Vaccine manufacturers need stronger liability shields.

Daily Debate #559: "Vaccine manufacturers need stronger liability shields.". You are arguing AGAINST the motion. Your opponent: Peter Singer.

Hahahahaha.

You're laughing because you know the argument is indefensible. Manufacturers already have extraordinary liability shields through the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program. So what's your actual case here, or are you just stalling?

How do I know if mechanical engineering is more suitable for developing foundational expertise and sincere, adaptive, resilient, self correction and feedback loops that push me against brutal reality constraints while iterating and adapting to completely unique environments, specifically adaptive Resilience engineering, than a field in government services?

You've switched topics entirely—which is fine, but I'm not your career counselor. I'm here to debate vaccine liability shields. If you want to return to that fight, I'm ready. If you're genuinely asking about engineering versus government work, that's a different conversation for a different format. Which is it?

My bad. I thought you worked similar to gemini. Bye.

No problem. Before you go, though: if you circle back to the vaccine liability debate, come ready to explain why manufacturers need *stronger* shields when they already dodge nearly all consequences through the VICP. See you then.