So, let's consider a population of a million people.  Or N million people where N > 1, if it matters.

Let's put aside the (very small, hopefully) portion of the population that have an adverse reaction to a vaccine for <disease X> (this reaction is not necessarily known prior to the vaccination)

In a hypothetical case where everyone except for 1000 people get vaccinated, what risk to the vaccinated population is presented by the 1000 unvaccinated people?

Very few vaccines are 100% effective.  MMR is about 93% effective.

One of the costs to society is that it is possible to virtually wipe out diseases through universal vaccination.  But without universal vaccination, the strain can continue and mutate to become resistant to the vaccines.

On the other hand, universal vaccination causes the weak that would normally be weeded out of the gene pool to flourish.

'Gimp,

Wow!

What an articulate, well reasoned post. Thanks for that.

There's an expression: "The perception is the reality".

And my post on the topic was simply answering the allegation that the Trump=Hitler was concocted by the media, solely to bring Trump down. Emphasizing the fact that I had had a similar sentiment prior to reading it elsewhere. It was, in fact, a particular speech I listened to in my car where he was mocking Bush and Kerry in a very sarcastic, bombastic manner, and it all just sounded familiar, somehow.

Admittedly, "The Rise and Fall..." is not the be all and end all chronicle of what happened there, but I trust it got the broad sweep correctly. Another gem is "Berlin Diary", also by William Shirer, outlining a small slice of what transpired in the first person as a correspondent. Well worth the read. And available somewhere online as a pdf, IIRC.

But, again, thank for your post, and I see where you're coming from. Though the "Obama=Hitler" seems like a bit of a stretch.

I seriously doubt Gimp was advancing the "Obama = Hitler" analogy.  I think he was merely stating that it was less of a stretch than "Trump = Hitler".  I don't think Obama is near the demon that Hitler was.  But he has a very similar ability to mesmerize the masses through skillful oratory.

This might be the kiss of death, because every time I decided I liked a particular Republican candidate, they dropped out a few days later.

But now I have decided I want Kasich to win.  The biggest knock I hear about him is that "he doesn't have a chance".  That is the definition of a self-fulfilling prophesy.

But I truly think that Trump, Cruz and Rubio (who I thought I would be supporting) are all making a mockery out of the process.  Even though I like a lot of what each of them say, they have all proven to me that they are unqualified for the job of CIC.

So honestly, if you were to discard your current first choice among the contenders, who would be your second choice?

But regardless of what I think of any of them, I think that any of them would be better than Hillary or Sanders.

I like some of the new functionality.  I don't like the graphic presentation.

And as far as that thread "bashing" this site; The most valid point in that regard was the name calling of Mari as being a dyke.  Even if it is true; so what?

"raise taxes" - is that raise tax rates or increase tax revenue?

Thanks, you saved me the trouble of stating that obvious factoid.

Do liberals think that if they double the tax rate that they will double the Revenue?

If not, then they have to acknowledge the elasticity of the tax effect.  And if they acknowledge that, then they have to acknowledge that raising taxes isn't always the answer.

No matter what you do to businesses, (eg: raising taxes, raising labor rates, raising other expenses, adding additional regulations and restrictions) businesses will always adjust in ways that were not intended, and the public is usually the loser.

Well for one, that's sensationalism in media. Yes the B-52 is nuclear capable, but it doesn't guarantee that it will be carrying nukes.

And that's not what BUFF stands for- LoL

I think everyone knows that "Fellow" is a "cleaned up for polite society" to refer to the common colloquialism. 

I wonder how many of the "moderate democrats" are simply trying to poison the Republican process?

That's a possibility.

But I know quite a few Democrats that plan to vote for Trump in the election, but can't vote for him in the primary unless they change party affiliations, and they aren't ready to do that.  They just don't want to vote for Hillary or Bernie.

And they all puke at the thought of Cruz.  They view him as an uncompromising religious zealot.