so the shots don't lower "the spread" enough to overcome the r0, even at 100%; but they are going to mandate it because they say that it will lower "the spread" enough to overcome r0 if everyone gets it?
Anyone who can not see that this logic is flawed should not be in charge of anything (a 6 year old could see it is flawed). Anyone who pushes this, therefore, is either unfit to rule, or is actively trying to hurt the people they rule over.
so the shots don't lower "the spread" enough to overcome the r0, even at 100%; but they are going to mandate it because they say that it will lower "the spread" enough to overcome r0 if everyone gets it?
Anyone who can not see that this logic is flawed should not be in charge of anything (a 6 year old could see it is flawed). Anyone who pushes this, therefore, is either unfit to rule, or is actively trying to hurt the people they rule over.
(post is archived)