Lee
Adventurer
Why wouldn't it have been?
I don't know that Tony did, but i cant think of a reason that she wouldn't have seen it.
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Spirited News & Observations II -- NGE/Baxter
- Thread starter WDW1974
- Start date
I don't know that Tony did, but i cant think of a reason that she wouldn't have seen it.
the.dreamfinder
Well-Known Member
alphac2005
Well-Known Member
I'll have to pull up some of the listings that I have and it's been a long work day, but I can say that you can generally take major corporations in Japan, Germany, South Korea, and Australia as prime examples of reinvesting and while having major international operations having a sense of national pride and not only seeking profit, but doing "good" for their country. Japan's corporate culture has a sense of we're amongst a group and not out for ourselves with one of the lowest CEO to average employee ratio in the world. Granted there is corruption and greed (e.g. in South Korea, major corporations such as Hyundai and Samsung with many ethical issues) in these countries, but there is a general lack of corporate greed to hurt one's nation.
In Germany, the government with private business took their moribund manufacturing sector and have turned it into the envy of the world. The most highly skilled manual labor workers on the planet where businesses team up with schools to educate, act as apprentices, and then provide high wage, high skilled jobs to Germans. Instead of outsourcing and going cheap, they've created a system in the past two decades that has made their companies stronger than ever and made their middle class and country incredibly stronger even with the mess that Europe has been over the past few years.
Lee
Adventurer
Ok...I see.
Tony's concept got killed by Rasulo.
I don't see WDI politics there, necessarily.
More likely it was too good (read: expensive) and Jay didn't want JKR to get herself set on something he didn't want to pay for.
the.dreamfinder
Well-Known Member
Lee
Adventurer
Not that I'm aware of.
So is donating billions annually to charity, building schools, athletic fields, theaters, providing scholarships, etc not contributing to a sense of national (or local) pride?
the.dreamfinder
Well-Known Member
Tax dodging??
Maybe. You could pay it in taxes and the money goes to a "new energy" company that fails and the taxpayers lose all their money, or you could directly pay for little Johnny to go to college that he could otherwise not afford.
If that's dodging....
John
Well-Known Member
@jt04........why oh' why. Why must you. First...I wouldnt be callled 74's biggest fanboi but to take shots at him when he is not here to defend himself is even below your standards.
Disney didnt think the huge $$$$$ that HP has pulled in was a good fit for them? seriously thats even a stretch for you. SO we wont call them cheap....does frugal make a better fit for ya? Because in the end it came down to money. They didnt want to spend what it would take to do what JK wanted. I never bought the whole " difficult to work with" thing. My feeling what that translated to was that Disney wanted to scale it down and hold cost and JK refused. Now she is deemed "difficult to work with" Seems Uni didnt have much problem. SO much that they are building HP 2.0. Not fit MK? hmmmm again what difference does it make what park it would go in?....the property has totally brought life back to a struggleing property and has poised it for years to come.....yea Disney didnt think it would fit. IMO if Disney would have built an HP land such as what exsist at Uni....it would have probably buried Uni for good. Now Uni has the champ on the ropes doing the ol' rope-a-dope. taking body shots one right after the other. What is Disneys hail mary?.....a data mining project that still no one really knows exactly when it will be rolled out and to what extent. Even after spending....how much?
Disney knows letting HP walk was a huge mistake.
Disney didnt think the huge $$$$$ that HP has pulled in was a good fit for them? seriously thats even a stretch for you. SO we wont call them cheap....does frugal make a better fit for ya? Because in the end it came down to money. They didnt want to spend what it would take to do what JK wanted. I never bought the whole " difficult to work with" thing. My feeling what that translated to was that Disney wanted to scale it down and hold cost and JK refused. Now she is deemed "difficult to work with" Seems Uni didnt have much problem. SO much that they are building HP 2.0. Not fit MK? hmmmm again what difference does it make what park it would go in?....the property has totally brought life back to a struggleing property and has poised it for years to come.....yea Disney didnt think it would fit. IMO if Disney would have built an HP land such as what exsist at Uni....it would have probably buried Uni for good. Now Uni has the champ on the ropes doing the ol' rope-a-dope. taking body shots one right after the other. What is Disneys hail mary?.....a data mining project that still no one really knows exactly when it will be rolled out and to what extent. Even after spending....how much?
Disney knows letting HP walk was a huge mistake.
jt04
Well-Known Member
I disagree with all of this. Get back to me when you have attendance numbers to back up your claims.
And I would rather Disney invest in the Star Wars IP over HP.
74 is a spirit. He can materialize here anytime he pleases.
Lee
Adventurer
Uni didn't have a problem because they gave her everything she wanted.
