UK data showing vaccinated all ages more prone to get Covid

Covid related topics that are connected to travel or the aviation industry.
photofly
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 11306
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2011 4:47 pm
Location: Hangry and crankypated

Re: UK data showing vaccinated all ages more prone to get Covid

Post by photofly »

WellThatAgedWell wrote: Thu Jan 27, 2022 12:13 pm We have many policy missteps that were blatantly wrong and none of the politicians want to stand up and say "maybe we were wrong about this".
Two observations about this valid point. Firstly, it's universally true in all political fields. Secondly, people will indicate uncertainty or error in a blame-free environment. There is no incentive to do so in Canadian politics as it is currently constituted, especially not over issues concerning COVID (as you can tell from the tone of argument even in this forum). The ballot box is the usual solution.
Who is accountable to this?
Essentially, you are, as part of the electorate who voted the administration into power. Remember, you choose politicians whose judgement you trust, to make decisions on your behalf. If they make decisions you later feel are wrong, the fault is actually (collectively) yours.
---------- ADS -----------
 
DId you hear the one about the jurisprudence fetishist? He got off on a technicality.
CpnCrunch
Rank 11
Rank 11
Posts: 4011
Joined: Mon Feb 08, 2010 9:38 am

Re: UK data showing vaccinated all ages more prone to get Covid

Post by CpnCrunch »

Impact wrote: Thu Jan 27, 2022 11:54 am
And I take the stance that if you don't want to get infected (by whatever risk/reward matix you choose to use), then don't go on a cruise ship.

ie: Take some personal responsibility for your life or well being.

Agree to disagree?
That's not how infections work. There is an incubation period, so you could be perfectly fine when boarding the ship, then infect the entire ship.
---------- ADS -----------
 
photofly
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 11306
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2011 4:47 pm
Location: Hangry and crankypated

Re: UK data showing vaccinated all ages more prone to get Covid

Post by photofly »

CpnCrunch wrote: Thu Jan 27, 2022 12:36 pm
Impact wrote: Thu Jan 27, 2022 11:54 am
And I take the stance that if you don't want to get infected (by whatever risk/reward matix you choose to use), then don't go on a cruise ship.

ie: Take some personal responsibility for your life or well being.

Agree to disagree?
That's not how infections work. There is an incubation period, so you could be perfectly fine when boarding the ship, then infect the entire ship.
I think his point was that by boarding you accept the risk that someone else will infect you. If you don't want to risk it, don't cruise. If you infect the entire ship, you're in the clear and it's everyone else's lookout - they all accepted the risk that might happen.
---------- ADS -----------
 
DId you hear the one about the jurisprudence fetishist? He got off on a technicality.
WellThatAgedWell
Rank 6
Rank 6
Posts: 467
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2022 7:38 am

Re: UK data showing vaccinated all ages more prone to get Covid

Post by WellThatAgedWell »

photofly wrote: Thu Jan 27, 2022 12:23 pm
WellThatAgedWell wrote: Thu Jan 27, 2022 12:13 pm Who is accountable to this?
Essentially, you are, as part of the electorate who voted the administration into power. Remember, you choose politicians whose judgement you trust, to make decisions on your behalf. If they make decisions you later feel are wrong, the fault is actually (collectively) yours.
Well I didn't vote Trudeau, I didn't vote for Ford, I didn't vote for the science table, Tam, Williams, Doom villa, and Dr whatever the @#$! the rest of your names are.

So just picture me here wiping the dust of my hands saying it not my fault we got here :lol: But that's not helpful. Sadly I don't think policy would have been much different with anyone else in power. Like who would do better? do we want NeverDoPolitics Andrea to show us how to Sextuple down on covid policy in 2025 :lol:
---------- ADS -----------
 
Two years of posts that aged like a fine cheddar.
Bingo Fuel
Rank 5
Rank 5
Posts: 316
Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2021 5:51 am

Re: UK data showing vaccinated all ages more prone to get Covid

Post by Bingo Fuel »

photofly wrote: Thu Jan 27, 2022 12:23 pm Essentially, you are, as part of the electorate who voted the administration into power. Remember, you choose politicians whose judgement you trust, to make decisions on your behalf. If they make decisions you later feel are wrong, the fault is actually (collectively) yours.
100% this. We just held an election. Canadians voted for a Liberal minority government.

Aside from holding another election, any effort to remove that elected government is undemocratic.

