We're already seeing the impact of vaccine mandates in places like New York: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/covid-vaccine-mandate-new-york-...
> "We stopped elective inpatient surgeries. We stopped some of our outpatient patient visits. We stopped ICU medical transfers from other referral rural hospitals. ... We've asked for more time to work on strategies with the state to ensure that as many people as possible get vaccinated," said Tom Quatroche, the president and CEO of Erie County Medical Center.
I would be remiss if I didn't mention that we already know beyond a shadow of a doubt that mass COVID vaccination doesn't magically stop the virus from doing what it does. Israel has absurdly high vaccine uptake - including a sizeable proportion of triply-vaxxed people - and we're still seeing more "cases" than at the same time the previous year. So I wonder how much you've actually looked into the efficacy (in terms of chance of infection and spread) of these vaccines given the data. And I wonder how rigorously you've thought about the second and third order effects when phenomenoms like antigenic drift and immune escape and Marek's disease are very well known.
Anyway, I won't go too far down that rabbit hole since the discussion is more of "assuming vaccination is good and we don't have any ethical qualms with using violent police power to compel people to consume a pharmaceutical product where the manufacturers have literally no liability to the consumer for any adverse reactions, what is the best way to modify behavior" than about examining the premise of the utility of mass vaccination itself. It's probably already obvious that I completely reject the ethics of what you are in favor of. So setting the pesky notion of ethics aside for the time-being, I still think you're failing to see the very obvious harms that come from the brand of coercion that you're advocating for.
Like I said above, we're already seeing the effects of these mandates on healthcare capacity. Firing 5% of one's hospital staff is no small thing. And you seem to very much not see how censoring and suppressing alternate points of view only reinforces those points of view. Implicitly you seem to think that adopting a policy and actually enforcing it in the real-world are the same thing - which is a trap that many a naive intellectual has fallen into since time immemorial.