Proof of Vaccination or Negative COVID Test required for theme parks soon?

[Californian Elitist]

So, I totally see your point and I understand it. But I can't tell if it's a slippery slope argument or something entirely, but the logic is off because it implies that discrimination is to blame, and simply not the fact that regardless of the issue (historical trust in government, etc.) minority groups have the EXACT same access to the vaccine. There is no institutional, environmental, or governmental barrier. It comes down to choice, regardless of race.

Exactly. Anyone who isn’t vaccinated can lose access to services. Race doesn’t matter.

 

[TP2000]

And? So will the percentages of other races. Why are we only talking about Latinos and African Americans?

They are markedly less vaccinated than Asians and Whites, at least currently. Thus, the peoples most denied access to public accomodation in California will be Latino and Black. Sad, but true.

 

[TP2000]

So, I totally see your point and I understand it. But I can't tell if it's a slippery slope argument or something entirely, but the logic is off because it implies that discrimination is to blame, and simply not the fact that regardless of the issue (historical trust in government, etc.) minority groups have the EXACT same access to the vaccine. There is no institutional, environmental, or governmental barrier. It comes down to choice, regardless of race.

The point is that Sacramento needs to do a vastly better job of getting Latinos and Blacks vaccinated, at least up to the level of Asians and Whites, before Sacramento passes a law to start denying public accomodations to people based on vaccination rates.

This is why Sacramento and most local politicians made such a big deal of tracking the races of people who are vaccinated.

 

[TP2000]

The latest draft version of the legislation I’ve seen has an implementation date of 11/1 which is intended to provide what they consider “sufficient lead time” for the Governor’s office to draft the the various business regulations by industry and push out guidance to the various localities.

This also would give more time for the vaccine hesitant to reconsider their position. This is assuming the bill authors stick with their most aggressive timeframe of completing this bill by close of legislative session on 9/10.

While the concept has near universal support among those of import in Sacramento there are some key disagreements among the business community and labor unions on how to implement this comprehensive plan. Add to that the Governor’s office is lukewarm to embarking pushing this aggressively right now in the midst of the current recall.

Oh, well that's some good news at least. Californians would have about 50 days to get vaccinated if this bill gets approved and signed by September 10th. I'm still skeptical this will happen though because of the Recall election.

Still, there's a lot of work to do before you start denying unvaccinated Californians access to public life and business on November 1st.

Currently, 55.4% of Californians are fully vaccinated. That's 22 Million Californians fully vaccinated, and 18 Million Californians unvaccinated.

The California legislature won't return to Sacramento until January, 2022. Things could be very, very different by then politically and with Covid and this issue would likely be moot.

 

[cmwade77]

Live with the consequences.... Like we're all idiots. What about the MILLIONS of people who have immunity from natural infection and don't want to risk side effects or long term damage from an unnecessary vaccine? No consideration is given for natural immunity. I had covid. Why would I have to get vaccinated?

"Because the immunity doesn't last."

It clearly doesn't last with vaccines either, as booster shots are being required and efficacy rates are plummeting.

None of this is about a virus or vaccines. This is about unending power grabs and being able to label any opposition as wanting people to die.

Isn't it interesting that the California legislature, after 18 months of letting the governor do everything through emergency powers, is suddenly teeing up a statewide vaccine mandate just as the governor is at risk of being voted out over those policies? Even though the people of California are clearly unhappy about all of it, they're trying to rush a legislative bill that Newsom can sign on his way out that a new governor cannot undo through EO. It's a huge middle finger to the voters of California.

I agree that the mandate is a bad idea, but getting vaccinated is not a bad idea and by the way, there are negative long term health effects that are negative if you get COVID without being vaccinated that are do right scary.

And there are consequences to getting vaccinated and not getting vaccinated, you make your choice and live with the consequences, but don't expect others to wear masks, etc. To keep you from getting sick because you aren't vaccinated.

 

[Californian Elitist]

They are markedly less vaccinated than Asians and Whites, at least currently. Thus, the peoples most denied access to public accomodation in California will be Latino and Black. Sad, but true.

