Skip to main content

If President Biden gets his way, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) will require truck drivers, along with the overwhelming majority of American employees, to get COVID-19 injections or face stiff penalties. Truck drivers and their employers are already saddled with burdensome regulations via the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA). This new Biden regulation further intruding into drivers’ private medical affairs could make finding qualified truckers increasingly difficult, especially for small trucking companies.

At present, all commercially licensed big-rig drivers are required to submit to a physical medical exam every two years. If that exam finds a driver to be, say, pre-diabetic or pre-hypertensive, he must be prescribed medication from his doctor for the problem and present that to an official examiner in order to be cleared to drive. Then he must be reexamined every year instead of every other year.

Certain failures to meet the standards in the exam can disqualify drivers and cut their careers short. The Department of Transportation (DOT) physical not only requires testing by urine sample for diabetes and a blood pressure examination, but it is also a comprehensive physical including tests for vision, hearing, cardiovascular health, and (a favorite of the men), a hernia examination.

Why Truckers Might Say, ‘Jump Off a Bridge’

Adding a COVID shot (and potentially boosters) to these already invasive DOT physical requirements might make truckers balk for several reasons. For one, a good deal of young men aged 21 to 30 are in a low-risk group for complications from a COVID infection, and the Centers for Disease Control acknowledges data showing such younger vaccine recipients can later experience dangerous heart inflammation. Young truckers may make the calculation that risking an adverse side effect like this, although rare, is not worth the chance.

Other drivers might have religious or moral objections to how the vaccine was developed. Still others might simply be sick and tired of having Uncle Sam telling them what to do in virtually every area of their life and flat-out refuse for this reason alone.

Biden’s mandate in its current form also does not take into account those who have natural immunity from a previous COVID-19 infection. Some might see a vaccine as unnecessary because they have such natural immunity.

It is my considered opinion as a truck driver that this latest regulatory overreach may become a bane to small trucking companies at best and strangle the economy due to a severe lack of drivers at worst. I have acquired natural immunity, have ethical concerns about the vaccine, and, quite frankly, already despise complying with nonsensical regulations like this one and many others. If truckers like me decide to refuse this order, several possibilities are in play.

Employment Margins Are Already Very Tight

One possibility is that many of the smaller trucking companies (outfits running 1,000 or fewer trucks) will simply not be able to stay in business. Like many businesses, trucking runs on very tight margins. When trucks and trailers sit around not making revenue for the company because no one is available to drive them, trucking companies can quickly go out of business.

I currently work on perhaps the most important account my small transportation firm has. About ten of us service the local transport of goods for this account. If we all decided to strike when and if this vaccine mandate isn’t blocked by the courts, it is fairly likely the company would lose the account. This doesn’t only affect my company.

Even if our trucking outfit decides not to comply, what would happen to the manufacturers to which we deliver our goods that do? If our consignees decide they won’t let any truckers in who can’t produce proof of vaccination, our shipping client still might be forced to pull the account. That might be another death knell for this small trucking business. It stands to reason that other small businesses, which are already struggling to find qualified employees, could easily be facing the same fate

As the small and mid-size transportation outfits struggle for drivers and eventually are forced to close, the already rising prices for goods are set to spike even further. Transportation logistics are quite complicated and delicate. A disruption in labor availability is a major shock to supply lines.

Also, what happens if a shipper asks for proof of vaccine or for the driver to submit to a test and he refuses? Or the driver works for a company with fewer than 100 employees? The complications affecting the transportation industry are legion because of the business cuts across so many other aspects of American commerce.

For example, our ten-man operation struggles to maintain quotas when just one man is out for an illness. Even vacation time can be disruptive if not properly planned. Now imagine my manager’s frustration if a man arrives at a consignee to deliver his goods, tests positive for COVID, and the shipment is refused.

Obviously these two factors alone—lack of drivers and cooperation across the actors involved in supply chain fulfillment—would result in further shortages of materials arriving on time at manufacturers. That would mean manufacturers can’t process a certain consumer good (like groceries) and goods don’t appear on the shelves as frequently or in the same quantity. That causes a scarcity, and the prices soar. Scale that to the size of the U.S. economy, and it’s easy to see why Biden’s mandate is a really poor idea, even outside all its legal problems.

Is It Right to Force People to Take Medicines?

Additionally, what are the feds going to do if I refuse to get the vaccine but keep working? They plan to fine my company nearly $14,000 per violation. What will they do if the CEO decides not to pay the fines and keeps running the company as normal? Will federal agents arrest the CEO and all the office employees? What if they resist?

