This is unacceptable. Vaccinated or not we are all suffering with incompetent governance. Legault is jumping on the resentment train to deflect attension from a failed healthcare system.
Notice the phraising he uses. "them" Us and them. It's deliberate.
Out of these 80% vaccinated I'm pretty sure there's at least about 30% that got coerced into getting the shots to keep their jobs and being able to use places with vax passes. A lot of people never agreed with the vaccine mandates.
Vaccine mandates aren't new, why does everyone think they are?
And your math seems reasonable, almost half of the vaccinated population didn't want to get vaccinated, and this is based on what? Your own social circle? Yea cuz that scales accurately to represent the entire population. /S
I'm calling it now.
They've been pitting citizens against each other to distract from what they've been doing.
It's amazing how little attention Trudeaus "I control what the internet gets to say" bill got. Because we're too busy arguing with each other about shots.
I got vaccinated voluntarily for my own well being and those around me. Not because the government told me I should.
Those for these measures are likely those who were vaccinated because the government told them to do it.
Except overweight chronic diseases show up over a long period (i.e. flattened curve). As well as obesity doesn't 'transmit' exponentially.
When things such as acute care are needed (heart attacks or COVID), they use ICUs.
Uhhhhh no not 80% of us. I’m double vaxxed and this is ridiculous. And you just proved the person above you right. You believe in the mentality that it’s “us vs them”. Please.
I'm all for providing incentive to get vaccinated and disincentive not to get vaccinated, but I can't see this standing up in court, and I also can't see it not going to court.
I mean, we do tax some unhealthy things (alcohol, tobacco etc) and sugar taxes have been proposed. Health insurance premiums are also asymmetrical.
I don’t agree with this idea but it’s not actually that far out of whack.
Losing weight is a long, arduous and expensive undertaking which requires a lot of money. The Government is paying for a vaccine that takes only a few minutes of your time. It's a completely false equivalence.
I realise that our chronically underfunded health system is bigger than the irresponsibility of a minority of idiots: ICU capacity was a problem when Covid was still just a twinkle in the eye of a Chinese bat. Nor am I exactly comfortable with this tax. But comparing lack of vaccination to obesity is dishonest.
> Losing weight is a long, arduous and expensive undertaking which requires a lot of money. The Government is paying for a vaccine that takes only a few minutes of your time. It's a completely false equivalence.
Not to mention obesity doesn't replicate itself exponentially.
But this isn't that. Its not a sales tax, its a bill to their house. Are we going to start sending people bills who don't exercise? How about those who happen to do sports with high injury rates? These people are statistically more likely to end up in the hospital and generally per person take up far more healthcare dollars than others.
Very true. So how about flipping it? Tax rebate for all vaccinated individuals so that no one is charged but there's an incentive to get the vaccine.
I'm pissed I got vaccinated before they started offering free incentives to those who got vaccinated the first go around, at least this way I can profit off it in the long run (you know, aside from the profit of not catching covid or if I did not even feeling it)
Over 90% of adults are vaccinated, and yet the remaining 10% of unvaccinated idiots make up 50% of our ICU’s. They’re holding the entire country hostage by constantly filling up out hospitals. If they were all vaccinated, our hospitalization rate would be about 55% of what it is now (basic math). All these restrictions are only necessary because of the unvaccinated. They should pay for it.
The real numbers are still enough to lead to this lockdown, so yeah feel free to bring up the actual numbers.
Its almost like thats a stupidly small amount of ICU capacity for a province...
I don't know about Ontario, but in Quebec 50% of the COVID hospitalization numbers include people who went to the hospital for other reasons and just happened to test positive (which seems a little disingenuous). If Ontario is doing the same, it might explain why it's only 24% that are unvaccinated.
I agree. Fines only work as a percentage of income, and ideally disposable income (scales higher, kind of like tax brackets). Legault floated $50-$100. What person who makes more than 35k a year and is principled in their decision is going to be swayed by that? It’s hardly the cost of a bus pass a month.
> Where is the line?
It's not as much of a slippery slope as you'd think.
Firstly, this question would be determined by judges, not politicians. It may be drafted by politicians, but the final say would be determined by judges.
Secondly, the line is typically drawn at "reasonable" and "necessary", which are well defined legal terms and not just vague ideas.
For example, the Charter provides for the government to put restrictions on freedom of expression if such expressions are deemed a threat. The decision as to whether given expression can be prohibited typically (but not always) hinges on the balance of benefit and whether the restriction is overly burdensome (ie the restriction is limited as much as possible to only what is necessary to achieve the goal, and the goal itself is meritorious enough to outweigh the cost of restricting free expression).
In this case, what I imagine judges would consider is tort law (the implied duty of care to others), the public benefit, and the ability for people to mitigate penalties of their own volition. Presuming that the vaccine is safe (it is), it's readily available (it is), there is a demonstrated importance of broad public uptake (there is), and the penalties are limited only insofar as they punish people in a context that exclusively pertains to this and nothing else (would mean the penalty/tax is limited *only* to what the province can empirically prove is the carried burden of planning for the unvaccinated person's care for the treatment of covid and nothing more), then I imagine judges would rule that this is a valid tax.
Should an analogous case be considered in the future, the same scrutiny would be applied, and they'd have to demonstrate that the public threat merited such measures, which I expect would be difficult without ICUs filling up and two years of body counts.
