I have nothing against a libertarian voluntary approach to the pandemic at least in spirit, but I think it runs into the usual shortcomings of individual-based risk approaches.
The virus risk is very asymmetric with a very steep mortality curve by age. Even hospitalization risk is steep. Perhaps most centrally some key transmission groups are lowest risk (young adults/kids) and the highest risk are fairly vulnerable and socially-dependent (elderly/nursing homes). This necessitates some substantial degree of self-sacrifice by low-risk persons.
We see this with similar approaches to health insurance, but much of those issues can be compensated for, subsidized, and the degree of pooled risk sharing is not as severe. Most importantly the risk is nearly fully internalized in those situations. However with a respiratory virus the risk-taking behavior of the individual generates negative externalities for others. Compounded even more as with asymptomatic/presymptomatic transmission those externalities aren't necessarily visible and can be highly diffuse.
In many respects it is not too dissimilar to climate change. If not worse as individual harm can be especially rapid and significant and the margin of safety narrower.
Vaccination has helped here by reducing the risk for high risk persons and by reducing transmission risk, but we still face the base shortcomings from the start of the pandemic. Most acutely in areas with low vaccination rates.
Who gets to decide if I self sacrifice?
The other problem here is that it is questionable whether or not vaccinating yourself helps others. There was a study that found that the amount of virus in nasal swabs of a vaccinated individuals was the same as in unvaccinated individuals. In other words, getting vaccinated does not necessarily stop you from being a carrier. I believe this was the reason for the renewed mask recommendations for those indoors even if you have been vaccinated (ironic since masks don't really work...at least not the ones people commonly use).
Yes, there are shortcoming to the voluntaryist approach. I don't think anyone claims otherwise. The claim is that there are fewer shortcomings than with any other approach.
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit
personal responsibility. If you are high risk it is on YOU to protect yourself not just in regards to this pandemic but everything in general. I remember when i was a kid and there was one guy in the school of 300 or so that that was deathly allergic to bee stings... Did we cancel all recess and field trips to keep him safe? Fuck no, he had to skip them himself.
As callous as it sounds it is not the responsibility of the collective to look after the individual, they can elect to do so, but coercion via threat of force is just plain wrong!
Downvoting a post can decrease pending rewards and make it less visible. Common reasons:
Submit