herring arguments devoid of any substance.

 

I never implied you were trying to get everyone vaccinated. If you had the ability to read posts in a nuanced manner you would realise that in fact I was illustrating that there are limits to what states can do, not you obviously since I'm well aware you can do nothing. The point was, and I will try to clearly illustrate it since you have spectacularly missed it:

 

1)  Health is a private matter in law. The state can not force everyone to be vaccinated. So whether you like it or not there will be millions of people who will not get vaccinated.

 

2) Your ostracisation fantasies notwithstanding if you live in a civilized state with the rule of law, those who are not vaccinated can not and will not be treated differently, except in extremely limited circumstances for extremely limited periods of time. Because they pay taxes like everyone else. So they and their children will have access to schools, cultural institutions, hospitals, all the places they help finance. The state could only treat those who are not vaccinated differently for a very limited period of time, the time that a discriminatory measure would be justified. However, such a measure would have to have benefits that would justify the discrimination, it would have to be proportionate to the risk and furthermore there has to be a concrete and specific reason for the discriminatory measure. I would not get my hopes up for your Vaccination Apartheid land if I were you.

 

As was pointed out 51% of the vaccinated got infected with the Delta variant in one study. So the scientific basis for any discriminatory measures against unvaccinated is not really established.

 

You're trying to "right the sinking ship and get it back on course"? I think you suffer from some Napoleon complex or such, but if you were doing that, which you aren't obviously, you're certainly doing a terrible a job.

 

We all know that the hysteric doomsday scenarios painted by some "experts" have not come to pass. What's more those experts never saw this crisis coming and did not prepare us for it. Besides, you put 10 of those experts in one room and you get 11 opinions.

 

Your belief in lockdowns being the cause of why the many overblown doomsday scenarios did not come to pass is an example in point, there are completely differing opinions by the "experts" as to the effectiveness of lockdowns. What is clear is that in the real world we have Sweden, which has had no hard lockdown yet now has close to 0 deaths from Covid per day.

 

You're the one who had brought up the histrionic argument that the benefit of the many automatically takes precedence over the rights of the few. That argument was put forth by the Nazis to justify Eugenics, killing the disabled etc, however, this is not the case in democratic nations with the rule of law. Just because it is your belief that the unvaccinated are a "detriment" to society does not mean that their legal rights are automatically overruled. Maybe in your ostracisation fantasy you would like that to happen, but I am afraid in the real world you'll just have to live with unvaccinated people.

[pookondee]

8 hours ago, Fairynuff said:

Actually it’s not. The fact is that vaccinated people are less likely to pass on the virus and less likely suffer severe illness. 

Actually there are recent studies that show infected vaccinated people can also carry high viral loads, so they can definately pass it on.

 

But in general i agree with your statement.

Of course the argument still stands that an unvaccinated person is more likely to be infected with a big viral load,

and then pass it on to a vaccinated person..

who could then suffer worse symptoms due to the strain or bigger viral load.

 

Any way you look at it, its very hard to argue that the unvaccinated aren't doing anyone any harm.

They are not only a risk to themselves, but are prolonging the time we all have to suffer these restrictions our governments are forcing on us.

 

 

[ukrules]

6 hours ago, robblok said:

So to lessen that as people who are unvaccinated should not be in crowds.

Nobody should be in crowds while COVID is spreading widely. Vaccinated or not.

 

 

[jak2002003]

1 hour ago, Fairynuff said:

Where’ve you been that you’ve missed the most basic of information that’s been around for so many months? And then you ask someone else for a link ????. And then just to dig yourself in deeper.... classic deflection. I think you ought to move on before it gets any worse for you.

Still no link then? ...........

[jak2002003]

9 hours ago, robblok said:

Yes they can spread it but not as much as those who are not vaccinated and also vaccinated have a lower chance to get sick.

 

So if you let unvaccinated people get together in large groups they will infect more and put a larger strain on the health system.

 

That means that many people can't get the care they need and operations need to be postponed.

 

But then again anti vaxers just want not to be vaxed and have the same rights. Thankfully in most European countries we segregate already. 