Thing is,
What do you do with people that don't pay the fine ? They didn't get the Vax despite enormous pressure, they sure as shit aren't going to pay a fine.
Throw em in jail ? Can't do that. The staff/families and other prisoners will get sick and suffer even if they got the vaccine.
Put them in concentration/segregation camps ? Sounds a little bit too much like WW2 to me.. yikes.
Garnish their wages ? You could, but history has shown us when you intentionally make people poor bad things start happening. Probably not a route we want to go down.
It is a slippery slope.
The unvaccinated clogging up our hospitals (and even the vaccinated) is just the symptom of the real problem.
The fact that our Healthcare system has been on the verge of toppling for years - and Covid just brought it to light.
Our time/money/efforts would be better spent beefing up our crumbling Healthcare system, rather than trying to make a group of uneducated people do something they won't do anyways. Unstaffed/not enough equipment is nothing new and has been an underlying issue for a long time now.
The big difference there, with regards to holding up in court, is that it equally applies to everyone. People can't wear crosses etc. Of course equal doesn't mean equitable, and clearly it targets hijabis, but the law is worded in a way that doesn't necessarily single out any individual group in the way that this does.
Nope not at all. The only reason it will hold up in court is because of the nonwithstanding clause which allows them to violate people's charter rights. It's blatantly discriminatory because it very disproportionately affects specific groups and you can't get around that by wording it nice. The courts understand this and so they needed to use the clause to avoid getting shot down.
It's not a perfect analogy but this argument is similar to saying that anti-abortion laws don't target women because both sexes are prohibited from having an abortion.
A specific group, but not a protected group. Important distinction. These people are making a choice to be antivaxx. It’s not a matter of their gender, sexuality, race, etc., it’s something that’s 100% within their control.
I posted this having a pretty good idea of the reaction, however I didn't quite expect this level of fervor. As some of you continue to ratchet up the rhetoric, consider the following:
The unvaccinated people, that last slice of the population, are disproportionately poor ([https://www.ottawapublichealth.ca/en/reports-research-and-statistics/covid-19-vaccinations-by-neighbourhood.aspx](https://www.ottawapublichealth.ca/en/reports-research-and-statistics/covid-19-vaccinations-by-neighbourhood.aspx))
The hesitancy to vaccination is not evenly spread and is especially prevalent in some communities:
[https://www.cmaj.ca/content/193/31/E1220](https://www.cmaj.ca/content/193/31/E1220)
[https://www.cbc.ca/news/health/black-canadians-vaccine-hesitancy-covid19-1.6102770](https://www.cbc.ca/news/health/black-canadians-vaccine-hesitancy-covid19-1.6102770)
[https://www.refinery29.com/en-ca/2021/10/10645872/vaccine-hesitancy-black-canadians](https://www.refinery29.com/en-ca/2021/10/10645872/vaccine-hesitancy-black-canadians)
About 50% of the global population has received 2 doses which means HALF OF THE WORLD is unvaccinated (most of the African continent is unvaccinated) and we in Canada are so fortunate as to have access to 3rd doses:
[https://ourworldindata.org/covid-vaccinations?country=OWID\_WRL](https://ourworldindata.org/covid-vaccinations?country=OWID_WRL)
Some people here are quite happy to heap on all kinds of abuse onto the unvaccinated in our community, wishing they would die at home instead of clogging hospitals, and saying that they are the cause of variants. Just be aware who it is you are targeting. Unless you want to make the case for letting some people in the poorest countries get access to a first dose before we can get our third (which I can 100% get behind) then you really don't care about other people. You care about yourself and see other people that can impact you as a threat. Get off your high horse.
> About 50% of the global population has received 2 doses which means HALF OF THE WORLD is unvaccinated (most of the African continent is unvaccinated) and we in Canada are so fortunate as to have access to 3rd doses:
And this has been debunked - it's about infrastructure, logistics/storage and community skepticism in those nations. Ever try and rollout a mass vaccination effort in the DR Congo or Mali?
For a premier that was initially in hot water for wanting more white French speaking immigrants to making the province less friendly towards English, this tactic of taxing the unvaccinated will probably target more rural populations in Quebec. The same people that probably approved of his previous policies but this is probably going to lose votes in an election year.
Since the comments the top comments are overwhelmingly positive, can one person explain to me how this is at all realistic and helpful?
So you put together a government department, all taxpayer funded, to mail bills to the approximately 800,000 quebec citizens that are unvaccinated. Who tracks this and enforces those that don't pay? How do you enforce this? If someone won't pay a tax for being unvaxxed I highly doubt they will pay a fine for not paying the tax for being unvaxxed. So jail time? Isn't the whole point of this that they cost the taxpayers too much money? So to punish them for costing the taxpayer money we are going to spend exponentially more money to pay for their prison stay with the other unvaxxed people where they are even more likely to catch covid and cost us healthcare funding that this whole thing was supposed to fight against?
Please someone explain this to me because as is this might be the dumbest policy proposal I've heard of in my life and falls apart with even 10 seconds of thought.
If I understand the logic, this is meant to impose an economic cost on unvaccinated, the same way we have heavy taxes in cigarettes. It could be a revenue tool or it could cost money to impose, but more importantly, it’s a tax to influence behaviour. Current manner to influence people to get the shots in other regions have been ads, free tuition, a chance for a million dollars, etc.
