The "luxury belief" framing matters. Rob Henderson coined the term to describe beliefs that function as status symbols—conveying social class, identity, and tribal belonging without directly affecting the people who hold them. In this case, rejecting vaccines while trusting your child will never be exposed to a disease that requires one.

We imagine disinformation as a symptom of ignorance. But more often, it’s a symptom of insulation. If you live in a community with 98% vaccination rates, you can afford to be the 2%. You can post wellness memes about "natural immunity" and still get herd immunity as a side effect. Your child is statistically safe, not because of your parenting, but in spite of it.

In lower-income communities, vaccine skepticism exists too, but it often stems from different roots: mistrust of institutions, historical medical abuses, or practical barriers like access and transportation. What makes affluent anti-vaxxers distinct is their belief that they are the ones questioning the system, when in fact they’re coasting on its success.

This is the tragedy of the commons, redrawn in immunological terms. Each person who chooses not to vaccinate imposes a small, cumulative burden on the group. Alone, it’s negligible. In aggregate, it’s disaster.

What makes it all so brittle is how unequal the burden becomes. Not everyone gets the same leeway to make these choices. An affluent parent who skips a vaccine because of "gut instinct" faces few consequences when the community uptake is high. But a child in a poor neighborhood with poor access to healthcare and low community coverage? Their odds are worse - through no fault of their own.

So the luxury belief isn’t just a personal delusion. It’s a redistribution of risk. It transfers danger from those with options to those without. From the people choosing to free-ride to the people holding the line.