 

So if you dont want to be vaccinated your choice but accept you will be limited. Each and every choice in life has pro's and con's anti vaxers just to have it their way. 

You are misinformed. 

 

"We find no difference in viral loads when comparing unvaccinated individuals to those who have vaccine "breakthrough" infections. Furthermore, individuals with vaccine breakthrough infections frequently test positive with viral loads consistent with the ability to shed infectious viruses. Our results, while preliminary, suggest that if vaccinated individuals become infected with the delta variant, they may be sources of SARS CoV-2 transmission to others."

 

 

[Fairynuff]

42 minutes ago, jak2002003 said:

Still no link then? ...........

At least you got that right.

[smedly]

way too many experts on this thread making statements they know nothing about 

 

data is still being researched by actual experts in order to answer all these questions - maybe they should just contact some of the posters on here and save a lot of time lol

[thaibeachlovers]

On 9/3/2021 at 10:40 PM, GrandPapillon said:

well, you know what to do next, vote your leaders out on the next election for being such cowards and petty paranoid authoritarians

Except enough people believe that such measures saved them from death and will probably re elect them.

I don't, but I'm in a minority.

[thaibeachlovers]

8 hours ago, Fairynuff said:

Oh for goodness sake! This has been reported a million times in a million places and you’re asking for a link????????????

Sooooo, no link then?

[thaibeachlovers]

I've read a lot of the posts and few even mention Pattaya or the OP.

 

Given the thread is about Pattaya, it's silly to say that Pattaya should introduce segregation as people will just get fake certificates and carry on regardless. That'll probably happen in other countries that try segregation as well.

[Lucky Bones]

Just as I expected, the usuals came out in force.

This thread was supposed to be about segregation in Pattaya.

Can we please get back on track?

The question is basically;

Do we need a 2 tiered system vacccinated in Pattaya to allow us to walk the sois?

 

 

[Lucky Bones]

Hi thaibeachlovers.

Fair call. Good to see you understand my question.

So many others seem to bang the keyboard prior to engaging brain.

[barmatt]

The WA hospital system is broken and <deleted> it couldn't even deal with medical emergencies pre-Covid let alone the added burden of Covid now. The Premier is sitting on a war chest of money but doesn't spend it where its needed.

[jacko45k]

9 hours ago, LongTimeLurker said:

But not all unvaccinated people have Covid.

Nor do vaccinated people, Sorry do not get your point. 

[Lucky Bones]

Hi Redwood1,

Yup, I got your first comment and let the keyboard ramblers roll.

I pretty much reckon your comment succinctly summed it up.

1=2=3.     ☆Simples.

 

 

[Lucky Bones]

Math and media hysteria have no relationship.

[KhaoYai]

22 hours ago, Fairynuff said:

At this stage those who are unvaxed have mostly chosen to be. IMO that makes them a threat to themselves and everyone else. (I’m obviously not referring to countries with little access to vaccines)

Indeed! I remember some comment or other that likened those who refuse the vaccine to drink drivers - a good analogy in my opinion.  I don't see the problem, its just a bloody vaccine for christ's sake - had mine months ago, took up all of 2 hours of my time.

 

I defend the rights of the individual to a point but not when their actions can have a devastating effect on others - which is precisely why its against the law to drink and drive. Just get vaccinated.

[Walker88]

2 hours ago, Lucky Bones said:

Just as I expected, the usuals came out in force.

This thread was supposed to be about segregation in Pattaya.

Can we please get back on track?

The question is basically;

Do we need a 2 tiered system vacccinated in Pattaya to allow us to walk the sois?

 

 

The people to ask are the Thais. Expats may have a view on whether or not 'medical apartheid' (as many are calling it) is wise or fair or whatever, but my own admittedly anecdotal evidence is that it will be the Thais who don't want any un-vaxxed folks anywhere near them.

 

 

[KhaoYai]

10 hours ago, Tanomazu said:

1)  Health is a private matter in law. The state can not force everyone to be vaccinated. So whether you like it or not there will be millions of people who will not get vaccinated.