She is "difficult to work with" in the sense that she has very high standards, to the point that she has final creative control over everything involved with Potter at Uni. She doesn't approve, it doesn't happen. She wants something, she gets it. Period.
Uni is cool with that, Disney wasn't.
Darth Sidious
Authentically Disney Distinctly Chinese
They need the violence to quiet down first. South America has some serious problems right now.
the.dreamfinder
Well-Known Member
Ok. While I do agree with you that the Gov has no business being in the private equity game and that the money and political capital used to get said projects passed would have been better spent on Carbon Tax/basic science research, charity as it exists in this society is often ineffective and sometimes corrupt (See tax dodging). There's this idea that charities can do it better than the gov. As someone who has spent a fair bit of time working with charities for various drives/fundraisers and education events, they do not have the reach of the government meaning they have no control over social structure, people often forget that poorly designed systems can CREATE the problems that charities try to solve retroactively, and lack of resources.
I know charity makes y'all feel all good inside so someone like little Johnny can go to college. Consider this: Little Johnny had to get a scholarship from x corporation/foundation because the cost of college far outstripped what his parents saved for him. And it's not like his parents did not save money for him, they did but because the rate at which the cost of education has risen now far outstrips inflation those savings only add up to a year and a half of school. Little Johnny lives in country X. In country X, a decision was made that the government would not 1)fund the expansion and growth of public higher ed and high quality trade schools and 2) scrutinize the prices colleges charge as well as their operations. A decision was instead made to stunt the expansion of existing programs designed to improve public higher education/trade schools and instead leave it to private organizations. So now little Johnny will essentially have a home mortgage dropped on his head before he even has a well paying job which negatively reverberates in the economy as he later cannot afford to buy a new car, get married and buy a home, or have a kid(s)
However, Country Y saw the importance of having a well educated and skilled society because that would benefit its economy for the long haul. They also knew that the government would have to be heavily involved in the expansion, growth, and regulation of education for it to achieve a level of high quality among the entire society. Since the country had this foresight, they decided to increase taxes so that the public sector could help grow high quality higher ed to all sectors of society and make that education affordable to all instead of using debt to finance it like they do in Country X. Country Y believed that a society should be judged by the situation of its weakest citizen.
Final point: would corporations/wealth individuals contribute as much to charity if it weren't for tax deductions and if so, does that not show the true motives of a sizable percentage of said group?
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/05/us/05charity.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
http://www.sas.upenn.edu/~holgers/papers/sz_5_10.pdf
There's more out there, but I don't want this to get us stuck in the mud.
the.dreamfinder
Well-Known Member
Rodan75
Well-Known Member
Agreed, things are moving rapidly in South America, just as they are in China. I would be surprised if their wasn't a Disneyland breaking ground in South America by 2020
englanddg
One Little Spark...
I agree, getting sidetracked isn't the best thing...however...I will leave you with two points to ponder, considering your points.
a) Per student we spend far more than any other country for public K-12 education, and more for even publicly supported schools
b) College tuition kept pace with general inflation until the rise of easily available public grants and publicly subsidized government loans
c) Financing (be it through loan programs, general credit availability, insurance or third party payment guarentees) ALWAYS distorts the costs of services. The housing bubble is no different than the higher education bubble, or the automobile market. They all have the same root cause. Free and available credit.
d) College is expensive because educators and administrators have made it expensive, not because "investments haven't been made". Even in middle to small sized towns, colleges are doing quite well in terms of facilities, renovations and salaries. Just like hospitals. Meanwhile, the pothole down the street hasn't been fixed in months.
I do realize that you touched on this with your point that "government controlled the cost of college"...but I would posit...government (at the state level, for state public schools) DOES set and approve the tuition rates. So, where is the difference?
I enjoyed your post, and agree with your conclusion that we shouldn't get sidetracked. I just wanted to add my two cents.
Cheers!
Rodan75
Well-Known Member
I'm sure it will be amazing.
However, how long is Comcast going to keep customer service high at Universal, they aren't investing big bucks into Comcast customer service, they are fairly desperate on the Studio side, and NBC still requires a ton of time and investment.
the.dreamfinder
Well-Known Member
We were referring to higher ed. K12 has it's spending and systemic issues, but that was not the point of my post.
When colleges shifted to a debt model, costs skyrocketed. This was precipitated due to reduced direct investment see UC system and how it was affected by the property tax caps and funding cuts.
Yes, state and county/community colleges do set tuition rates, which I never questioned. My issues was that the federal/state/county governments now exist in a system where no priority is made to make sure that public college is affordable without the use of student loans.
See for profit colleges that now target lower class/minority students for what can be argued is lesser quality, marked up community college which derive most of their revenue from student loans. (yes there are exceptions like the School of Visual Arts, but they are an outlier)