A sense of entitlement

Quoth the Dorey:

Let's leave aside the (somewhat disrespectful) red herring of "anti-choicers" for a moment, and examine the rest of this absurd tweet.

In Australia, there is an entitlement meant to encourage vaccination, which was recently revised. You are only entitled to this if you completely vaccinate, or have a valid reason that excludes you from vaccinating.

Do you get this, Meryl? It is an incentive to vaccinate.

Therefore you're only entitled to it if you vaccinate.

Imagine for a moment, a government incentive to insulate your property. A fine idea, and one which benefits everyone (except perhaps the power companies) in these environmentally conscious times.

Should you be entitled to receive the insulation incentive if you don't insulate?

Should you Meryl?

Come on Meryl, should you be entitled to receive an isulation incentive if you don't insulate?

And if so, what the fuck is the point of the incentive in the first place? You don't have to be an economist to realise that offering an incentive - in order to to encourage people to take action - is useless if you do not make the incentive contingent upon that action. If you arrived in economics 101 without having an inkling of this, you'd be laughed out of the opening lecture.

Are you really this stupid, Dorey? Are you really?

posted @ Thursday, January 19, 2012 12:17 PM


Comments on this entry:

# re: A sense of entitlement

Left by anonymousType at 1/19/2012 4:03 PM
No I don't think Dorey can claim she is that stupid, but the current government can. Come on, there isn't really a valid reason to not vaccinate and scam the entitlement. But people like Dorey will continue to encourage this, using Dorey-logic.
Comments have been closed on this topic.
Vaccination Saves Lives: Stop The Australian Vaccination Network
Say NO to the National School Chaplaincy Program