So you're talking about individual rights. What about the individual's rights not to be put at risk?  I don't think people should be forced to be vaccinated but I do think those who refuse must suffer the consequences of their decisions. 

 

Segregation in some form is just about inevitable before long.  The argument put forward by some airlines is a good example of why - they are concerned for the welfare of their staff and the very real possibility of being sued by passengers who catch the virus whilst on their flights. I watched a TV programme a couple of months back which explained that provided you know the identity of all those you've been in contact with its fairly easy, through sequencing, to locate exactly who passed an infection on to you.  An airline takes responsibility for your safety the moment you set foot in their aircraft so them being sued is a very real possibility.

 

Another side of the same coin is in relation to employers - many employers in the UK are worried that they could be sued by their employees in the same way as the airlines.  Both groups are also concerned about the effect that allowing unvaccinated people the same freedoms as the vaccinated could have on their business.

 

Most countries are yet to complete their vaccine programmes but I think that as they start to do so, segregation will start to become common place in many walks of life.  Its already very likely that in the near future, unvaccinated people will not be allowed in to UK night clubs.

 

Its also important to note that medical segregation already exists. Take Yellow Fever for example - people from high risk countries are not allowed to enter some countries unless they've been vaccinated.

 

If people don't want to be vaccinated, that's their choice but they shouldn't complain when they find that their other choices become increasingly limited.

Edited September 5, 2021 by KhaoYai

[James105]

44 minutes ago, KhaoYai said:

So you're talking about individual rights. What about the individual's rights not to be put at risk?  I don't think people should be forced to be vaccinated but I do think those who refuse must suffer the consequences of their decisions. 

 

Segregation in some form is just about inevitable before long.  The argument put forward by some airlines is a good example of why - they are concerned for the welfare of their staff and the very real possibility of being sued by passengers who catch the virus whilst on their flights. I watched a TV programme a couple of months back which explained that provided you know the identity of all those you've been in contact with its fairly easy, through sequencing, to locate exactly who passed an infection on to you.  An airline takes responsibility for your safety the moment you set foot in their aircraft so them being sued is a very real possibility.

 

Another side of the same coin is in relation to employers - many employers in the UK are worried that they could be sued by their employees in the same way as the airlines.  Both groups are also concerned about the effect that allowing unvaccinated people the same freedoms as the vaccinated could have on their business.

 

Most countries are yet to complete their vaccine programmes but I think that as they start to do so, segregation will start to become common place in many walks of life.  Its already very likely that in the near future, unvaccinated people will not be allowed in to UK night clubs.

 

Its also important to note that medical segregation already exists. Take Yellow Fever for example - people from high risk countries are not allowed to enter some countries unless they've been vaccinated.

 

If people don't want to be vaccinated, that's their choice but they shouldn't complain when they find that their other choices become increasingly limited.

Isreal adopted vaccine passports.   How's that working out for them?   People who had 2 jabs are now the "unvaccinated" and only those who have had 3 jabs will be considered vaccinated.    Can you guess what happens next?

 

Natural immunity offers a higher level of protection than the jabs anyway and the vaccines do not prevent catching or transmitting it, so that makes the whole argument about suing people/companies a bit irrelevant.   

 

https://www.timesofisrael.com/study-covid-recovery-gave-israelis-longer-lasting-delta-defense-than-vaccines/

 

Those who want vaccine passports should just be honest and state why they really want it because it's not about health, nor is it about science.   This whole covid saga has given wannabe authoritarians an excuse to express their fantasies and it is becoming increasingly unpleasant.    

[Lucky Bones]

Walker88.

Sadly I agree. A mate of mine in Aus is still paying money to his Thai honey. His Aus wife either knows nothing or stays shtrum. And he tells me Thais are stupid.

I say Thais are not stupid. Uneducated, possibly yes, but not stupid.

We are what we are.

The elders in my village are now <deleted> scared of me as a farang with a possible virus.

Time for me to move.

 

Cheers

 

 

 

 

 

[bobbin]

19 hours ago, Tanomazu said:

This is wrong for many reasons.