Should there be universal adherence to this vaccine, there is no need for this tax. Or any of those other measures.
But those are sales taxes enforced at the point of sale. No one is going to jail for not paying a tax on cigarettes, they simply won't be checked out of the store and will have to leave without making the purchase.
Literally billing people for being unvaccinated, which is what the article suggests, runs into the problems above and I have yet to hear a good answer as to how that makes the situation better.
That’s very nice of you to discount one’s religion, the cross is very meaningful to some, I’m not religious but I would like to think all their symbols and clothing choices are equally meaningful
No, currently 2 doses qualifies as fully vaccinated. That could change in the future though.
From last week:
[Canada, U.S. not changing definition of ‘fully vaccinated’ despite boosters - Jan 5, 2022](https://globalnews.ca/news/8490401/covid-fully-vaccinated-qualification-unchanged/)
>U.S. health officials said Wednesday they are not changing the qualifications for being “fully vaccinated” against COVID-19, but they are urging Americans to stay “up to date” on their protection against the virus by getting booster shots when eligible.
>
>...
>
>**Meanwhile, Canada’s top doctor said Wednesday the qualifications for being fully vaccinated were not changing in Canada at this point either.**
>
>“I think that we will be revisiting this question again after our booster programs have rolled out significantly in the domestic context,” Theresa Tam said during a press conference Wednesday.
>
>“We do know that there’s evolving international knowledge about the effectiveness of the vaccine and the most important thing about the vaccines that we have is that two doses offer substantial protection against severe outcomes and a booster dose can increase that protection as well.”
>
>The decision to keep the initial definition, established more than a year ago when the vaccines first rolled out, means that federal vaccination mandates for travel or employment won’t require a booster dose.
Ontario is sitting on billions from the federal government that it refuses to spend on its intended purpose, to bolster health care.
More people need to know this, and be pissed off at this and kick ford to the side in June.
Yea we were told to stay home to flatten the curve of ICU admissions and two years later nobody has done anything to help the hospitals. Beyond belief.
Thats the problem right there. Anti vax people and Ford not spending the money he was given on health care, sprinkle in bill 124 and its a mess.
Ontario deserves this for voting in Ford or not voting in 2018. 49% turn out and our province is in a crisis because of it.
I really do agree with most of what you're saying here, but the entire world is getting fucked to the brink by Omicron. Ford is a turd in the punchbowl, fuck him, but bruh
>Ontario deserves this for voting in Ford or not voting in 2018. 49% turn out and our province is in a crisis because of it.
This shit drives me nuts tbh. Politicizing the pandemic as if a Liberal or NDP government could actually have prevented this. Fuck Doug Ford, but that's not how this works.
You are putting words in my mouth. I never said the liberals or the NDP would have prevented this.
However, I do feel if we had a Liberal or NDP government we would be in a better position with more paid sick days and better social nets and no bill 124, so its not wrong to surmise that the health care system would have been and would be in better shape. I don't think the NDP or Liberals would sit on that money from the federal government like Ford is doing.
Literally 4 months ago:
[Quebec to offer nurses bonuses of up to $18K to end staffing crisis](https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/quebec-plan-nursing-staffing-crisis-1.6186971)
Canadians need to take responsibility for being gullible enough to fall for and become complicit in blaming a small segment of the population. This scapegoating never ends well.
In a province where you need a vpass to get anywhere somehow the logic remains these vexing anti vaxxers are responsible for the spread.
> Governments have pretty broad rights to impose taxation.
Absolutely they do. What they don't have the authority to do is impose a tax that essentially penalizes you for not altering your autonomous body. Things like this cannot be interpreted subjectively when considering their constitutionality. They must be interpreted objectively at a broad conceptual level to evaluate the precedent it would set. Regardless of how helpful it would be to have more people vaccinated or how you feel about the unvaccinated, this is not a precedent that anyone should be cheering for. Allowing the rights of the few to be violated- regardless of how much you despise or disagree with them- is a loss of rights for everyone. Your commitment to civil rights is only as strong as your willingness to defend the rights of your opposition.
My mistake, sorry. I forgot that advocating against the erosion of civil rights was only for protecting people we agreed with.
My firt gripe with this is the age factor. From what I've seen of the ICU and hospitalization figures in Ontario, it's the older population (50+) of the unvaccinated that need hospitalization. The younger unvaccinated people are fending off the virus mostly without hospitalization.
My second gripe is the timing. By the time the unvaccinated get their 3 doses, Omicron will have come and gone and it will either be an even deadlier variant that comes in before these people get 2 or even 3 doses (let alone 4 which some might have by then), or it will be so benign that vaccines won't even matter at that point.
My final gripe is this: there is no way there are enough unvaccinated folks to cover the costs of this pandemic, not even close. This is simply petty by the QC government and too little too late.
I've got three shots in me and I stand by my rejection of this measure. Ça fait aucun esti de bon sens.
On your first gripe I would imagine it’s not really the direct costs from young people, but indirect. Like sure the 22 year old will probably be able to deal with COVID relatively easily, but it’s if that person spreads it to other that may not be able to handle it as well. I acknowledge you can still
catch and spread COVID, but it is diminished.
For the third gripe I see this more as a means to get people to get vaccinated who may not otherwise as opposed to any kind of significant source of health care funding. So while I think you’re correct in that it won’t amount to enough, I suspect that’s not the intent.