I may not agree with the Liberals, or most of the provincial governments, but I absolutely will not abide anyone trying to undermine the democratic will of the electorate.
---------- ADS -----------
 
"Never wrestle with pigs. You both get dirty and the pig likes it." - George Bernard Shaw
Bingo Fuel
Rank 5
Rank 5
Posts: 316
Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2021 5:51 am

Re: UK data showing vaccinated all ages more prone to get Covid

Post by Bingo Fuel »

WellThatAgedWell wrote: Thu Jan 27, 2022 12:47 pm Like who would do better? do we want NeverDoPolitics Andrea to show us how to Sextuple down on covid policy in 2025 :lol:
Better than Ford or Del Duca, IMHO. But I imagine you're more the Derek Sloan type.
---------- ADS -----------
 
"Never wrestle with pigs. You both get dirty and the pig likes it." - George Bernard Shaw
photofly
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 11306
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2011 4:47 pm
Location: Hangry and crankypated

Re: UK data showing vaccinated all ages more prone to get Covid

Post by photofly »

WellThatAgedWell wrote: Thu Jan 27, 2022 12:47 pm
Well I didn't vote Trudeau, I didn't vote for Ford, I didn't vote for the science table, Tam, Williams, Doom villa, and Dr whatever the @#$! the rest of your names are.

So just picture me here wiping the dust of my hands saying it not my fault we got here :lol: But that's not helpful. Sadly I don't think policy would have been much different with anyone else in power. Like who would do better? do we want NeverDoPolitics Andrea to show us how to Sextuple down on covid policy in 2025 :lol:
Unfortunately, the government that the electorate chooses, governs for the entire electorate. You can't opt-out of responsibility because your choice wasn't the most popular. If it helps you feel better about it, you had the choice to campaign (or campaign harder) for your choice of candidate. Not doing so is a choice, too. Whether your choice was the most popular or not, it's still "your" fault.
---------- ADS -----------
 
DId you hear the one about the jurisprudence fetishist? He got off on a technicality.
altiplano
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 5377
Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2005 2:24 pm

Re: UK data showing vaccinated all ages more prone to get Covid

Post by altiplano »

photofly wrote: Thu Jan 27, 2022 8:30 am
altiplano wrote: Wed Jan 26, 2022 3:18 pm A good starting point for Canadian values is in the Charter, and they've been trampled by the provinces and feds.
The document to which you're referring is The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. It doesn't mention the word "values" once. So it's not clear to me how one gets from the Charter to a common set of Canadian "values".

Can you elaborate on the link you see between the contents of the Charter, what you call the trampling of the Charter by the provinces and feds, what you consider to be Canadian values, and the alleged betrayal of those Canadian values you referred to?
I think the rights and freedoms on the Charter are absolutely something Canadians respect as values in our broader society, they certainly guide us. Fundamental freedoms, democracy, mobility, equality, fair treatment. We respect each other enough and believe these things are of significance. As I said, only a starting point, not exclusive.

Do you disagree? Or are you just getting overly semantic again? If you want to disagree of these can be considered values we hold, and respect, then whatever you want to call them, either way... they are important and getting walked all over.
---------- ADS -----------
 
photofly
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 11306
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2011 4:47 pm
Location: Hangry and crankypated

Re: UK data showing vaccinated all ages more prone to get Covid

Post by photofly »

I can think of all sorts of "Canadian" values, that different people might claim, some of which don't sit easily together: care for others, politeness, individuality, abiding by the law, freedom of expression, community spirit, entrepreneurship, social responsibility, "we're all in it together", "the government doesn't tell me what to do", socialized medicine, my-body-is-my-own. Different people can claim all these as "Canadian". When I asked which values that are Canadian are the specific ones you believe have been "betrayed" -- that was the word you used - you vaguely waved me towards the Charter, which doesn't really answer the question.
I think the rights and freedoms on the Charter are absolutely something Canadians respect as values in our broader society, they certainly guide us. Fundamental freedoms, democracy, mobility, equality, fair treatment. We respect each other enough and believe these things are of significance. As I said, only a starting point, not exclusive.
That's true. But remember the first clause of the Charter:
The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees the rights and freedoms set out in it subject only to such reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society.
So a very very very very Canadian value - it comes before anything else in the charter - is that reasonable restrictions on rights are to be expected. GIven its paramount position in the text, you could argue that's the most Canadian value of them all.

I understand you don't, or may not, think any limits to the freedoms set out in the charter due to COVID restrictions would be "reasonable", but you will at least agree I hope that many people think they are reasonable, and that fact alone should show you that language like "betrayed" might not be fair.
---------- ADS -----------
 
DId you hear the one about the jurisprudence fetishist? He got off on a technicality.
Vaticinator
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 222
Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2021 11:29 am

Re: UK data showing vaccinated all ages more prone to get Covid

Post by Vaticinator »

photofly wrote: Thu Jan 27, 2022 7:00 pm So a very very very very Canadian value - it comes before anything else in the charter - is that reasonable restrictions on rights are to be expected.
Who is the arbiter of what is reasonable? Justin? Teresa Tam? Doug Ford? Bonnie Henry?
---------- ADS -----------
 
photofly
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 11306
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2011 4:47 pm
Location: Hangry and crankypated

Re: UK data showing vaccinated all ages more prone to get Covid

Post by photofly »