Lol.

Bye with this, TP.

 

[TP2000]

Lol.

Bye with this, TP.

I'm not sure why that's funny to you.

If you are going to prevent the unvaccinated from going into restaurants, or theme parks, or gyms, or public accomodations in general in California, the demographics on who makes up the unvaccinated at this point is important.

I'm a not-poor white guy, and the majority of my friends are not-poor whites and Asians. I don't know anyone who is not vaccinated. The talk amongst my crowd now is who is getting their booster shots and when. My social circle will not be excluded from going into any business or building in California that we choose. We are all fully vaccinated.

This demographic data on the unvaccinated is well known to Sacramento planners and politicians. They've made it a point of tracking it, to be honest. I'm not sure they've thought this through. But the September 10th deadline is not on their side, what with the September 14th deadline looming ever larger.

My hunch is that this bonehead idea on requiring vaccinations will not make it to the governor's desk by September 10th.

 

[TP2000]

If ya don't like my comments, you can ignore me

I gotta say, I'm fascinated with this ignore thing. I never thought about it for over 15 years on this site. I only used it once about a year ago, and it took me 10 minutes to figure out how to do it.

It happened after some bozo here tried to say I was "racist" because I have been a lifelong fan of The Supremes and even took a trip to Detroit a few years ago specifically to visit the Motown Museum (and got verklempt while I was there standing in that magical garage sound studio, before dropping a grand in the gift shop). The idiocy and bigotry of that specific poster angered me so much, I put him on ignore.

But then a few weeks later I figured this site wasn't worth that much emotion, so I went in and took him off ignore. And since then I've just been happy to chat with anyone here, and sometimes they make me giggle when they get all angry about stuff.

Some folks here just seem really angry and miserable in general, never able to laugh at themselves or anything really, so what can you do with those folks but try to pull them along for the fun the rest of us are having?

 

[BuzzedPotatoHead89]

While I really hate to wade into this one the fact in the eyes of policymakers there is a distinct legal difference between what some may arguably claim as de facto segregation policies and de jure segregation policies.

Just look at the the disaster that is zoning policy and California land use law and the detrimental outcomes state housing policy. From a policy perspective this is really no different than other “sin taxes” that (while unintentional) still nonetheless disproportionately “hit” those in lower socio-economic groups at higher rates. The state lottery, alcohol/tobacco taxes, etc. all come to mind. This is really no different in terms of outcomes.

Which is to say claims of discrimination by race, ethnicity, or socio-economic status (whether made in good faith or not) are frankly not going to stop legislators from…well… legislating on this matter. Particularly not in notoriously law-happy Sacramento which as has regulatory oversight over where Disneyland resides.

 

[TP2000]

While I really hate to wade into this one...

Wade on in! It's August and the water is warm! No harm in talking like polite, rational adults.

...the fact in the eyes of policymakers there is a distinct legal difference between what some may arguably claim as de facto segregation policies and de jure segregation policies.

Just look at the the disaster that is zoning policy and California land use law and the detrimental outcomes state housing policy. From a policy perspective this is really no different than other “sin taxes” that (while unintentional) still nonetheless disproportionately “hit” those in lower socio-economic groups at higher rates. The state lottery, alcohol/tobacco taxes, etc. all come to mind. This is really no different in terms of outcomes.

Which is to say claims of discrimination by race, ethnicity, or socio-economic status (whether made in good faith or not) are frankly not going to stop legislators from…well… legislating on this matter. Particularly not in notoriously law-happy Sacramento which as has regulatory oversight over where Disneyland resides.

I brought this up, so I feel I have an obligation to see it through.

It fascinates me that in this age where Sacramento hammers home "Equity", and the governor constantly droned on about how "Equity is our north star" in the fight against Covid, that they would consider a law that prevents the unvaccinated from accessing public accomodations in this state. When they know darn well the current demographic data on who is highly vaccinated and who is under vaccinated in California, by race and zip code.

