> Authorised workers had to be vaccinated or couldn't attend work onsite. Those who refused could face disciplinary proceedings including dismissal.
> The mandates rendered vaccination against COVID a condition of employment. Anyone who refused to be vaccinated could therefore be subject to disciplinary proceedings, including dismissal.
Australia | USA | UK
Vaccine passports for venues: Australia = Widespread | USA = Mostly banned | UK = Never implemented
Unvaccinated locked out of shops/restaurants: Australia = Yes | USA = No | UK = No
Healthcare worker mandates: Australia = Yes | USA = Partial (upheld for Medicare/Medicaid facilities) | UK = Brief, then revoked
Broad employment mandates: Australia = Yes (most industries) | USA = Struck down | UK = No
Different lockdown rules by vax status: Australia = Yes | USA = No | UK = No
Days locked down
Australia (Melbourne) = 262 days
UK (England) = approx 190 days (three national lockdowns)
USA = approx 30-60 days in most states (one lockdown only, spring 2020). Eight states never locked down at all. No second or third lockdowns.
Again, so what? Your claim is says "forced" and "dangerous" but you provide no evidence. You've made your opinion clear, but that's all it is. That the Aus government did something different proves, and shows, nothing.
This is standard right wing hate-filled drivel, like that peppered throughout your comment history.
Your ilk really are hoping that Trump's authoritarian takeover of the US succeeds, through provocation, apathy or by whatever means, because you're driven only by the pursuit of power to turn your hate into violence against your perceived enemies.
We're actually dumber than the frogs. The original 19th century experiment involving frogs that didn't jump out of heated water was using frogs who had had their brains destroyed. The question being asked was whether the escape reaction to hot water was caused by the brain or by something further down in the nervous system. With an intact brain, the frogs would jump out. Without one, they wouldn't. Question answered.
It's just a simple analogy that quickly breaks down.
The frogs have it easy. All they have to do is jump out. One individual action and they're safe. (Until the scientist catches them and uses them in more experiments, anyway.)
The situation for people living under governments becoming gradually more oppressive is much more complicated. You don't know for sure that the water will keep heating up. Escape is extremely difficult and costly. Turning off the heat takes massive collective action. A third of the frogs actively want the water to boil, and another third don't really care.
Maybe that's a strong element, but I think we are simply too addicted to comfort and our way of life. We've been encouraged to "just vote" for so long we've lost all political muscle.
reply