Beerball Posted July 23, 2021 Posted July 23, 2021 4 minutes ago, SCBills said: It’s all fun and games until Daboll quits. Actually it’s much more than fun & games.
Ridgewaycynic2013 Posted July 23, 2021 Posted July 23, 2021 3 minutes ago, HOUSE said: Maybe the Dolphins will give him a shot 🤔 2
GunnerBill Posted July 23, 2021 Posted July 23, 2021 21 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said: Maybe not in terms of risk to the public, but risk assessment in industry includes an assessment of liability risk to the company. Again, that is part of my reasoning. If you devolve it to businesses they will take economically evidenced decisions about what is best for their business, their organisation etc. But if you end up in a situation where you get masses of industries taking a decision that their employees must be vacced their will be a serious societal cost to be borne in the long run and that is why to my mind this is a question that should be one of public policy. Because it isn't fair to tell industries they need to worry about creating a social underclass. Balancing those sort of macro risks and benefits is - in my view - the job of the state (I use state in its British meaning not in the sense of the 52 states).
GaryPinC Posted July 23, 2021 Posted July 23, 2021 6 minutes ago, GunnerBill said: I have explained why I think that above. Because for me this is too big and too fundamental a public policy question to be devolved on an individual basis to economic actors such as businesses. I am sceptical as a matter of public policy about the ability of economic nudge factors to deliver societal change without delivering significant downsides. Let's say for a second it is the NFL. Then it is car manufacturers. Then it is tech companies. And they all say "get vacced or you can't work here" and there becomes a diminishing pool of jobs open to non-vacced people. You are creating a two tier society that is going to give you a legacy of problems that last decades. That is why other than in those industries where it is really essential - and I understand and agree that there are some where it is - I don't think just devolving this decision about whether people must be vacced to industry is the right approach. I get what you're saying, but if companies risk ruining their business because there are not enough vaccinated workers, then they need to come up with a different approach, don't they? To me, it's the same thing as mandatory drug screening. Some companies do away with it, or institute it individually as probation because they know mandatory screening would create too much turnover.
GunnerBill Posted July 23, 2021 Posted July 23, 2021 Just now, GaryPinC said: I get what you're saying, but if companies risk ruining their business because there are not enough vaccinated workers, then they need to come up with a different approach, don't they? To me, it's the same thing as mandatory drug screening. Some companies do away with it, or institute it individually as probation because they know mandatory screening would create too much turnover. Again though I don't believe that this is a question that you should boil down to pure economics about what is good for business. It is too important for that and the societal risks, in my view, make it unsuitable for that sort of market driven approach. The market won't give a flying kangaroo if their approach creates a social underclass disenfranchised from the rest of society. It never does. I may well be getting into a lot of my general critique of monetism and "free" markets here but if as a global community we get this question wrong the ramifications are extremely serious. It is a decision that should not for me be driven by anyone's bottom line.
Hapless Bills Fan Posted July 23, 2021 Posted July 23, 2021 21 minutes ago, GunnerBill said: Indeed. I just firmly believe it is for Government to do that stepping. Not devolve it to industry. I know that is controversial especially in a country like the US where people tend to prefer small non-interventionist Government. Yeah, the viewpoint about Gov't is different here. And further convo down this road should go to PPP
BuffaninSarasota Posted July 23, 2021 Posted July 23, 2021 2 hours ago, TBBills said: Imagine being so stupid you lose your job b.c you didn't want a simple shot. Oversimplification 2 1
GunnerBill Posted July 23, 2021 Posted July 23, 2021 Just now, Hapless Bills Fan said: Yeah, the viewpoint about Gov't is different here. And further convo down this road should go to PPP Noted. I didn't intend to go down this road but I can't really adequately explain my lack of comfort with the Dennison thing without it. For what it is worth I think more Government intervention in this area would be equally controversial in the UK and probably the world over. But it is a question eventually I think countries will have to tackle.
Don Otreply Posted July 23, 2021 Posted July 23, 2021 38 minutes ago, GunnerBill said: I have explained why I think that above. Because for me this is too big and too fundamental a public policy question to be devolved on an individual basis to economic actors such as businesses. I am sceptical as a matter of public policy about the ability of economic nudge factors to deliver societal change without delivering significant downsides. Let's say for a second it is the NFL. Then it is car manufacturers. Then it is tech companies. And they all say "get vacced or you can't work here" and there becomes a diminishing pool of jobs open to non-vacced people. You are creating a two tier society that is going to give you a legacy of problems that last decades. That is why other than in those industries where it is really essential - and I understand and agree that there are some where it is - I don't think just devolving this decision about whether people must be vacced to industry is the right approach. Indeed. I just firmly believe it is for Government to do that stepping. Not devolve it to industry. I know that is controversial especially in a country like the US where people tend to prefer small non-interventionist Government. I’m with you on that, Americans love to distrust Government as a hobby it seems, but then whine like children when the government doesn’t run to their rescue when they feel it is needed, yet these very same people bare their souls to Facebook and Amazon etc…, my fellow country men and women seem to think corporations are trustworthy for some unfathomable reason, we are going to hell in a hand basket as the saying goes… enjoy your day, I’m going to sip a single malt and and read a book, later, 1
MiltonWaddams Posted July 23, 2021 Posted July 23, 2021 3 hours ago, Hapless Bills Fan said: Er, we do know that where relevant, employers have been mandating their employees to get vaccinated for years now? Flu, Hepatitis B, etc etc It’s funny. My post was responded to, but it was also deleted. That’s funny.
