Because one of those things is contagious, impacting consumers and laborers and therefore halting commerce until addressed. It was determined to be more profitable to give away free shots. Yay capitalism.
this post was submitted on 28 Jul 2026
1257 points (99.6% liked)
Political Memes
12258 readers
1548 users here now
Welcome to politcal memes!
These are our rules:
1) Be civil
Jokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.
2) No misinformation
Don’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.
3) Posts should be memes
Random pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.
4) No bots, spam or self-promotion
Follow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.
5) No AI generated content.
Content posted must not be created by AI with the intent to mimic the style of existing images
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
Yes, herd immunity is inapplicable to diabetes, cancer, or allergies.
Edit: Is there a way to generically refer to not OP but the original original poster? The guy, for example, who's confused in this post (Jum). Is OOP standard?
OOP
Object Oriented Person
Ornery and Officious Periodontologist
Orange Octagonal Polygon
OOP, yes
Unless of course OP's comment refers to multiple other comments, in which case it's OOPS
Fun fact: the Danish word for oops is "ups", which makes it fun to receive packages from United Parcel Service here 😁
It's the same in german, i was always saying i wouldn't get my parcel because ups!
(although GLS is far worse)
Unfortunately I don't think that it is standard, people also use OP to refer to a commenter higher up a single comment thread, so then the normal OP becomes the OOP, meaning the OP in the post would become the OOOP. Or we could use "Pre-Original-Original-Poster"...
people also use OP to refer to a commenter higher up a single comment thread too
I've never understood that. That's literally not the OP. The original poster is the one who posted the post, not a comment.
Using the word that way is antithetical to its very meaning. It's like if I randomly started calling my cousin my grandfather, but unironically (side rant: "unironically" is used to mean "non-sarcastically," because people can't grasp the difference between sarcasm and irony 🤦♀️).
Anyway, you could refer to the "top-level comment," but I don't think there's an acronym for that. But I've seen OC used, it's just rare. OC can refer to any higher-level comment though as long as the context makes it clear which one it's in reference to.
But the one who posted the post is not OOP. That's OP. OOP is the one who posted the post that OP's post refers to.
I guess the POOP would then be any OOPs from OOP's post or prior...
load more comments
(2 replies)
load more comments
(1 replies)
load more comments
(4 replies)
I think I was always dimly aware of the notion, but one of the things that covid really highlighted for me was that people in power are able to put an actual cash figure on every human life.
"If we spend more than £X on a given solution to this problem, it will stop being financially worthwhile"
And £X+ was the point at which disabled people, or younger people, or both, or whoever, were just left to die. Governments spent a lot of money, for sure, but not a penny more than was necessary to keep the economy (somewhat) upright and their cronies in cocktails and bigger yachts.
Even worse, the £X is the short-term financial gains. Reducing poverty and homelessnes DOES profit over long run, but we don't have anyone at top competent enough to tradeoff it with "slightly less profit margins increased by next year."
That each human being has an estimated cash value is something that was taught in school when I went at least. It was more related to how much a death costs estimated based on how much value the person could have brought in if alive.
What's really wild is that every government has multiple numbers depending on what they're spending on. The amount that their departments associated with it will spend to rescue a citizen held hostage is different from the amount they'll spend to save a life from disease which is different from the amount any particular infrastructure related department will spend to save a life, which may all be different from each other, and may be different based on cause of death (my government will spend a lot more to save a life from a passenger train related death than from a freight train related death or an automobile death)
ETA: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Value_of_a_statistical_life
load more comments
(2 replies)
load more comments
(7 replies)
I don't frequently have these kinds of debates in public, but the closest I've ever gotten to talking a vaccine skeptic out of their position was when I came from the angle of, "these shots are free because insurance companies know they work, and they would rather eat the cost of 100 vaccines than have to pay for every hundredth person to be hospitalized with the flu for 3 days, which costs THEM $40k."
Yeppp, insurance companies want you to have to have health insurance, be perfectly healthy as long as possible, and die or recover quickly when you get something expensive like cancer. Vaccines are basically always going to be a good value proposition for them because most people should get them which spreads the cost of R&D and manufacturing out between most people in a way that hospital stays and designer drugs can'tm
load more comments
(7 replies)
COVID shots also save the lives of other people because of reducing disease transmission (fewer people sick means less transmission), which is acceptable for the most simpleton "What's in it for me crowd".
Meanwhile the socialized healthcare things are only acceptable for people who don't want to see others suffer (i.e. who have empathy) and/or who can see how living in a country were other people have better lives also improves their own lives (i.e. who have social awareness) and/or who are aware than "one day I might be the one there" (i.e. reasonable intelligent and risk aware).
So it absolutelly makes sense that in countries were people are heavilly brainwashed to have simpleton zero-sum-game selfish views on social issues, COVID shots are an easier idea to sell (and even then, as we saw mainly in the US, it's pretty easy to swindle the dumbest of the "What's in it for me" crowd to think the COVID shots are actually bad for them and refuse to take them).
Adding to your second paragraph, it also turns out that people who are healthy are more able to contribute to society, so even if you have zero empathy you're going to want to provide for many of the basics that the US has increasingly striven to make unaffordable.
load more comments
(6 replies)
When smallpox was eradicated in the 1950s, it was achieved with something like 100 million doses of the vaccine, which was substantially less than the world population at the time (in the neighborhood of 2.5 billion). This is because scientists understood that the vaccine was not something for individual protection but was rather a weapon to protect the population as a whole (and annihilate the disease entirely) when coupled with a full understanding of how the disease spread.
the gov benefits from a healthy, non-pleage riddled populous.
the only reason America is different is because your culture idolizes money and a selfish level of individualism. thats why your health care system, much like other aspects of your economy and socity, is pay to win.
Yeah turns out healthy people work more and pay more taxes, which the government likes
Completely unrelated to this meme, but does anyone have the meme of republicans not understanding hypotheticals that goes like
"Imagine you are [x]"
"But I'm not [x]? I'm [y]"
There's also the fact that rich people buying insulin for themselves is enough to keep them safe. Rich people vaccinating only themselves though won't be anywhere near as effective.
Unvaccinated people just give a vaccine-resistant strain the chance to develop.
To think the years we've been set back. The things society could provide for the people... It really makes me sad.
COVID shots weren't given away for free, the government paid corporations for it with public money.
Public trials for new therapies cost billions. Pfizer and Moderna got this stage for free.
Man discovers that the same government that doesn't pay for insulin or chemotherapy is willing to pay for COVID vaccine 🤔
man if seizures and hypoglycaemic episodes were contagious that medicine would be cheaper
Thank you, Michael J Caboose.
time is merely mans attempt to control his environment. clocks sole purpose is to create controllable sequences of events
is that also why the timestamps are conspicuously missing from this screenshot?
Im still thinking about the title, plainly it makes sense but idk what OP meant by it!
Because diabetes isn’t contagious. It was never altruistic.
Because covid is contagious. If one thing is worse than death, it's death that spreads, also know as a plague. Orders of magnitude worse. They change everyone's history, not just your family's.
view more: next ›