That’s an extreme and unlikely example, of course, but the point is, all laws and regulations are ultimately enforced at the point of a gun. I am convinced that the ruling class and a good chunk of the populace too easily forget what the ultimate enforcement of government regulation entails at the end of the day. Are vaccine mandates worth sending in enforcement officers to punish people for not obeying, or to force them into medical treatments against their wills?

President Biden and his party pay lip service to caring about the working class, but at every opportunity they can, they place more and more burdens on workers. This is precisely the reason most of us blue-collar, middle-class workers have taken to voting the way we do.

In a 2016 lecture at Hillsdale College entitled, “Conservative Civil Disobedience,” sociologist Charles Murray postulated that at some point, in order to stop being tyrannized by the regulatory state, workers and employers will need to refuse to comply, get arrested or fined for it, and take it to court. I’ve only got one question now, as someone who is deciding whether Biden’s vaccine mandate is a hill worth dying on: Is there a lawyer in the house?

"Let's Go Brandon"!

Original Post

Replies sorted oldest to newest

biden has become the authoritarian they accused Trump of being.  Now he is mandating access to our bank accounts, reporting of deposits and spending.  to do this he will nearly double the size of IRS.

we aren't asking for more from country, actually we are asking for less.  we want smaller government, less hand outs.  did you know refugees get more than people that paid into social security for over 40 years, plus paid into Medicare for over 40 years.   

@1130 posted:

biden has become the authoritarian they accused Trump of being.  Now he is mandating access to our bank accounts, reporting of deposits and spending.  to do this he will nearly double the size of IRS.

we aren't asking for more from country, actually we are asking for less.  we want smaller government, less hand outs.  did you know refugees get more than people that paid into social security for over 40 years, plus paid into Medicare for over 40 years.   

There you go again... making crazy claims with zero proof. What kinda sheeple are you?

Don't believe everything you read on the internet. ~Abraham Lincoln~

While Missouri Credit Union does not normally engage in political topics, we feel there is an CRUCIAL matter pending in Congress that needs your IMMEDIATE attention.



You are important to us and we want you to know the facts, especially when it relates to concerning developments around public policy that expose your financial privacy.



The Biden administration proposed requiring all credit unions, banks, and other financial institutions to report to the IRS on all deposits and withdrawals through personal accounts regardless of tax liability. This indiscriminate, comprehensive financial account reporting to the IRS can soon be enacted in Congress and will create a significant invasion of privacy to you our members.



Why should you be concerned?

  • If passed, the proposal will require the financial institutions like Missouri Credit Union to report deposits and withdrawals of $600 or more, on personal savings, transactional, loan, and investment accounts to the IRS regardless of member’s consent.
  • There are numerous concerns surrounding maintaining privacy and data security of your information.


What you can do -

Your credit union works for you, our members, not the IRS. We encourage you to join us NOW in telling your representatives that the proposed IRS bank account profiling is indiscriminate and intrusive.

@1130 posted:

While Missouri Credit Union does not normally engage in political topics, we feel there is an CRUCIAL matter pending in Congress that needs your IMMEDIATE attention.



You are important to us and we want you to know the facts, especially when it relates to concerning developments around public policy that expose your financial privacy.



The Biden administration proposed requiring all credit unions, banks, and other financial institutions to report to the IRS on all deposits and withdrawals through personal accounts regardless of tax liability. This indiscriminate, comprehensive financial account reporting to the IRS can soon be enacted in Congress and will create a significant invasion of privacy to you our members.



Why should you be concerned?

  • If passed, the proposal will require the financial institutions like Missouri Credit Union to report deposits and withdrawals of $600 or more, on personal savings, transactional, loan, and investment accounts to the IRS regardless of member’s consent.
  • There are numerous concerns surrounding maintaining privacy and data security of your information.


What you can do -

Your credit union works for you, our members, not the IRS. We encourage you to join us NOW in telling your representatives that the proposed IRS bank account profiling is indiscriminate and intrusive.

That's not gonna pass...

now, lets address all the other wild claims you made... I'm waiting.

refugees get more than people that paid into social security for over 40 years, plus paid into Medicare for over 40 years.   

@1130 posted:

From your own article....  $15,900 per refugee.
That's a long way from 'more than someone who paid in for 40 years.