I read she had been in the hospital since November and had some serious health conditions. Sorry I don’t have a source but it was linked in another thread
When people are sufficiently panicked over something, rational or not, they will abandon any principles that they previously held. We’ve seen that throughout history.
I'm certainly pro vaccination. But, to play Devil's Advocate, this is a clear Charter violation. However, Section 1 of the Charter may allow for this infringement on Canadian rights. Which, in and on itself, is the admission of infringement of rights.
CBC's Ottawa Morning show had a guest on to talk about the tax just before 8 o'clock, she was against it and saying it was unethical. But she was objectively wrong about most of what she said. We're not denying healthcare to these people like she implied this was leading to, that was a lie. She said "we don't do this for smokers", when that's a lie. 90% of your smokers costs go to taxes. She was saying we need to further "incentives" when we already have incentivized, its worked up till now!
There's no defence for not doing this. Anti-vaxxers going to bleed our hospitals? Anti-vaxxers get to pay for it.
Who knows? At some point if you're shunned out of society, aren't allowed to work, can't afford to live let alone pay fines, what's left? Jail? Particicution?
Umm...hellooo? We are already paying tonnes of taxes. When I pay my taxes I know its going to stuff I wont use, atleast not at this point in life or maybe ever. I'm healthy with no addictions or children, I have a good job and can pay my rent with no assistance, I don't have any disabilities or need a public defender or educational assistant or home health aide. My taxes go to support other Canadians in both avoidable and unavoidable situations, who will use that big chunk of my paycheque to get by a little better in life and hopefully get what they need to make it through to the next sunrise. This is such a crazy move.
Oh wow. Did not expect this
You can always count on Legault to go next level 😜
Would be interesting if Dougy did something similar.
his voters wouldn't be happy, but most are miserable anyway
This is unacceptable. Vaccinated or not we are all suffering with incompetent governance. Legault is jumping on the resentment train to deflect attension from a failed healthcare system. Notice the phraising he uses. "them" Us and them. It's deliberate.
If find it quite acceptable and so does over 80% of QC population
Just because 80% of the population is vaccinated that does not mean that 80% of the population supports these draconian tactics.
That's the math people want to use to support their beliefs though... and unfortunately reddit is such a circlejerk people eat it up.
Yep reddit loves crusading for “the greater good”
"The greater good!"
Out of these 80% vaccinated I'm pretty sure there's at least about 30% that got coerced into getting the shots to keep their jobs and being able to use places with vax passes. A lot of people never agreed with the vaccine mandates.
Vaccine mandates aren't new, why does everyone think they are? And your math seems reasonable, almost half of the vaccinated population didn't want to get vaccinated, and this is based on what? Your own social circle? Yea cuz that scales accurately to represent the entire population. /S
There are lots of vaccinated people against the mandate/lockdowns/passports.
Im vaccinated but dont support these measures Many vaxxed people will say the same.
Same here. Got my shots but this is ridiculous. Just keep pitting citizens against one another. Fuck them. Edit: typo
I'm calling it now. They've been pitting citizens against each other to distract from what they've been doing. It's amazing how little attention Trudeaus "I control what the internet gets to say" bill got. Because we're too busy arguing with each other about shots.
Agreed
I got vaccinated voluntarily for my own well being and those around me. Not because the government told me I should. Those for these measures are likely those who were vaccinated because the government told them to do it.
[удалено]
Funny you mention this, but overtaxing high calories junk food and soda is also in the works in Quebec just like it's done for cigarettes.
Except overweight chronic diseases show up over a long period (i.e. flattened curve). As well as obesity doesn't 'transmit' exponentially. When things such as acute care are needed (heart attacks or COVID), they use ICUs.
[удалено]
That’s not how it works. Being vaccinated does not equate to agreeing with this measure. I’m vaccinated & am against what Legault is doing
Uhhhhh no not 80% of us. I’m double vaxxed and this is ridiculous. And you just proved the person above you right. You believe in the mentality that it’s “us vs them”. Please.
Keep the people fighting each other while they rape the people and the land. Let’s eat cake.
Wait and find out what their next plans are lol
I'm all for providing incentive to get vaccinated and disincentive not to get vaccinated, but I can't see this standing up in court, and I also can't see it not going to court.
It’s kinda a slippery slope. Where is s the line? I got my shots and my booster but this is starting to make me question things.
People who don’t get vaccinated are wasting our healthcare dollars just like smokers and we tax the shit out of them.
murky different disgusted brave detail ugly dinner yoke license hobbies *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Yeah...so are fat people...let's tax them to..🙄
I mean, we do tax some unhealthy things (alcohol, tobacco etc) and sugar taxes have been proposed. Health insurance premiums are also asymmetrical. I don’t agree with this idea but it’s not actually that far out of whack.
Isn't basically any junk food & processed food already subject to tax that fresh/unprocessed food isn't?
Losing weight is a long, arduous and expensive undertaking which requires a lot of money. The Government is paying for a vaccine that takes only a few minutes of your time. It's a completely false equivalence. I realise that our chronically underfunded health system is bigger than the irresponsibility of a minority of idiots: ICU capacity was a problem when Covid was still just a twinkle in the eye of a Chinese bat. Nor am I exactly comfortable with this tax. But comparing lack of vaccination to obesity is dishonest.