Short Summary in August, 2021:
Wealthy Pale People Living on Beach or in The Hills = Highly Vaccinated
Poorer n' Darker People Living Unglamorously Inland = Under Vaccinated

Gov. Newsom Says Equity is ‘North Star' in Vaccine Eligibility

Gov. Gavin Newsom visited a school in Alameda County Tuesday and discussed vaccine eligibility and reopening tiers.

www.nbcbayarea.com

I guess I'm just shocked that Sacramento lawmakers would consider such a law. My only guess is that they simply haven't thought this through, and unlike me and people here subjected to my data-driven posts, they have not even glanced at their own Covid Dashboard that is updated daily by their own California Department of Public Health.

Again, it appears they have not thought this thing through. And they are too stupid to realize who this will negatively impact the most.

 

[smooch]

Live with the consequences.... Like we're all idiots. What about the MILLIONS of people who have immunity from natural infection and don't want to risk side effects or long term damage from an unnecessary vaccine? No consideration is given for natural immunity. I had covid. Why would I have to get vaccinated?

"Because the immunity doesn't last."

It clearly doesn't last with vaccines either, as booster shots are being required and efficacy rates are plummeting.

None of this is about a virus or vaccines. This is about unending power grabs and being able to label any opposition as wanting people to die.

Isn't it interesting that the California legislature, after 18 months of letting the governor do everything through emergency powers, is suddenly teeing up a statewide vaccine mandate just as the governor is at risk of being voted out over those policies? Even though the people of California are clearly unhappy about all of it, they're trying to rush a legislative bill that Newsom can sign on his way out that a new governor cannot undo through EO. It's a huge middle finger to the voters of California.

What side effects and risks are there for this vaccine? There's literally a 0.0000006% rate of serious adverse side effects to the vaccine. I'm also curious how there's going to be long term side effects if apparently the vaccine doesn't last for a long time either. I thought people were waiting for the vaccine to be FDA approved to take it, but now that it is they just say they don't trust the FDA. Sounds like goal posts being moved and people just don't want to admit that they don't plan on taking the vaccine.

While yes you can argue there are aspects of the use of power that are in play in this decision is it really that hard to believe that it is mainly driven by being forced to use that power because when people are not mandated to take a life saving / pandemic ending vaccine they instead believe the myriad of misinformation online and make the poor decision to not be vaccinated, thus endangering themselves and those around them while also prolonging this pandemic? Nobody wants to label their opposition, they want people to get vaccinated so things can begin to go back to normal.

I've never been a fan of the government mandating / forcing things that aren't necessary, but this vaccine given this GLOBAL PANDEMIC is something that I would deem a necessary use of power. The same way the government mandates that you're not allowed to drink and drive because it endangers not only yourself but innocent people around you, just like being unvaccinated endangers you and innocent people around you.

Not everything is a conspiracy theory. Yes there are things that the government lies about and hides for nefarious purposes, but this is not one of them. Sometimes the simplest answer is the correct one. It's extremely simple actually, we've been in a global pandemic that has killed 4.48 million people. We now have developed a vaccine that greatly reduces your chance of catching the virus, having a severe case if you do catch it, and greatly reduces your chance of being hospitalized if you do catch it. People should be trusted to make the correct decision, but when the incorrect decision of one person can harm / kill another innocent person and not enough people are making the decision that will lead to herd immunity / the end of this pandemic then I believe it is absolutely justified for the government to enact mandates that will require people to get vaccinated in order to get out of this pandemic. The same way vaccines have been required to fly to other countries or even go to college. Nobody ever came out complaining that requiring all those other vaccines was a power grab from the government. But in this world we live in now everything has to be a conspiracy theory because misinformation has run rampant on the internet for years and years.

 

[Californian Elitist]

I'm not sure why that's funny to you.

If you are going to prevent the unvaccinated from going into restaurants, or theme parks, or gyms, or public accomodations in general in California, the demographics on who makes up the unvaccinated at this point is important.