Vaticinator wrote: Thu Jan 27, 2022 8:48 pm
photofly wrote: Thu Jan 27, 2022 7:00 pm So a very very very very Canadian value - it comes before anything else in the charter - is that reasonable restrictions on rights are to be expected.
Who is the arbiter of what is reasonable? Justin? Teresa Tam? Doug Ford? Bonnie Henry?
The final arbiter is the Supreme Court of Canada.
---------- ADS -----------
 
DId you hear the one about the jurisprudence fetishist? He got off on a technicality.
Vaticinator
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 222
Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2021 11:29 am

Re: UK data showing vaccinated all ages more prone to get Covid

Post by Vaticinator »

Yes of course, but before it gets there, who gets to determine when policies can limit rights? And is there a process of some sort that must be followed, or is it arbitrary? Are there safeguards in place to ensure that doing so is actually in our best interests? Are there thresholds or benchmarks that need to be met? Is there any ongoing burden of proof required in order to keep such limitations in place, or can they just be maintained in perpetuity on the whims of whoever implemented them? What protections do the people have to prevent the abuse of this caveat?
---------- ADS -----------
 
photofly
Top Poster
Top Poster
Posts: 11306
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2011 4:47 pm
Location: Hangry and crankypated

Re: UK data showing vaccinated all ages more prone to get Covid

Post by photofly »

Vaticinator wrote: Thu Jan 27, 2022 8:59 pm Yes of course, but before it gets there, who gets to determine when policies can limit rights? And is there a process of some sort that must be followed, or is it arbitrary?
Policies don't take effect until they become laws, or regulations.

Laws have to be passed by parliament or provincial assemblies, in the first instance. In the case of COVID regulations the laws were legislation for emergencies, powers handed over to provincial governments "just in case" some decades ago. Again - your various governments have had those on the books for ages. A bit late to complain they're being used, now.
Are there safeguards in place to ensure that doing so is actually in our best interests?
Yes, of course. But those safeguards don't apply retrospectively - the actions the government takes are judged on what was known and believed at that time. You don't get to come back later and say "well we can see now that those actions or rules turned out not to be in our best interests, so you're all in big big trouble."
Are there thresholds or benchmarks that need to be met?
If you're talking about powers passed under the various Emergency Acts (for example the Ontario Emergency Management and Civil Protection Act) then yes, it's specified in the law. Here's the relevant section from that law:

Emergency powers and orders
Purpose
7.0.2 (1) The purpose of making orders under this section is to promote the public good by protecting the health, safety and welfare of the people of Ontario in times of declared emergencies in a manner that is subject to the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. 2006, c. 13, s. 1 (4).

Criteria for emergency orders
(2) During a declared emergency, the Lieutenant Governor in Council may make orders that the Lieutenant Governor in Council believes are necessary and essential in the circumstances to prevent, reduce or mitigate serious harm to persons or substantial damage to property, if in the opinion of the Lieutenant Governor in Council it is reasonable to believe that,

(a) the harm or damage will be alleviated by an order; and

(b) making an order is a reasonable alternative to other measures that might be taken to address the emergency. 2006, c. 13, s. 1 (4).

Limitations on emergency order
(3) Orders made under this section are subject to the following limitations:

1. The actions authorized by an order shall be exercised in a manner which, consistent with the objectives of the order, limits their intrusiveness.

2. An order shall only apply to the areas of the Province where it is necessary.

3. Subject to section 7.0.8, an order shall be effective only for as long as is necessary. 2006, c. 13, s. 1 (4).
A citizen can go to court if they think the government is acting ultra-vires.
Is there any ongoing burden of proof required in order to keep such limitations in place, or can they just be maintained in perpetuity on the whims of whoever implemented them?
Here's what that same act has to say:
Termination of emergency
7.0.7 (1) Subject to this section, an emergency declared under section 7.0.1 is terminated at the end of the 14th day following its declaration unless the Lieutenant Governor in Council by order declares it to be terminated at an earlier date. 2006, c. 13, s. 1 (4).

Extension of emergency, L.G. in C.
(2) The Lieutenant Governor in Council may by order extend an emergency before it is terminated for one further period of no more than 14 days. 2006, c. 13, s. 1 (4).

Extension of emergency, Assembly
(3) The Assembly, on the recommendation of the Premier, may by resolution extend the period of an emergency for additional periods of no more than 28 days. 2006, c. 13, s. 1 (4).
What protections do the people have to prevent the abuse of this caveat?
That's what the courts are for.

Obviously, the provincial assemblies can pass additional primary legislation, if they wish. If that legislation is contrary to the Charter, the courts will strike it down, if asked.
---------- ADS -----------
 
DId you hear the one about the jurisprudence fetishist? He got off on a technicality.
Vaticinator
Rank 4
Rank 4
Posts: 222
Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2021 11:29 am

Re: UK data showing vaccinated all ages more prone to get Covid

Post by Vaticinator »

So an unelected official who represents the queen, rather than the people, gets to make the call, based on their beliefs and opinions. None of what is there inspires a lot of confidence or offers much transparency, which should be of the utmost importance when limiting rights.
---------- ADS -----------
 
Post Reply

Return to “Covid”