I've a friend in her seventies who had covid and she's got ongoing heart problems. She has been providing ongoing support for her schizoaffective son. He's trying to help now, and already, as I understand it, helped with things like shopping.
My point? Well, whilst not keeping vulnerable people safe may seem to advantage those that want to get rid of the 'benny scroungers' who are a 'burden' on the 'taxpayer', it also leaves behind others who are anything but.
Ah, but surely not all vulnerable people are helping other vulnerable people? Well, no, not in that way, but what about those little contributions vulnerable people make to society? E.g. is it really cheaper for society to let granny get long covid or even die (but not instantly) than to let her carry on providing a bit of free babysitting so that her children can work flexible hours, or deterring a bit of local crime by keeping an eye out for burglars, or doing a bit of voluntary work here and there, or passing on a few skills and life experiences to another generation?
And, being really crude about it, the poorest and most deprived already had shorter life expectancies, so those that are a bit more what I'll call 'financially contributory' to society are more likely to be an issue here.
Oh well, we can keep fighting back, keep spreading our message. My favourite is to point out to people that even if we want to go through life being utterly selfish in our decisions, for the vast majority of us, applying the 'first they came for' principle is in their interests. If we protect others in society, they're there to protect others. (Not the specific people, in terms of overall numbers.)
In the meantime, I wonder how long before someone starts up a black market in fake tests? They must be there already, just as it's not difficult to forge an official vaccination confirmation letter.
What a pity I'm not an unscrupulous mendacious entrepreneur. There's money to be made there.