I'm a not-poor white guy, and the majority of my friends are not-poor whites and Asians. I don't know anyone who is not vaccinated. The talk amongst my crowd now is who is getting their booster shots and when. My social circle will not be excluded from going into any business or building in California that we choose. We are all fully vaccinated.

This demographic data on the unvaccinated is well known to Sacramento planners and politicians. They've made it a point of tracking it, to be honest. I'm not sure they've thought this through. But the September 10th deadline is not on their side, what with the September 14th deadline looming ever larger.

My hunch is that this bonehead idea on requiring vaccinations will not make it to the governor's desk by September 10th.

What’s funny is the fake concern about Latinos and African Americans.

Conservatives are now concerned about race only because they don’t believe in vaccine mandates and are personally bothered by businesses with said vaccine mandates. “But what about the blacks and the Latinos?!” Give me a break. There’s been no actual concern for these communities up until now, and it’s so obviously fake as hell. Again, ANYONE who isn’t fully vaccinated will not have certain privileges, no matter the race. Vaccine mandates are not a race-based civil rights issue.

Let’s talk about the real issues surrounding why Latinos and African Americans aren’t getting vaccinated at high rates. Let’s get to the roots, the actual social problems regarding this topic. Not being able to walk inside a Denny’s to eat a Grand Slam or walk into Disneyland to meet people in fuzzy costumes are the least of our concerns.

 

[mandelbrot]

Disney is requiring all CM's to be vaccinated by the first week of October. Those not vaccinated and without a valid reason for not getting vaccinated will be terminated. There's a shocking number of unvaccinated CM's right now and TDA is already ramping up hiring efforts to replace those who will be let go. The area of most concern is food service as that department has a high percentage of employees of a particular demographic with low vax rates. And though it hasn't been publicized there have been substantial outbreaks among CM's in the resort, particularly in restaurants. One prominent restaurant (which I will not name) has been especially hard hit.

I get not liking being told what to do. I do. But a free and safe vaccine that will save you a very expensive hospital stay or death at the very least with a damn near zero chance of giving you any serious side effects is a no-brainer to me. One CM who is an old friend of mine, who watched his brother die of Covid a few months ago, has now been in the hospital with Covid for three weeks. Today he was put on a ventilator and his outlook is grim. He watched his brother die of the disease which is now killing him--a disease for which he could have been vaccinated but he chose not to for whatever reason.

At the rate we're going this pandemic will never end. New variants will keep springing up among the unvaccinated (some of them almost certainly targeting children) and updated vaccines and/or boosters will have to be created. Most will get those shots but enough won't so the cycle of new variants and new shots will continue. Keep ordering those masks. We will be wearing them for years.

 

[mandelbrot]

My philosophy is to not worry about the communities of others if there are problems in my immediate community. Frankly, the black community in LA is no where near me and any discrimination they face is neither something I can prevent or address, so I just don’t invest emotions in what happens to them. That’s not because I want something bad to happen to them, I’m just fairly indifferent. I can clearly see that vaccine mandates would treat those members of the black community unfairly, but because it’s not something I can have any impact on combined with the fact there are more pressing matters in my immediate community that I can have an impact on, I don’t challenge it.

What’s so surprising is that there are members of the black community in LA who would rather see their brothers and sisters be discriminated against as a way of punishing the fictitious antivax boogeymen the propaganda machine has made up. That’s certainly not a perspective I have when it comes to my community I find it quite appalling, to be completely honest. But, as I said, this is not my community we’re discussing so I have little say, if any, with what happens to them.

If there are any persons who are offended by my initial comment, should I have a problem with vaccine mandates disproportionately effecting the black community in LA?

You make it sound like "the black community in LA" is some walled-off enclave where the residents only intermingle with each other. We are all here in the same region interacting with each other. We are all a few degrees of separation from everyone else and what happens in one community can easily travel to another community. That's the most polite way I can respond to this.