 

1. Health is private matter in law. It is your body and your right alone to deal with health matters that affect your body. The right to abortion for women is an example. Many countries have it written into law that health is a private matter. If you start to move away from that and declare health of an individual is now a public matter then things like smoking, eating too many calories, BDSM where people agree to be injured, high risk sports, all these things could and should become illegal, because according to your logic, they can increase the cost on the health system. The net result would be greatly reduced freedom for all.

 

2. The state is only allowed to treat unvaccinated differently if there is a concrete and specific reason for this. Moreover essential services, like education, that are funded by the taxes of all, have to be available to all, the same with cultural institutions provided by tax funding.

 

In other words any state measures that would treat the unvaccinated differently would have to be urgently necessary and proportionate. Is the benefit of those measures so large that it justifies the limitation of freedom.

 

The science at this point is still unclear and changing. If you look at recent studies these show that double vaccination has led those vaccinated to be 49% less likely to be infected with the Delta variant. So 51% of the vaccinated still got infected with the Delta variant.

 

"One in 26. That’s the chance of being infected with the delta variant of Covid-19 if you’re in contact with an infected individual and fully vaccinated, the researchers found. This is compared to a one in 13 chance for the unvaccinated."

 

https://www.forbes.com/sites/roberthart/2021/08/04/fully-vaccinated-half-as-likely-to-catch-delta-covid-variant-and-less-likely-to-infect-others-study-finds/?sh=3e551c18281c

 

It is hard to construe an urgent, pressing and necessary measure based on such numbers.

 

Whilst it is true that the vaccinated present less of a burden to the health system, in many countries the burden of Covid patients is surprisingly small, the numbers of severe cases being treated so small that a large number of intensive care beds remain available.

 

Nevertheless, based on the existing figures it would be ludicrous to ask the unvaccinated to be asked to pay for their treatment, just as we don't ask smokers, Sado-maso practitioners, Judo, Karate, Muay Thai, Footballers, or other practitioners of sport where injuries are more likely, or those who consume large amounts of calories, to pay for their treatment. If anyone were to go down that route, it would dramatically decrease freedom for all. Everyone would have to pay who does anything risky.

 

 

A well-reasoned argument in favor of a position I do not support..

 

Public health vs. individual health.. This pandemic is unprecedented in the lifetime of everyone alive today. Hugely disruptive and costly. Unprecedented measures to control it are justified. I have zero problem with watching adamant anti-vaxxers being forced into a more and more restricted lifestyle due to their choice. Restricted jobs, travel, access to food establishments, large public gatherings, etc. Choices have consequences.

 

But, as Tanomazu points out, the idea of requiring the (deliberately) unvaccinated to pay for medical care is a ridiculous step too far. For the reasons he elaborated. The slope is too slippery.

[Fairynuff]

5 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Sooooo, no link then?

No fingers or keyboard then?

[redwood1]

13 minutes ago, bobbin said:

A well-reasoned argument in favor of a position I do not support..

 

Public health vs. individual health.. This pandemic is unprecedented in the lifetime of everyone alive today. Hugely disruptive and costly. Unprecedented measures to control it are justified. I have zero problem with watching adamant anti-vaxxers being forced into a more and more restricted lifestyle due to their choice. Restricted jobs, travel, access to food establishments, large public gatherings, etc. Choices have consequences.

 

But, as Tanomazu points out, the idea of requiring the (deliberately) unvaccinated to pay for medical care is a ridiculous step too far. For the reasons he elaborated. The slope is too slippery.

It seems some vaxers have acquired a peculiar zeal to want to force a vax on everyone, even though they admit the vaxes only offer limited protection, and it looks like many boosters will be on the way which will also only offer limited protection....

That there might be someone , for whatever personal reason, who does not want to participate in this whole ongoing medical procedure, just seems to make them angry...  

[hotandsticky]

5 minutes ago, redwood1 said:

It seems some vaxers have acquired a peculiar zeal to want to force a vax on everyone, even though they admit the vaxes only offer limited protection, and it looks like many boosters will be on the way which will also only offer limited protection....

