Coronavirus and Walt Disney World general discussion

[GoofGoof]

Yes, but the lockdowns definitely either a lot of businesses go under or reduce their headcount. Just take the ripple effect on not being allowed to have indoor dining. Some areas couldn't just open outside dining (in some places that wasn't even allowed until the summer) so what did they have to do. Reduce or eliminate their orders from their suppliers, reduce or eliminate the amount of employees they had, etc. Now, just because they are no longer forced to be closed doesn't mean they are allowed to operate at the same level and therefore they are still reducing staff and orders from vendors.

This is just one example of how the lockdowns caused a lot of unemployment. You can take other businesses and extrapolate as well. So I don't think you can just say that since most states/areas aren't under a total lockdown that all the effects are just from the pandemic.

I said the majority not all and I listed bars and restaurants and DLR right in the post you quoted as exceptions. Do you believe that if the government imposed no restrictions from the start that the economy would be business as usual with no businesses going under and no jobs lost? The economic impact of Covid is real but I don’t think it’s all self imposed by government restrictions or even most of it. Take WDW as the perfect example. FL is no longer putting any restrictions on them yet many CMs are still unemployed and the resort isn’t profitable. That’s the pandemic, not the government lockdowns. Same with airlines. Nobody is locking them down but they are still laying off thousands. I know it’s easier to just blame the government for any economic impact but the economy would have tanked even if the government did nothing and although we will never know for sure what would have happened there’s some strong evidence that the economic impact would have been worse long term without those initial lockdowns.

 

[Horizons '83]

Name a comment where I ever said there’s a complete lockdown right now.

Well you joined less than a month ago, so there really aren't many comments to "ever" find

 

[GoofGoof]

Sorry but you guys can’t have it both ways. You can’t complain about how you need your job to support your families and then support measures that don’t allow other people to work and support their families because you decided it’s too risky. No.

How about making it possible for people to work in a safe environment? Factories have OSHA requirements to make the place safe for employees to work. Those safety requirements may be detrimental to the bottom line of the business and could even cause a factory to be closed. Should we eliminate those safe work practices to help the bottom line and ensure that doesn’t happen? Should we tell the workers they either have to take the risks at work or find another job?

 

[danlb_2000]

I wouldn't characterize that time as 're-opening'.

There were still travel restrictions and restrictions on how many people could gather for a meeting or any other event. Businesses were told to keep people working from home. The death rate was traumatic. People were scared. And they mostly complied. And the few yahoos who didn't care and tried to open up a gym or indoor restaurant found their business boarded up by the state.

The next-to-last stage of re-opening happened in the Fall (and still didn't fully happen, the last stage of restaurants increasing capacity had the brakes stomped on that just a week before it was to happen thanks to this new wave).

New Jerseyans became lax. Schools and colleges broke down the bubbles the youth were in and they started to socialize indiscriminately again. People decided that their wedding, their BBQ, and their religious holy day celebrations were magically protected from the virus and became superspreader events.

I'm chasing after my customers whose nose is exposed and telling them that if they can't keep their mask on correctly, they can't do business here. And that's because they became complacent.

And that's how it is in Jersey.

The op claimed "the second you open things back up cases are going to spring up again". A good number of things opened in NJ, and the cases did not spring back up. You can open a lot of things safely without causing a big spike in cases.

 

[GoofGoof]

If people remember back to April we talked about the re-opening plans and how once cases got low enough we would open slowly and then assess the impact and then open some more and if/when the numbers start to spike we would pull back and level set again in the hopes of containing the outbreak. The virus would come and go in waves and we should enjoy the good times knowing the next wave would eventually come. The US abandoned that plan and instead if anyone even talks about pulling back people immediately start shouting about never going back to lockdowns. I have no idea if it will work or not but it looks like Germany is going to give it a shot. They are targeting specific businesses with a higher risk of exposure but I’m sure to some people that’s a lockdown.

 

[DisneyDebRob]

I said the majority not all and I listed bars and restaurants and DLR right in the post you quoted as exceptions. Do you believe that if the government imposed no restrictions from the start that the economy would be business as usual with no businesses going under and no jobs lost? The economic impact of Covid is real but I don’t think it’s all self imposed by government restrictions or even most of it. Take WDW as the perfect example. FL is no longer putting any restrictions on them yet many CMs are still unemployed and the resort isn’t profitable. That’s the pandemic, not the government lockdowns. Same with airlines. Nobody is locking them down but they are still laying off thousands. I know it’s easier to just blame the government for any economic impact but the economy would have tanked even if the government did nothing and although we will never know for sure what would have happened there’s some strong evidence that the economic impact would have been worse long term without those initial lockdowns.

