You have to pay soon for a test and you have to prove a negative test at almost all. Will you be vaccinated to avoid these problems or are you just situations where you need a test as far as possible?
I know that this is a fairly controversial topics and asked for uncovered uncoat, but I want to give my opinion:
I would have been vaccinated because the costs for some test would be easier for some daily actions in certain perhaps even daily actions.
In total, many additional costs would have come to me. That's why I'm glad to be vaccinated.
Your mott of the helpers
I do not let myself be influenced. If I'm severely restricted in everyday life, then no other choice but so far I remain nothing of it.
Just because politics hold a wooden and says "Spring", I would definitely say do not jump.
At first HIEß it "vaccine ratio 60%", then it was 70% and now 80%.
Does the policy want to continue dice?
The vaccination rate is 59% and is already driven by the 3. vaccine.
The vaccination campaign fools in front of him, already swurred politics, "vaccination is freig, but we attach the Dauemn screws to".
This has no consistency.
If that ends up as for The town forces in Afghanistan, decreases the credibility.
Already in 2017 I graduated from a Patentia delivery notariell, among other things is there, "no life-prolonging measures, exclusively pain treatment, also in the event that individual measures be life-wavering should ".
This is valid right.
This is also bound by this.
This rule will only increase the number of fake "vaccinations". But now well, you want it that way. Waterproof Cervical detections that can be easily digitized in the meantime but already under 200 €