That there might be someone , for whatever personal reason, who does not want to participate in this whole ongoing medical procedure, just seems to make them angry...  

 

 

They are OK, no vaxxer has ever forced any opinion on me.

 

 

Anti-vaxxers............................... well, those mugs are a different kettle of fish. Those clowns have helped convince a 78 year old, frail friend that the vaccine is more dangerous than Covid - someone told him that with his underlying heart and stroke issues he should not have the vaccine.

 

If he gets Covid it is very likely that he will die.

Edited September 5, 2021 by hotandsticky

[canthai55]

On 9/3/2021 at 5:27 PM, Guderian said:

Like every decison that's been made during this pandemic, we won't have a say in it, so probably best to just go accept that it is what it is and go with the flow.

That is NEVER a good idea

[bobbin]

1 hour ago, redwood1 said:

It seems some vaxers have acquired a peculiar zeal to want to force a vax on everyone, even though they admit the vaxes only offer limited protection, and it looks like many boosters will be on the way which will also only offer limited protection....

That there might be someone , for whatever personal reason, who does not want to participate in this whole ongoing medical procedure, just seems to make them angry...  

This is an example of a "not" well reasoned argument..

 

Essentially it says that anti-vaxxers should be able to choose to participate in a public health measure..

 

You had better buckle your seat belt.. it's going to be a bumpy ride for you. Choices have consequences.

[James105]

4 minutes ago, bobbin said:

This is an example of a "not" well reasoned argument..

 

Essentially it says that anti-vaxxers should be able to choose to participate in a public health measure..

 

You had better buckle your seat belt.. it's going to be a bumpy ride for you. Choices have consequences.

Do you realise that the majority of people who are arguing against these types of measures are those that have already been vaccinated and just see any medical procedure as a personal choice that has the square root of nothing to do with anyone else apart from their physician?    Coercion is counter productive and will result in less people being persuaded to get jabbed overall.   But then I tend to think that the people demanding this would be happy with that as it gives them an opportunity to "other" people and actively want to see a 2 tier society where for the first time in their lives they would be in the "superior" part of it.   

[redwood1]

9 minutes ago, bobbin said:

This is an example of a "not" well reasoned argument..

 

Essentially it says that anti-vaxxers should be able to choose to participate in a public health measure..

 

You had better buckle your seat belt.. it's going to be a bumpy ride for you. Choices have consequences.

Who said I was talking about me?...I think vaxes are a good idea....I was thinking of others, everyone has a different situation,I am sure you agree...

[johnnybangkok]

13 hours ago, Tanomazu said:

Whether you're happy with anyone's decision is really irrelevant. You are creating red-herring arguments devoid of any substance.

 

I never implied you were trying to get everyone vaccinated. If you had the ability to read posts in a nuanced manner you would realise that in fact I was illustrating that there are limits to what states can do, not you obviously since I'm well aware you can do nothing. The point was, and I will try to clearly illustrate it since you have spectacularly missed it:

 

1)  Health is a private matter in law. The state can not force everyone to be vaccinated. So whether you like it or not there will be millions of people who will not get vaccinated.

 

2) Your ostracisation fantasies notwithstanding if you live in a civilized state with the rule of law, those who are not vaccinated can not and will not be treated differently, except in extremely limited circumstances for extremely limited periods of time. Because they pay taxes like everyone else. So they and their children will have access to schools, cultural institutions, hospitals, all the places they help finance. The state could only treat those who are not vaccinated differently for a very limited period of time, the time that a discriminatory measure would be justified. However, such a measure would have to have benefits that would justify the discrimination, it would have to be proportionate to the risk and furthermore there has to be a concrete and specific reason for the discriminatory measure. I would not get my hopes up for your Vaccination Apartheid land if I were you.

 

As was pointed out 51% of the vaccinated got infected with the Delta variant in one study. So the scientific basis for any discriminatory measures against unvaccinated is not really established.

 

You're trying to "right the sinking ship and get it back on course"? I think you suffer from some Napoleon complex or such, but if you were doing that, which you aren't obviously, you're certainly doing a terrible a job.