That’s the thing right? Some people here believe everything should be fully open so we get back to normal as it once was before. There are a majority of people (see every poll over the last 2 months) that are not going out to eat whether it’s 100% or not. As you mentioned Disney.. they aren’t even hitting capacity at what they have now except for holiday weekends and a occasional weekend. Airlines are open but 65% lower then last year. The majority is waiting and playing it safe for whatever reason they mage have.
One of my good friends owns a sandwich shop with 15 tables. He socially distanced them and is doing everything right. He said he barely gets anyone in for dine-in although his take out is off the charts. The demand is not there in any area.
My wife is sitting on her hands most of the day (travel agent) because there’s no demand for anything.

 

[DisneyDebRob]

The op claimed "the second you open things back up cases are going to spring up again". A good number of things opened in NJ, and the cases did not spring back up. You can open a lot of things safely without causing a big spike in cases.

Opening them back up at low capacity and masks didn’t seem to cause the spike. Wider openings, larger capacity seems to have did something. We are all guessing at this point but it makes sense a little.

 

[Miss Bella]

If people remember back to April we talked about the re-opening plans and how once cases got low enough we would open slowly and then assess the impact and then open some more and if/when the numbers start to spike we would pull back and level set again in the hopes of containing the outbreak. The virus would come and go in waves and we should enjoy the good times knowing the next wave would eventually come. The US abandoned that plan and instead if anyone even talks about pulling back people immediately start shouting about never going back to lockdowns. I have no idea if it will work or not but it looks like Germany is going to give it a shot. They are targeting specific businesses with a higher risk of exposure but I’m sure to some people that’s a lockdown.

I bet we see mass protests in Germany. They were already going on before this lockdown.

 

[Lilofan]

If people remember back to April we talked about the re-opening plans and how once cases got low enough we would open slowly and then assess the impact and then open some more and if/when the numbers start to spike we would pull back and level set again in the hopes of containing the outbreak. The virus would come and go in waves and we should enjoy the good times knowing the next wave would eventually come. The US abandoned that plan and instead if anyone even talks about pulling back people immediately start shouting about never going back to lockdowns. I have no idea if it will work or not but it looks like Germany is going to give it a shot. They are targeting specific businesses with a higher risk of exposure but I’m sure to some people that’s a lockdown.

Two nations that made progress in the covid epidemic , New Zealand and Germany run by two strong female leaders. I've got faith in them.

 

[oceanbreeze77]

Two nations that made progress in the covid epidemic , New Zealand and Germany run by two strong female leaders. I've got faith in them.

Can we borrow them?

 

[hopemax]

Is your partner furloughed because of government restrictions related to Covid?

Also, you do realize that a lot of people advocating for less restrictions for risky behaviors aren’t doing it from a selfish “I need to be at a bar right now” perspective, it’s their livelihood - they work in bars, restaurants, tourism, entertainment, etc. and want to be able to work, just like you and your partner. I’m sick and tired of anyone who calls attention to the negative effects outside of infection rates being called selfish, it’s incredibly narrow-minded.

I'm sick and tired of people assuming that the rest of us are unaware of the the negative effects. We know darn well. You know the phrase, "Throwing good money after bad." That is my biggest fear about all these COVID exposed businesses. People are lying to themselves about the reality of the next 1-3 years, and even longer. Being open will not save these businesses in a permanent way. We've been letting them walk around with internal bleeding, thinking they are saved because there are no surface wounds, gushing blood. All the opening does is force the owners of these businesses to blow through their reserves slower, giving themselves false hope that turnaround is "just around the corner," mentally and physically exhausting themselves. A short term, base level survival, blaming themselves for their eventual failure by not pulling on their bootstraps enough, instead of the demand crisis and the virus wreaking havoc worldwide. The proverbial boiling frogs.

Although it is hard to hear, since the government has been unwilling to be a financial backstop, I think the more resilient business owners will be the ones that closed early on, preserved their savings, preserved their capital and sought employment in industries that are still functional and even thriving, regrouping for the day when this is done. When all of this is over, there will be a huge need for restaurants, entertainment etc. and we're doing a bang up job of making sure the only people who have the financial wherewithal to open in a post-COVID world are corporations and people with deep financial pockets. They cynical side of me, says that this is a "feature, not a bug" of the pandemic to some. The well-healed have headed to the hills, removed themselves from Main Street businesses (higher incomes are pulling back on discretionary spending, more than lower income families), invested in rural real-estate, renovated their pandemic bunkers and are hunkering down. The rest of us should be paying attention to that.

 

[oceanbreeze77]

We were already headed towards a deep recession before covid. The economy was already ruined and anyone who thinks covid ruined the economy is fooling themselves. It just made it worse.

 

[FeelsSoGoodToBeBad]

I'm not in favor of full lockdowns for multiple reasons, prime among them the mental health and safety of those BEING locked down.

