> That says you know what percentage of the people I am in contact with need to be vaccinated for some level of what you think I would consider to be "acceptable risk."
So, do you know what that percentage would be, for various vaccines?
And how did you define what my acceptable risk would be?
Because I think you must have an opinion on both of those things, if you're willing to advise me that "I need most."
Since you're favoring an economic slant to this discussion, how, exactly, did you decide what I need?

You need most to get herd immunity. It varies on the disease, but you dont need unanimity to get it. Herd immunity was the prize you mentioned that justified using forceful mechanisms, where I answered you dont need it. What you individually want most is your judgement, I'm just telling you that you dont need everyone to agree with you to get herd immunity effects.

> People can be carriers of diseases, and not become ill from them. This nullifies your argument.
Also, that line of argument can be used as a defense of drunk driving.
Drunk driving is not victim-less, even if your own body is risked, as well.
That's insufficient escrow even for automobile insurance.

In drunk driving, you are harming someone. In not vaccinating, you are not protecting someone. The comparable analogy would be that as long as you have space in your house, you should be forced to home the homeless. Since you, by taking space, are directly harming them with your negligence and self-interest, which then also have cumulative effects on society.

> Yes, I think people can enact a government. A government has an enforced monopoly on force, and hopefully has established a system of laws that give the people the opportunity to change those laws over time.
And frankly, we voted. We use force against ourselves. We're okay with that.
Feel free to vote that we shouldn't be okay with that. Also, feel free to move and renounce your citizenship.
Those legal options are available to you.
You can also attempt to resist the laws of your country, peacefully or otherwise. I wouldn't recommend it.

It is illegal to force vaccinations in the U.S. If you live in the use, you should move to a country that enforces your vaccination ideals.

> (of physically forcing people) Fine by me.

When you do it successfully, please send me proof and Ill gladly share your story with the world. I'd like to see you try doing this. Until then, talk is talk.

> Oxygen is a benefit. Not having it is not a cost.

Oxygen is nature, herd immunity is a societal benefit. Humans dont own oxygen, but they do, in a way, own the capacity to build herd immunity. This kind of logic is trying to reverse the burden of proof: that whatever you dont have is yours because it could be. Herd immunity is not a right, its not a natural right, not a legal right, etc. It's merely an effect of vaccines.

> We have government to debate issues exactly like this.

Governments have decided against forceful vaccination. Albeit some arguments about kids, babies and dogs, but to adults its generally in most cases, illegal to force it.

Also, I find the line of argumentation about government kind of off-the-mark. Government is not supposed to be the way you force other people to do your will. That is a tyranny. If 51% vote to enslave the other 49%, a disservice to mankind was made. Thats why the modern governments are democracies with severe limitations on individual rights.

> Personally, I'm realizing I should be trying to get my employer to demand all of the employees be reasonably vaccinated, via their employment contracts

I hope your employer has the right to do that. He might not have it, due to some other person believing the opposite to your point, and willing to break into the employers home and physicially forcing them to do it.