I find this blend of comments disheartening and disappointing, mainly because they appear to come from a place of willful ignorance.
Please try not to forget that the reason all covid-19 vaccination programmes have been rolled out progressively from the older to younger segments of the population is due to the fact that:
a) vaccines are in short supply, thus mass vaccination programs demand a rational approach to maximize it's effectiveness in lowering covid-19 deaths,
b) all covid-19 vaccination programmes prioritize vaccinating at-risk groups within their population,
c) covid-19 is patently known to have a considerably high fatality rate on older segments of the population, while on younger segments of the population it's negligible.
Let's not feign ignorance here. Covid-19 kills old people in spades while young people just brush it off. If you care about loved ones and aren't happy with he idea of seeing your elders die from covid-19 then it's obvious why said elders are moved to the front of the queue to get vaccinated.
This should be so obvious that should require no explanation. Then again basic steps to safeguard the health and well-being of others, such as the ridiculous anti-mask militancy, is sadly a thing. So it's clear that many among us simply care nothing about any issue that does not involve them directly and are so self-centered that interpret basic care for others as an affront to their personal privileges.
It really isn't, and reeks of egocentric entitlement. It should be obvious that at-risk groups are a priority. Complaining that the people that likely die from covid are being prioritized over a group that has a negligible risk for no reason other than wanting to jump the line is something that's both baffling and dumbfounding.
But they didn't. Instead they do things like closing sure start centres and increasing pensions way more than wages while taxing people 69% marginal rates for a typical middle class job.
The real question is: is our goal to minimize deaths, or to do what's fair? For the most part, we've chosen to heed the advice of our public health experts and minimize deaths.
But is it really fair that we vaccinate all the old people first, just so they can leave their home and get back to their weekly bingo nights, instead of the younger person working at a grocery store to make sure everyone has food on the table? From an ethics perspective, I don't think the answer is so clear-cut, and I think it's reasonable for people to gripe about it.
Your post is unnecessarily hostile, ignorant, and insensitive. I knew someone who died of the disease. He was half my age and I’m too young to be eligible for the vaccine. Not all young people “brush it off.”
1. When the vaccine roll-out was started, there was no proof that it prevented infection - only that it prevented death and serious illness and hospitalisation.
2. In the UK it is estimated that having the vaccine in the first wave and vaccinating the priority groups woudl have saved over 90% of deaths that occurred.
It's pretty obvious
If you think the answers are “obvious”, you’re either ignoring relevant questions or you are filling in answers with your own assumptions.
They need that system anyway for babies too young to be vaccinated, people with health issues making the vaccine inadvisable, etc.
First jab
Israel has 56% of people fully vaccinated, Chile 22%, US 19%
UK is just 8%
> but everyone is apparently cool with that because "kids don't get sick from it"
The government and media don't give a stuff about anyone under the age of 50, certainly not under 40.