Evidence from mid‑2021 through 2023 shows elements of a two‑class system based on vaccination status in the U.S. and other countries, but this system was neither universal nor long‑lasting, and it largely faded as vaccines/boosters became widespread and Omicron infections surged.

Evidence that supports the prediction (at least temporarily):

• By late summer and fall 2021, many U.S. jurisdictions and private entities implemented rules that explicitly differentiated between vaccinated and unvaccinated people:
  • New York City’s “Key to NYC” program required proof of vaccination for indoor dining, gyms, and entertainment venues, effectively creating separate access rules for vaccinated vs. unvaccinated individuals.
  • Various employers, hospitals, universities, and federal contractors imposed vaccine mandates, with unvaccinated workers sometimes barred from the workplace or subject to stricter testing/masking requirements.
  • International travel rules often allowed vaccinated travelers to enter with fewer testing or quarantine requirements, while unvaccinated travelers faced more restrictions.
• These policies match the structure of what Jason described: vaccinated people having one set of rules, and unvaccinated people another, more restrictive set.

Evidence that cuts against the prediction as an enduring “near‑future” equilibrium:

• Many of the most visible vaccine‑differentiated policies were rolled back during 2022–2023 as:
  • Omicron and later variants led to widespread breakthrough infections, reducing the justification for sharply different rules.
  • Political and legal pushback mounted, and courts sometimes limited federal or state-level mandates.
  • Public health authorities shifted away from hard vaccine mandates toward broader guidance (e.g., CDC’s August 2022 guidance dropped different recommendations based solely on vaccination status for many settings).
• By late 2023–2025 in most of the U.S., daily life (restaurants, events, transit, workplaces) generally no longer operates with formal, routine rule sets that differ by vaccination status. Requirements now tend to hinge on setting (e.g., health‑care, high‑risk facilities) or general community transmission levels, not a pervasive two‑track system in ordinary public life.

Why the outcome is ambiguous rather than clearly right or wrong:

• Jason’s statement referred to “the near future”; in that near‑term window (roughly late 2021 into part of 2022), many places did move toward policies that functioned as a two‑class system based on vaccination.
• However, those differentiated rules were not stable or uniform across the whole society, and they were substantially rolled back within a couple of years. Today, you can’t accurately say that U.S. or global COVID policy is defined by an enduring, generalized two‑class system between vaccinated and unvaccinated people.
• Because the prediction doesn’t specify duration, geographic scope, or how entrenched the system would be, it’s possible to interpret it as largely correct for a time (short‑run policy response) or ultimately wrong as a description of the stable, ongoing order.

Given that both interpretations are reasonable and the prediction’s terms are somewhat vague, the fairest assessment is ambiguous rather than cleanly “right” or “wrong.”