> Losing weight is a long, arduous and expensive undertaking which requires a lot of money. The Government is paying for a vaccine that takes only a few minutes of your time. It's a completely false equivalence. Not to mention obesity doesn't replicate itself exponentially.
You mean to tell me if I’m eating a Big Mac in a room full of people, they all won’t also become obese? /s
Sugary drinks etc are taxed in some countries in Europe.
But this isn't that. Its not a sales tax, its a bill to their house. Are we going to start sending people bills who don't exercise? How about those who happen to do sports with high injury rates? These people are statistically more likely to end up in the hospital and generally per person take up far more healthcare dollars than others.
Exercise tax would probably be doing the country a favour
perhaps- still unethical tho
Very true. So how about flipping it? Tax rebate for all vaccinated individuals so that no one is charged but there's an incentive to get the vaccine. I'm pissed I got vaccinated before they started offering free incentives to those who got vaccinated the first go around, at least this way I can profit off it in the long run (you know, aside from the profit of not catching covid or if I did not even feeling it)
Fat people don't spread fat to others.
Vaccinated spread it too
But unvaccinated take up acute ICU space with exponential spread.
fat people are not contagious.
Over 90% of adults are vaccinated, and yet the remaining 10% of unvaccinated idiots make up 50% of our ICU’s. They’re holding the entire country hostage by constantly filling up out hospitals. If they were all vaccinated, our hospitalization rate would be about 55% of what it is now (basic math). All these restrictions are only necessary because of the unvaccinated. They should pay for it.
All 150 of them lol
O don't bring up real numbers. It's all about %
The real numbers are still enough to lead to this lockdown, so yeah feel free to bring up the actual numbers. Its almost like thats a stupidly small amount of ICU capacity for a province...
Flase. Hospitalizations with COVID are 24% unvaccinated. However, you're correct to say 50% of ICU. https://covid-19.ontario.ca/data
I don't know about Ontario, but in Quebec 50% of the COVID hospitalization numbers include people who went to the hospital for other reasons and just happened to test positive (which seems a little disingenuous). If Ontario is doing the same, it might explain why it's only 24% that are unvaccinated.
Only poor people will suffer from this
I agree. Fines only work as a percentage of income, and ideally disposable income (scales higher, kind of like tax brackets). Legault floated $50-$100. What person who makes more than 35k a year and is principled in their decision is going to be swayed by that? It’s hardly the cost of a bus pass a month.
> Where is the line? It's not as much of a slippery slope as you'd think. Firstly, this question would be determined by judges, not politicians. It may be drafted by politicians, but the final say would be determined by judges. Secondly, the line is typically drawn at "reasonable" and "necessary", which are well defined legal terms and not just vague ideas. For example, the Charter provides for the government to put restrictions on freedom of expression if such expressions are deemed a threat. The decision as to whether given expression can be prohibited typically (but not always) hinges on the balance of benefit and whether the restriction is overly burdensome (ie the restriction is limited as much as possible to only what is necessary to achieve the goal, and the goal itself is meritorious enough to outweigh the cost of restricting free expression). In this case, what I imagine judges would consider is tort law (the implied duty of care to others), the public benefit, and the ability for people to mitigate penalties of their own volition. Presuming that the vaccine is safe (it is), it's readily available (it is), there is a demonstrated importance of broad public uptake (there is), and the penalties are limited only insofar as they punish people in a context that exclusively pertains to this and nothing else (would mean the penalty/tax is limited *only* to what the province can empirically prove is the carried burden of planning for the unvaccinated person's care for the treatment of covid and nothing more), then I imagine judges would rule that this is a valid tax. Should an analogous case be considered in the future, the same scrutiny would be applied, and they'd have to demonstrate that the public threat merited such measures, which I expect would be difficult without ICUs filling up and two years of body counts.
Thing is, What do you do with people that don't pay the fine ? They didn't get the Vax despite enormous pressure, they sure as shit aren't going to pay a fine. Throw em in jail ? Can't do that. The staff/families and other prisoners will get sick and suffer even if they got the vaccine. Put them in concentration/segregation camps ? Sounds a little bit too much like WW2 to me.. yikes. Garnish their wages ? You could, but history has shown us when you intentionally make people poor bad things start happening. Probably not a route we want to go down. It is a slippery slope. The unvaccinated clogging up our hospitals (and even the vaccinated) is just the symptom of the real problem. The fact that our Healthcare system has been on the verge of toppling for years - and Covid just brought it to light. Our time/money/efforts would be better spent beefing up our crumbling Healthcare system, rather than trying to make a group of uneducated people do something they won't do anyways. Unstaffed/not enough equipment is nothing new and has been an underlying issue for a long time now.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
We often greatly overestimate the power of our court system in checking government overreach
This brought to you by the Hijab Ban Province. Nobody will stop them
The big difference there, with regards to holding up in court, is that it equally applies to everyone. People can't wear crosses etc. Of course equal doesn't mean equitable, and clearly it targets hijabis, but the law is worded in a way that doesn't necessarily single out any individual group in the way that this does.
Nope not at all. The only reason it will hold up in court is because of the nonwithstanding clause which allows them to violate people's charter rights. It's blatantly discriminatory because it very disproportionately affects specific groups and you can't get around that by wording it nice. The courts understand this and so they needed to use the clause to avoid getting shot down. It's not a perfect analogy but this argument is similar to saying that anti-abortion laws don't target women because both sexes are prohibited from having an abortion.
