Home Covid-19 California Should Vaccinate The Rich First

California Should Vaccinate The Rich First

Author

Comments

So, how do we value lives? And, having done so, who should gain access to something in short supply? Over in California they’re considering this and, given that they’re over in California, getting the answer wrong. The reason they’re doing so is because they’re ignoring the valuation that we’ve already done.

No, not you and me as individuals and not as an actual written down calculation. But as a society, the whole of us an all our myriad interactions, we have gone out and valued the lives of everyone within the society. It’s called the market and that’s what it does.

No, not some mysterious capitalist value, or exchange value (not that we allow such for human beings these days) or even just “market value”. Market exchange tells us what people do, on average, value and what value they apply, on average, to those things. That undocumented farm workers get $10 an hour and CEOs $1,000 is not some Aquinan true value, nor is it some moral turpitude that this is the way it turns out. Rather, that’s just the aggregate outcome of the interaction of hundreds of millions of people.

You know, all these values are human values, they’re values applied by humans and the value is the value that is emergent from what humans do.

At which point we have the answer to this problem being gnawed over in California:

As the first doses of the Covid-19 vaccine arrive in California, officials are facing intense pressure to prioritize vulnerable communities and promote equity and racial justice in the state’s distribution scheme.

Historically marginalized groups that have been ravaged by the virus and their advocates are pushing for urgent vaccine access, including farm workers in the Central Valley, undocumented laborers in the meatpacking industry, incarcerated people in overcrowded prisons and indigenous communities in remote regions.

In deciding who gets access to the limited supplies of the life-saving vaccine in the coming months, the most populous and diverse state in the country will have to answer thorny questions about what work is “essential” and how the government should address the pandemic’s systemic inequalities and historical injustices amid the virus’ deadliest surge yet.

“This is a hard question, because you’re essentially asking whose lives matter the most,” said Janel Bailey, co-director of the Los Angeles Black Worker Center, which has helped provide Covid testing in hard-hit Black neighborhoods.

We already have our answer. Rich folks are worth more than poor folks. So, rich folks get the vaccine first.

This being logical too – to somewhat soften the moral blow there. For what is our aim with the vaccine? To stop suffering the vast economic blow of the vaccine. Not losing $4 and $6 trillion a year from the US economy will do more for the lives – lifespans and also living standards – of the poor and everyone else than any other thing we could do. By our economic valuation already discussed who contributes most to that economic value? The higher paid of course. So, get them back to work and we have minimised the economic loss.

Just as with any other economic asset of course. Economic output, economic wealth itself, is maximised when economic assets move from lower to higher valued uses. Currently the vaccine doses are a scarce economic resource. Of course, in strict terms they always will be but the’re really scarce now. So, utility is maximised by vaccinating the higher paid – deploying those vaccine doses to their highest valued use.

True, all of that is rather bloodless and even calculating. But then that’s the answer that society has already provided us with. We do, by definition, already value the work of the lower paid less than we do that of the higher. So, something that enables work to resume should be distributed in that order.

SUPPORT US WITH A SUBSCRIPTION?

8 COMMENTS

  1. Someone once commented on my (entirely rationale) proposed funding model for health services in the UK (replacement for the hopeless HNS) was “lacking compassion”. You can’t account for stupid.

  2. Being a paranoid pessimist, I’d say ‘Definitely vaccinate the rich – rather than me.’ Thus any problems with these hastily produced vaccines will be suffered by someone else.

  3. The fastest economic recovery isn’t from vaccinating the rich first, it’s from vaccinating the high-risk (largely the elderly) first. If you can cut deaths and hospitalisations by, say, 80% through prioritising vaccination of the most vulnerable, then you’re a long way to being able to get back to “proper normal”. Vaccinating late-middle-age accountants, lawyers, executives etc who are willing to pay more doesn’t actually help so much with the opening up process.

  4. A value is always for a purpose. It is meaningless as just an abstraction. In the case of vaccination, you shuld vaccinate those who thereby do the most to prevent spread of the disease. That does not mean rich people, who can easily isolate themselves for a while longer. It means people like medics whose job requires them to get in close contact with lots of people. If they can be made immune you not only help them but also all the people they might have spread the disease on to. Similarly for anyone else where you can get an amplification effect – maybe taxi drivers, shop workers, pizza delivery workers (not so much as the contacts are brief), prostitutes, etc. Another factor which is relevant in America is whether a person who is infectious would isolate themselves or continue going about their business and infect others. Generally, poor people cannot afford to isolate themselves (in America – in other countries they may be supported sufficiently during isolation), so you get a multiplier effect when you vaccinate them.

  5. If you vaccinate the rich first you can overcharge them so you can discount the price so the poor can afford it. All technologies start as an expensive plaything of the rich, and it’s the rich being bilked of their money that makes the technology affordable to the poor.

  6. “…. For what is our aim with the vaccine? To stop suffering the vast economic blow of the vaccine. Not losing $4 and $6 trillion a year from the US economy will do more…”

    Hmm.. I’m guessing that the rich are almost certainly able to arrange to continue their work from home with minimal discomfort. having them in quarantine won’t lower their ability to earn.

    There are likely to be people in the economy who are critically dependent on being able to go to work tomorrow – otherwise they might not be able to eat. I suggest that they should be early candidates (assuming, of course, that the only way to be allowed to go to work is to have the vaccine).

    In fact, we have already found out, in the UK at least, who the most important people are for keeping the economy going. These are termed ‘essential workers’, and include transport workers, logistics staff, teachers (to enable little Arabella and Samuel to be out of the way of the husband and wife trading team), infrastructure workers and waste disposal.

    • Teachers? Really? Most of them haven’t done any work for most of the past year so they can’t qualify as “essential workers” as they are missing the key criteria of “work”.

    • Actually the most vital people to keep the economy going are farmers and factory workers – but the BBC doesn’t actually see them. Everyone else is support staff.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

expunct

in British English
expunct (ɪkˈspʌŋkt)
VERB (transitive)
1. to delete or erase; blot out; obliterate
2. to wipe out or destroy

Support Us

Recent posts

American Hyperconsumerism Is Killing Fewer People!

This report does not say what the Guardian headline writers think it does: Three Americans create enough carbon emissions to kill one person, study finds The...

Contracts Often Lag New Revenue Streams

I've been - vaguely and not with any great interest - anticipating a story like this: Scarlett Johansson sues Walt Disney over Marvel’s Black Widow...

Richard Murphy Rediscovers Monetarism

We have a delightful example of how Richard Murphy simply doesn't understand the basic nuts and bolts of the economics he wants to impose...

Vox Is Missing The Point About Having A Constitution

Not that we should be all that surprised by this from the progressives at Vox. No government- well, no one not controlled by...

So Let’s Have An Elitist Technocracy Instead!

There's been a certain amount - OK, a lot - of squealing in the US about how democracy is the ultimate value and we...

Recent comments