 

We all know that the hysteric doomsday scenarios painted by some "experts" have not come to pass. What's more those experts never saw this crisis coming and did not prepare us for it. Besides, you put 10 of those experts in one room and you get 11 opinions.

 

Your belief in lockdowns being the cause of why the many overblown doomsday scenarios did not come to pass is an example in point, there are completely differing opinions by the "experts" as to the effectiveness of lockdowns. What is clear is that in the real world we have Sweden, which has had no hard lockdown yet now has close to 0 deaths from Covid per day.

 

You're the one who had brought up the histrionic argument that the benefit of the many automatically takes precedence over the rights of the few. That argument was put forth by the Nazis to justify Eugenics, killing the disabled etc, however, this is not the case in democratic nations with the rule of law. Just because it is your belief that the unvaccinated are a "detriment" to society does not mean that their legal rights are automatically overruled. Maybe in your ostracisation fantasy you would like that to happen, but I am afraid in the real world you'll just have to live with unvaccinated people.

You clearly stated in your last reply to me 'Even though, according to you, such forced vaccination for everyone would be for the common good.'  If that's not impling I am trying to get everyone vaccinated then I don't know what is.
 

The rest of your post is the same regurgitated nonsense you have posted in your previous 3 posts so I will not bother addressing them again. I'm not a fan of banging my head against a brick wall, so let's pick up on your other little gems.

 

We ALL know states don't currently force people to get vaccinated , however ALL states do posses emergency powers such as the UK which can:-

• making regulations without an act of parliament
• taking actions without complying with statutory duties that it would normally have to comply with
• taking actions that it would not normally be allowed to take.

https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/explainers/emergency-powers

 

And I quote 'Emergency powers allow the government to introduce measures that may affect fundamental rights, such as the right to liberty. These measures can only be introduced in exceptional circumstances and should be temporary in nature'.

 

Your assertion therefore that 'The state can not force everyone to be vaccinated' is in fact wrong. If (and it's a VERY big if) they deemed that anyone not vaccinated posed a “significant harm to human health.”  then they absolutely could force people to take the vaccine (a bit much) or more likely, quarantine them from the rest of the population. Both options are highly unlikely and would probably cause complete uproar but the powers are there if needed.

 

Another classic of yours is 'We all know that the hysteric doomsday scenarios painted by some "experts" have not come to pass'. Again, the ONLY reason these 'doomsday scenarios' didn't come to pass was through lockdowns and sacrifice. There are many studies out there showing how many people could have died without these actions with many predicting Spanish Flu proportions of deaths:-   https://www.imperial.ac.uk/news/196496/coronavirus-pandemic-could-have-caused-40/ 

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-00966-w

 

For you to minimise the seriosness of this pandemic and call those same experts who saved us all from a horrendous eventuality by calling them 'hysterical' shows us all where you are coming from and what your agenda really is. This is of course then further backed up with the classic Covid sceptics rallying call of 'but what about Sweden'. A sure sign of the Covid/vaccine sceptic if ever there was.

 

And since you decided to make this personal with my ' Napoleon complex' and 'doing a terrible a job' then lets do just that. 

 

I have run a very successful business in Thailand employing 56 people in 2019. The pandemic has seen me cut that number to it's current 19. More than half my staff have gone and I've suffered significent loss both financially and personally having lost a very close friend to Covid. To then hear anti-vaxxers going on about 'my rights' and 'what about me' when the solution to get us all out of this crisis has already been found does not sit well with me. What about my employees rights to gainful employment? What about everyone's right to go out at night without a curfew or gather for a wedding or a birthday party? How about everyone's right to just get back to some semblance of normality? The way out of all this is there and staring us in the face but either the uneducated or the selfish or just the ones who believe in every conspiracy theory going are stopping this and dragging this all out for months longer than necessery. Well I for one have had enough. Either get the vaccine or stay indoors away from the rest of us. The grown ups want to get back to normal and as they say, if you're not part of the solution then you're part of the problem so pick the right side or get out of the way.