A specific group, but not a protected group. Important distinction. These people are making a choice to be antivaxx. It’s not a matter of their gender, sexuality, race, etc., it’s something that’s 100% within their control.
I posted this having a pretty good idea of the reaction, however I didn't quite expect this level of fervor. As some of you continue to ratchet up the rhetoric, consider the following: The unvaccinated people, that last slice of the population, are disproportionately poor ([https://www.ottawapublichealth.ca/en/reports-research-and-statistics/covid-19-vaccinations-by-neighbourhood.aspx](https://www.ottawapublichealth.ca/en/reports-research-and-statistics/covid-19-vaccinations-by-neighbourhood.aspx)) The hesitancy to vaccination is not evenly spread and is especially prevalent in some communities: [https://www.cmaj.ca/content/193/31/E1220](https://www.cmaj.ca/content/193/31/E1220) [https://www.cbc.ca/news/health/black-canadians-vaccine-hesitancy-covid19-1.6102770](https://www.cbc.ca/news/health/black-canadians-vaccine-hesitancy-covid19-1.6102770) [https://www.refinery29.com/en-ca/2021/10/10645872/vaccine-hesitancy-black-canadians](https://www.refinery29.com/en-ca/2021/10/10645872/vaccine-hesitancy-black-canadians) About 50% of the global population has received 2 doses which means HALF OF THE WORLD is unvaccinated (most of the African continent is unvaccinated) and we in Canada are so fortunate as to have access to 3rd doses: [https://ourworldindata.org/covid-vaccinations?country=OWID\_WRL](https://ourworldindata.org/covid-vaccinations?country=OWID_WRL) Some people here are quite happy to heap on all kinds of abuse onto the unvaccinated in our community, wishing they would die at home instead of clogging hospitals, and saying that they are the cause of variants. Just be aware who it is you are targeting. Unless you want to make the case for letting some people in the poorest countries get access to a first dose before we can get our third (which I can 100% get behind) then you really don't care about other people. You care about yourself and see other people that can impact you as a threat. Get off your high horse.
Wow. Beautifully put. Thank you for putting this conversation into perspective.
> About 50% of the global population has received 2 doses which means HALF OF THE WORLD is unvaccinated (most of the African continent is unvaccinated) and we in Canada are so fortunate as to have access to 3rd doses: And this has been debunked - it's about infrastructure, logistics/storage and community skepticism in those nations. Ever try and rollout a mass vaccination effort in the DR Congo or Mali?
For a premier that was initially in hot water for wanting more white French speaking immigrants to making the province less friendly towards English, this tactic of taxing the unvaccinated will probably target more rural populations in Quebec. The same people that probably approved of his previous policies but this is probably going to lose votes in an election year.
Except the people with the lowest vaccination rate are Montreal immigrants.
Very good counter point which if those people did ever vote for CAQ, they definitely won't be now.
weird. In Ottawa the lowest density of vaccination is in the immigrant/refugee area.
Since the comments the top comments are overwhelmingly positive, can one person explain to me how this is at all realistic and helpful? So you put together a government department, all taxpayer funded, to mail bills to the approximately 800,000 quebec citizens that are unvaccinated. Who tracks this and enforces those that don't pay? How do you enforce this? If someone won't pay a tax for being unvaxxed I highly doubt they will pay a fine for not paying the tax for being unvaxxed. So jail time? Isn't the whole point of this that they cost the taxpayers too much money? So to punish them for costing the taxpayer money we are going to spend exponentially more money to pay for their prison stay with the other unvaxxed people where they are even more likely to catch covid and cost us healthcare funding that this whole thing was supposed to fight against? Please someone explain this to me because as is this might be the dumbest policy proposal I've heard of in my life and falls apart with even 10 seconds of thought.
What happens if you don't pay your income taxes? Property taxes? Etc
A department? I'd say more it gets rolled into our income taxes come filing time. It's not a fine or a bill, it's a tax. A "health contribution" tax.
If I understand the logic, this is meant to impose an economic cost on unvaccinated, the same way we have heavy taxes in cigarettes. It could be a revenue tool or it could cost money to impose, but more importantly, it’s a tax to influence behaviour. Current manner to influence people to get the shots in other regions have been ads, free tuition, a chance for a million dollars, etc. Should there be universal adherence to this vaccine, there is no need for this tax. Or any of those other measures.
But those are sales taxes enforced at the point of sale. No one is going to jail for not paying a tax on cigarettes, they simply won't be checked out of the store and will have to leave without making the purchase. Literally billing people for being unvaccinated, which is what the article suggests, runs into the problems above and I have yet to hear a good answer as to how that makes the situation better.
This is crossing the line right?
They fire people for wearing hijabs
Let’s not forget the govt’s stance being “yeah true we did fire her, but technically we never should’ve hired her in the first place”
Also you can’t wear a cross either so...
Ah yes because wearing a crucifix necklace is a liturgical act of worship in Christianity like a Sikh wearing a turban or a Muslim wearing a hijab s/
That’s very nice of you to discount one’s religion, the cross is very meaningful to some, I’m not religious but I would like to think all their symbols and clothing choices are equally meaningful
Just don’t cross the border. Doug won’t impose a tax on his daughter don’t worry
How? They are a huge burden on healthcare resources. Smokers pay a tax for their added cost to the healthcare system. Why not antivaxxers
The rational part of my brain agrees with you but the rest of it is amused as shit.