 

[Stevek]

What side effects and risks are there for this vaccine? There's literally a 0.0000006% rate of serious adverse side effects to the vaccine. I'm also curious how there's going to be long term side effects if apparently the vaccine doesn't last for a long time either. I thought people were waiting for the vaccine to be FDA approved to take it, but now that it is they just say they don't trust the FDA. Sounds like goal posts being moved and people just don't want to admit that they don't plan on taking the vaccine.

While yes you can argue there are aspects of the use of power that are in play in this decision is it really that hard to believe that it is mainly driven by being forced to use that power because when people are not mandated to take a life saving / pandemic ending vaccine they instead believe the myriad of misinformation online and make the poor decision to not be vaccinated, thus endangering themselves and those around them while also prolonging this pandemic? Nobody wants to label their opposition, they want people to get vaccinated so things can begin to go back to normal.

I've never been a fan of the government mandating / forcing things that aren't necessary, but this vaccine given this GLOBAL PANDEMIC is something that I would deem a necessary use of power. The same way the government mandates that you're not allowed to drink and drive because it endangers not only yourself but innocent people around you, just like being unvaccinated endangers you and innocent people around you.

Not everything is a conspiracy theory. Yes there are things that the government lies about and hides for nefarious purposes, but this is not one of them. Sometimes the simplest answer is the correct one. It's extremely simple actually, we've been in a global pandemic that has killed 4.48 million people. We now have developed a vaccine that greatly reduces your chance of catching the virus, having a severe case if you do catch it, and greatly reduces your chance of being hospitalized if you do catch it. People should be trusted to make the correct decision, but when the incorrect decision of one person can harm / kill another innocent person and not enough people are making the decision that will lead to herd immunity / the end of this pandemic then I believe it is absolutely justified for the government to enact mandates that will require people to get vaccinated in order to get out of this pandemic. The same way vaccines have been required to fly to other countries or even go to college. Nobody ever came out complaining that requiring all those other vaccines was a power grab from the government. But in this world we live in now everything has to be a conspiracy theory because misinformation has run rampant on the internet for years and years.

You know you aren't going to change this persons mind at this point.

"Vaccines aren't FDA approved so I won't take them"
Vaccines get approved
"FDA Vaccine approval was rushed so I won't take them"

The goalposts will continue to move to fit their narrative. A new excuse will come up whenever someone provides them with an answer. It's literally like talking to a 3 year old...apologies to all 3 year olds out there.

 

[Stevek]

I'm not sure why that's funny to you.

If you are going to prevent the unvaccinated from going into restaurants, or theme parks, or gyms, or public accomodations in general in California, the demographics on who makes up the unvaccinated at this point is important.

You've yet to explain why pointing out these specific races is important when literally everyone has access to a free vaccination. People, regardless of color, are making personal choices that will impact their ability to experience certain things. Whether they are black, white, or brown really should make zero difference and pointing racial differences (not inequalities) around vaccination rates and the impact on their ability to experience something is race baiting pure and simple.

 

[Californian Elitist]

You've yet to explain why pointing out these specific races is important when literally everyone has access to a free vaccination. People, regardless of color, are making personal choices that will impact their ability to experience certain things. Whether they are black, white, or brown really should make zero difference and pointing racial differences (not inequalities) around vaccination rates and the impact on their ability to experience something is race baiting pure and simple.

I think it’s very clear that some of us don’t know when to appropriately identify a societal issue that is race-based. As you asked, why are only the African American and Latino communities getting called out? You and I both know the answer to this question already.

Establishments that will require guests/customers to provide vaccination proof will not discriminate based on race and color. Those who are vaccinated will be served and those who aren’t will not be served. Simple as that.

 

[Californian Elitist]

What would that be? Do tell.

Go look at @Stevek ‘s most recent response. It’s the very last sentence.

 

[Californian Elitist]

but obviously a vaccine mandate is going to discriminate against those who aren't vaccinated,

This is the only point that’s relevant.

But you don’t care anyway, so…

 

[Stevek]

Go look at @Stevek ‘s most recent response. It’s the very last sentence.

It's unlikely they have seen my response...I'm sure there are more than a few folks that have put me on ignore, much like I have been doing to some.