HalftimeAdjustment Posted July 23, 2021 Posted July 23, 2021 1 hour ago, Hapless Bills Fan said: You mean UNvaccinated players? I disagree with you about the point. I think the whole thing is founded on a premise that's no longer true: that a team outbreak is very much more probable to be initiated and propegated by unvaccinated players, 12-20x more likely (vaccine effectiveness against infection/spread 92-95%). This was supported by the initial studies that came out a couple months after vaccinations - Israel did one, CDC studied 4,000 HCW with the covid 19 variant that was circulating at the time, etc. But new data from Israel, UK, MO, Providence, CDC MMRW etc, now say that with Delta, that's no longer true. Vaccinated people are still less likely to catch and spread Covid-19, but it's only ~5x more likely (effectiveness ~78%) That means if you look at a team that has 4 or 5x more vaccinated coaches and players than unvaccinated, the probability of spread originating from either group is ~ equal, or maybe even a bit more in the vaccinated group if a lot of them are vaxxed with J&J. That being the case, its effect is punative, yes, but I don't think that was the point or the rationale. It's totally confusing to me what the league will do with a team that has an outbreak, can't reschedule, and is (let's say) 90% vaccinated players. You might have 5 unvaccinated players and 48 vaccinated players on a team. Now let's say they test them all because of a couple of cases and they find 12 people are positive, most or all asymptomatic... and yet this happens on Saturday. What do you do with that game? The whole "if we can't reschedule it, you'll have to forfeit" seems like a huge loophole. Last year they went through hoops to reschedule games and bent over backwards. In fact, the only way I can see them not rescheduling it is if it's a week 18 game. Otherwise... they are going to go to extreme lengths to reschedule, vaccinated or unvaccinated. No one gets paid when they don't play games.
BRH Posted July 23, 2021 Posted July 23, 2021 "Dennison, 63, worked with Gary Kubiak for more than three decades in Denver (1995-2009, 2015-16), Houston (2010-13) and Baltimore (2014). Before joining the Vikings in 2019, Dennison served as offensive line coach/run game coordinator for the New York Jets in 2018." It's like 2017 didn't even happen. 1
machine gun kelly Posted July 23, 2021 Posted July 23, 2021 Some industries are Mandating vaccination for entry of work. Not just first responders but in medical device sales, biotechnology sales and depending on pharma meaning how close the interaction is to patients they won’t hire you and right in the hr description on hiring practices. Not a law, but they just meaning hospitals or other facilities Barr you unless you show you’re card. I’m not saying right or wrong, Im only saying these are private industries and if it’s right in an hr description, you can bet it’s not against the law. the two coaches fired weren’t smart. If they were top all 22 talent maybe they can just follow the protocols and make their choice. The backups, assistant coaches, and so on, are taking a risk. Most organizations won’t say they were fired because a vacc. Declination, but the message is going to be clear to these guys. Not debating the ethical nature of right or wrong here, just the reality.
Chaos Posted July 23, 2021 Posted July 23, 2021 At some point one of the NFL teams should rename itself the Sheep. They will instantly be the most popular team in the USA. Merchandise sales would soar. 1 1 1
GaryPinC Posted July 23, 2021 Posted July 23, 2021 47 minutes ago, GunnerBill said: Again though I don't believe that this is a question that you should boil down to pure economics about what is good for business. It is too important for that and the societal risks, in my view, make it unsuitable for that sort of market driven approach. The market won't give a flying kangaroo if their approach creates a social underclass disenfranchised from the rest of society. It never does. I may well be getting into a lot of my general critique of monetism and "free" markets here but if as a global community we get this question wrong the ramifications are extremely serious. It is a decision that should not for me be driven by anyone's bottom line. Sure they would if it hurts business! It's easy to think only about the economics (and many do) but it's also about keeping people as safe and healthy in the workplace as possible. I can never deny economics plays the major role in businesses but that doesn't make it mutually exclusive to a safe and healthy workplace. I wholeheartedly agree with you when it comes to mandating emergency-authorized use compounds, but approved, proven, safe compounds/vaccines to protect your workers I'm okay with.
GLP Posted July 24, 2021 Posted July 24, 2021 Goodbye to a couple of “less than critical thinkers”… (aka mor.ns) Critical Thinking: “The objective analysis and evaluation of an issue in order to form a judgment.” Bye,bye to Cole as well… good riddance! 1 1
dorquemada Posted July 24, 2021 Posted July 24, 2021 3 minutes ago, GLP said: Goodbye to a couple of “less than critical thinkers”… (aka mor.ns) Critical Thinking: “The objective analysis and evaluation of an issue in order to form a judgment.” Bye,bye to Cole as well… good riddance! wow deep man
Mr. WEO Posted July 24, 2021 Posted July 24, 2021 Why wouldn't the fire Dennison for being a s*****y coach? There's no vaccine for that.
Hapless Bills Fan Posted July 24, 2021 Posted July 24, 2021 1 hour ago, MiltonWaddams said: It’s funny. My post was responded to, but it was also deleted. That’s funny. It's imperfection. We mods are imperfect. Alert the media! Also sometimes we remove posts that quote removed posts, but the post itself isn't a problem so if someone quotes it it stays IDK if that makes sense, probably not 🤷♂️ 3 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said: Why wouldn't they fire Dennison for being a s*****y coach? There's no vaccine for that. Apparently, that's not their assessment of him 1 1
Recommended Posts