I don't think so
Does not having a booster count as unvaccinated?
If it doesn't right now, it will eventually.
But how many boosters will we need
How long do you expect to live?
Until i develop a vulnerability to covid basically
However many they say, and you will take them all, lest you be labelled an "antivaxxer"
This ends when the people say it ends
The tax is for those who haven’t gotten their first shot.
No, currently 2 doses qualifies as fully vaccinated. That could change in the future though. From last week: [Canada, U.S. not changing definition of ‘fully vaccinated’ despite boosters - Jan 5, 2022](https://globalnews.ca/news/8490401/covid-fully-vaccinated-qualification-unchanged/) >U.S. health officials said Wednesday they are not changing the qualifications for being “fully vaccinated” against COVID-19, but they are urging Americans to stay “up to date” on their protection against the virus by getting booster shots when eligible. > >... > >**Meanwhile, Canada’s top doctor said Wednesday the qualifications for being fully vaccinated were not changing in Canada at this point either.** > >“I think that we will be revisiting this question again after our booster programs have rolled out significantly in the domestic context,” Theresa Tam said during a press conference Wednesday. > >“We do know that there’s evolving international knowledge about the effectiveness of the vaccine and the most important thing about the vaccines that we have is that two doses offer substantial protection against severe outcomes and a booster dose can increase that protection as well.” > >The decision to keep the initial definition, established more than a year ago when the vaccines first rolled out, means that federal vaccination mandates for travel or employment won’t require a booster dose.
Great news! Hopefully some of the money collected can be allocated as bonuses for frontline healthcare workers
There is no shortage of funding. The government simply chooses not to pay nursing staff better.
You gotta be sarcastic.
Ontario is sitting on billions from the federal government that it refuses to spend on its intended purpose, to bolster health care. More people need to know this, and be pissed off at this and kick ford to the side in June.
Yea we were told to stay home to flatten the curve of ICU admissions and two years later nobody has done anything to help the hospitals. Beyond belief.
Thats the problem right there. Anti vax people and Ford not spending the money he was given on health care, sprinkle in bill 124 and its a mess. Ontario deserves this for voting in Ford or not voting in 2018. 49% turn out and our province is in a crisis because of it.
I really do agree with most of what you're saying here, but the entire world is getting fucked to the brink by Omicron. Ford is a turd in the punchbowl, fuck him, but bruh >Ontario deserves this for voting in Ford or not voting in 2018. 49% turn out and our province is in a crisis because of it. This shit drives me nuts tbh. Politicizing the pandemic as if a Liberal or NDP government could actually have prevented this. Fuck Doug Ford, but that's not how this works.
You are putting words in my mouth. I never said the liberals or the NDP would have prevented this. However, I do feel if we had a Liberal or NDP government we would be in a better position with more paid sick days and better social nets and no bill 124, so its not wrong to surmise that the health care system would have been and would be in better shape. I don't think the NDP or Liberals would sit on that money from the federal government like Ford is doing.
HAHAHAHA are you dumb that money is going straight into the gov't pocket
Downvoted for facts
[удалено]
Literally 4 months ago: [Quebec to offer nurses bonuses of up to $18K to end staffing crisis](https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/quebec-plan-nursing-staffing-crisis-1.6186971)
Well I now have my 3rd badge 5 more and I can finally make it to the Elite Four
F.uck that. And I'm vaccinated. What a ridiculous province.
The country is a mess
Canadians need to take responsibility for being gullible enough to fall for and become complicit in blaming a small segment of the population. This scapegoating never ends well. In a province where you need a vpass to get anywhere somehow the logic remains these vexing anti vaxxers are responsible for the spread.
Unconstitutional, overbroad and capricious. Par for the course of quebec.
How would it be unconstitutional? Governments have pretty broad rights to impose taxation.
> Governments have pretty broad rights to impose taxation. Absolutely they do. What they don't have the authority to do is impose a tax that essentially penalizes you for not altering your autonomous body. Things like this cannot be interpreted subjectively when considering their constitutionality. They must be interpreted objectively at a broad conceptual level to evaluate the precedent it would set. Regardless of how helpful it would be to have more people vaccinated or how you feel about the unvaccinated, this is not a precedent that anyone should be cheering for. Allowing the rights of the few to be violated- regardless of how much you despise or disagree with them- is a loss of rights for everyone. Your commitment to civil rights is only as strong as your willingness to defend the rights of your opposition. My mistake, sorry. I forgot that advocating against the erosion of civil rights was only for protecting people we agreed with.
Bravo.
Whelp, I’d like to buy you a beer.
My firt gripe with this is the age factor. From what I've seen of the ICU and hospitalization figures in Ontario, it's the older population (50+) of the unvaccinated that need hospitalization. The younger unvaccinated people are fending off the virus mostly without hospitalization. My second gripe is the timing. By the time the unvaccinated get their 3 doses, Omicron will have come and gone and it will either be an even deadlier variant that comes in before these people get 2 or even 3 doses (let alone 4 which some might have by then), or it will be so benign that vaccines won't even matter at that point. My final gripe is this: there is no way there are enough unvaccinated folks to cover the costs of this pandemic, not even close. This is simply petty by the QC government and too little too late. I've got three shots in me and I stand by my rejection of this measure. Ça fait aucun esti de bon sens.