There's also a 45k$ cap on the total... including housing, medical treatment......

that's a 5 year total... that math comes out to 9k$/year.

again, every bit of that information was in the article you posted.

This from Sept., 2017, and you know it has gotten worse since dems came in and undid all Trump's work.

BY SPENCER RALEY 9/28/2017

The cost of illegal immigration to taxpayers is growing at an unsustainable pace

The total cost of illegal immigration to federal, state and local taxpayers for the nation’s 12.5 million illegal aliens has increased to $116 billion annually, according to a new study released Wednesday by the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR). The study, one of the most comprehensive to date on the issue, investigates the major contributing factors driving the high cost of illegal immigration, and compares that to the revenue state and local governments collect from illegal aliens.

The findings paint a much different picture than what open-border proponents and many in the mainstream media try to portray — that illegal immigration is somehow a net positive to the United States economy.

FAIR found that while illegal immigrants pay billions of dollars in taxes every year, they ultimately cost taxpayers more than seven times what they contribute. The study found that illegal immigrants pay almost $19 billion annually in combined federal, state and local taxes. This estimate is actually considerably higher than what many studies before this have suggested. However, the amount of taxes illegal immigrants pay is dwarfed by the considerable costs that they impose on American taxpayers: nearly $135 billion annually, creating a net deficit of $116 billion.

The majority of the costs to taxpayers, $89 billion (66 percent), are borne at the local and state level. This means that American taxpayers are forced to bear the costs of the federal government’s failure to secure our borders every time they pay school taxes, local tolls, sales and excise taxes. It also means that illegal migrants get a lot of benefits that they don’t pay for.

Conversely, by a 5-to-1 ratio, the taxes paid by illegal immigrants wind up in federal coffers. Despite states bearing most of the costs associated with illegal immigration, the federal government receives 15.4 billion of their tax receipts, compared to $3.5 billion received by states and localities.

When states offer financial support to illegal immigrants, and protect them from the federal immigration enforcement efforts, it’s the law-abiding residents who suffer the financial consequences. New York, New Jersey, Maryland, Illinois and Virginia are all far from the southern border, yet they are still popular destinations for illegal immigrants because welfare programs are easily available, even to those unlawfully in the United States. New York, New Jersey, and northern Virginia have all been leaders in the sanctuary movement. Illinois and Maryland have gone so far as to allow illegal immigrants to obtain drivers licenses, and even vote in some local elections.

The state and local costs of illegal migration are amplified by the fact that illegal immigrants remit much of their earnings to their home nations. FAIR estimates that nearly 20 percent of the average household income of illegal immigrants is remitted back to their home nations. Annually, this totals approximately $7,200 per illegal immigrant household that is not spent in the United States, and therefore is not subject to the sales or excise taxes that fund state treasuries.

These findings soundly refute the argument that the presence of illegal immigrants in the U.S. is justified because they pay taxes. The truth is that, in addition to violating American immigration law, illegal immigrants pay only a fraction of the costs for the services they consume. Law abiding taxpayers are stuck footing the vast majority of the fiscal burden created by their actions. It’s time for the federal government to end the financial incentives that attract illegal immigrants to the United States — in particular, welfare programs and refundable tax credits.

FAIR also offers an updated estimation of the number of illegal immigrants in the United States, pegging it at 12.5 million. This is based on the same criteria used by other credible research organizations like Pew Research. However, for ideological reasons, Pew leaves out illegal immigrants who are beneficiaries of programs like Temporary Protected Status and Deferred Action for Childhood of Arrivals. Failing to count these individuals falsely suggests there are fewer illegal immigrants in the country today than in the past and inappropriately lowers the costs associated with the illegal immigrant cohort.

This study confirms what we already know — that the cost of incentivized illegal immigration is unsustainably high, and continues to grow at an alarming rate. President Trump won the 2016 presidential election with a platform that championed true immigration reform. Americans are tired of losing billions of dollars every year due to illegal immigration. Ending the incentives that attract illegal immigrants and securing the border are necessary first steps to reversing the growing costs associated with unlawful migration.

Raley is a research associate at the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR).

@1130 posted:

There is really no way to know the actual cost they are to us. We have to have social programs, and pay for interpreters and "advocates" for them, in areas of the legal, business, medical, police, and more. We have to have interpreters for their kids for school. So many more ways they cost us million/billions.  I know it's about the votes for the left, but I still wonder why they have ZERO regard for what this invasion is doing to the country.

Add Reply

Post

Untitled Document
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×