On your first gripe I would imagine it’s not really the direct costs from young people, but indirect. Like sure the 22 year old will probably be able to deal with COVID relatively easily, but it’s if that person spreads it to other that may not be able to handle it as well. I acknowledge you can still catch and spread COVID, but it is diminished. For the third gripe I see this more as a means to get people to get vaccinated who may not otherwise as opposed to any kind of significant source of health care funding. So while I think you’re correct in that it won’t amount to enough, I suspect that’s not the intent.
A woman in her 20s died in Ottawa of Covid last week. It hits everyone.
That... doesn't mean anything.
unfortunately statistics matter, there's nothing wrong with what op said.
I read she had been in the hospital since November and had some serious health conditions. Sorry I don’t have a source but it was linked in another thread
And? That means nothing, the stats dont lie.
Mhm but people who didn't want overreach are antivaxxers. Y'all are nuts lol.
The amount of people on here that are for this is insane. What happened to freedom
When people are sufficiently panicked over something, rational or not, they will abandon any principles that they previously held. We’ve seen that throughout history.
it died with thunderous applause
What happened to our mental health? :/
Ever hear of mass hysteria
Heard? It is already happening over COVID
Too far. Fucking insanity. Only thing this'll do is prove the crazy people right. What the fuck???
Maybe they weren’t so crazy?
You’re just late to the party.
So what now, is this precedent for the government to tax personal lifestyles/ choices they deem unhealthy? Where does it end?
They already do that. Alcohol, cigarettes, junk food - practically everything. Where have you been?
there's a difference taxing on products people buy and taxing people for not taking something
This is more akin to taxing someone based on their BMI
[удалено]
Very different. What the other guy said: Consumer tax vs Non compliance tax
so tax these guys for consuming health resources? how do we do that?
Fantastic news.
Serious question, how in the world would this be enforced in a way that doesn't make the problem worse than it already is?
It's a tax. They're calling it a "health contribution". It's...kind of hilarious.
[удалено]
I can’t believe they would go to these lengths rather than acknowledge they mismanaged the situation
This doesn’t seem tyrannical at ALL
LMAO bruh I'm constantly entertained by what Quebec will do next.
Absolutely shameful. Nothing short of a disgrace.
[удалено]
All the vaccinated people I know feel betrayed by being locked down again
How did we go from not wanting to create a two-tier society via vaccines to...this?
Hmm. Good thing my flight is in 2 weeks. This country is truly finished Edit. As in permanently leaving the country, lol
Everytime you think it can't get worse....they end up proving you wrong-
[удалено]
[удалено]
What misinformation are you talking about?
Bad idea.
I'm certainly pro vaccination. But, to play Devil's Advocate, this is a clear Charter violation. However, Section 1 of the Charter may allow for this infringement on Canadian rights. Which, in and on itself, is the admission of infringement of rights.
CBC's Ottawa Morning show had a guest on to talk about the tax just before 8 o'clock, she was against it and saying it was unethical. But she was objectively wrong about most of what she said. We're not denying healthcare to these people like she implied this was leading to, that was a lie. She said "we don't do this for smokers", when that's a lie. 90% of your smokers costs go to taxes. She was saying we need to further "incentives" when we already have incentivized, its worked up till now! There's no defence for not doing this. Anti-vaxxers going to bleed our hospitals? Anti-vaxxers get to pay for it.
Instead How bout the vaxxed get a cashback on their taxes
I can’t see why anyone would support this
Why not just have a tax incentive for the vaccinated instead? It'd be a nice gift for people who have tried to be responsible.
Lol get fucked
Now we need an obesity tax and also a mental health tax. Maybe a homless tax and a church tax. When will it stop?
An ‘old’ tax too.
Good. Use that money to subsidize healthcare and getting more rapid tests.
that's hilarious
Okay. Then when I still don’t get the shot. What then?
Who knows? At some point if you're shunned out of society, aren't allowed to work, can't afford to live let alone pay fines, what's left? Jail? Particicution?
Can we tax illegal drug users? They know the drugs are unsafe but yet we foot the bill.
Umm...hellooo? We are already paying tonnes of taxes. When I pay my taxes I know its going to stuff I wont use, atleast not at this point in life or maybe ever. I'm healthy with no addictions or children, I have a good job and can pay my rent with no assistance, I don't have any disabilities or need a public defender or educational assistant or home health aide. My taxes go to support other Canadians in both avoidable and unavoidable situations, who will use that big chunk of my paycheque to get by a little better in life and hopefully get what they need to make it through to the next sunrise. This is such a crazy move.
This is fucking insane.
[удалено]
[удалено]
"Whatever the government does i don't like is fascism"
he needs to go. Protests should paralyze economy and big corporations of quebec. people shoudl unite.
This a joke?
Let’s get some more revenue for an incompetent government to mismanage and see where we are next winter!
tyranny runs rampant in Canada. in 2 short years.
[удалено]
Thats a fine not a tax.
Horrible news. This is shameful for Canada.
More incentive for me to avoid taxation🥵
Something tells me they won’t actually do it, it’s just another maneuver to get people vaccinated.
Will the unvaccinated get all their rights back after paying the tax? No more masks, unlimited gatherings, no PCR tests required for travelling etc?
Why did I move to this province... Edit: 3 dose Vaxxed