That said, I know several people who absolutely refuse to follow social distancing/masking guidelines unless the have absolutely no choice to comply in order to accomplish something (eg, go to the grocery store). These are people who "refuse to live in fear" like so many other "sheep" around them and repeatedly crow about how this is all overblown and a government conspiracy to control us all. One of these people has a beautiful 3 year old "rainbow baby" daughter who has had multiple health issues since she was born and continues to be about half the size of a normal child her age. This person was also training at one time to be a nurse. She works as a bartender in an establishment that refuses to enforce mask wearing by their employees, even giving them one to keep in their pocket in case the health department stops by to check on compliance. They've been camping in large groups multiple times since the Spring and hosted multiple parties.

This is the behavior that's resulting in continued spread, but these people flat refuse to even consider that their behavior is contributing to anything. It makes me absolutely crazy and is a big reason I am rarely on social media anymore.

 

[disneycp]

I'm sick and tired of people assuming that the rest of us are unaware of the the negative effects. We know darn well. You know the phrase, "Throwing good money after bad." That is my biggest fear about all these COVID exposed businesses. People are lying to themselves about the reality of the next 1-3 years, and even longer. Being open will not save these businesses in a permanent way. We've been letting them walk around with internal bleeding, thinking they are saved because there are no surface wounds, gushing blood. All the opening does is force the owners of these businesses to blow through their reserves slower, giving themselves false hope that turnaround is "just around the corner," mentally and physically exhausting themselves. A short term, base level survival, blaming themselves for their eventual failure by not pulling on their bootstraps enough, instead of the demand crisis and the virus wreaking havoc worldwide. The proverbial boiling frogs.

Although it is hard to hear, since the government has been unwilling to be a financial backstop, I think the more resilient business owners will be the ones that closed early on, preserved their savings, preserved their capital and sought employment in industries that are still functional and even thriving, regrouping for the day when this is done. When all of this is over, there will be a huge need for restaurants, entertainment etc. and we're doing a bang up job of making sure the only people who have the financial wherewithal to open in a post-COVID world are corporations and people with deep financial pockets. They cynical side of me, says that this is a "feature, not a bug" of the pandemic to some. The well-healed have headed to the hills, removed themselves from Main Street businesses (higher incomes are pulling back on discretionary spending, more than lower income families), invested in rural real-estate, renovated their pandemic bunkers and are hunkering down. The rest of us should be paying attention to that.

I don’t disagree with any of that. Well said. But if businesses want (need, more likely) to be open and feel they can turn a profit right now, I also don’t think we should be able to take that away from them. It’s a big slippery slope letting government have this much power.

 

[disneycp]

How about making it possible for people to work in a safe environment? Factories have OSHA requirements to make the place safe for employees to work. Those safety requirements may be detrimental to the bottom line of the business and could even cause a factory to be closed. Should we eliminate those safe work practices to help the bottom line and ensure that doesn’t happen? Should we tell the workers they either have to take the risks at work or find another job?

Worker safety is incredibly important, but I don’t think OSHA requirements are a comparable example to what’s happening right now. Businesses can plan for OSHA requirements, and know them before they even get started. They can’t really plan for their governor forcing them to close, or majorly reduce capacity, without much notice. Even if the governor doesn’t end up adding more restrictions, businesses don’t know that - they have to keep operating under a cloud of uncertainty now that the precedent has been established.

 

[GimpYancIent]

No, history shows the opposite. The whole concept of keeping sick people or even just other people who may or may not be sick away was figured out centuries ago.

Yea Europe has a wonderful history with illnesses the Bubonic Plague for one, there are others but I won't bore you with details.

 

[TrainsOfDisney]

Worker safety is incredibly important, but I don’t think OSHA requirements are a comparable example to what’s happening right now. Businesses can plan for OSHA requirements, and know them before they even get started. They can’t really plan for their governor forcing them to close, or majorly reduce capacity, without much notice. Even if the governor doesn’t end up adding more restrictions, businesses don’t know that - they have to keep operating under a cloud of uncertainty now that the precedent has been established.

Requirements do change. Sometimes it costs businesses quite a bit of money to adapt. Look at all that Disney has done for fall protection in the parks.

 

[MisterPenguin]

Yea Europe has a wonderful history with illnesses the Bubonic Plague for one,

It all started with a mouse.

 

[mmascari]

Wow, this thread has gotten extra busy in the last week. By the time I catch up to not make the same reply as someone else, I tend to not catch up.

A few things are clear though.

Generally speaking people don't understand how six degrees of Kevin Bacon works or how that would apply to transmission of an infectious disease.

Percentages and large numbers are hard to grasp. Something that is 99% safe and 1% bad isn't safe in an absolute sense if the numbers are large enough. It needs to be more like 99.999990% safe, 10,000 time larger. Percentages are super deceptive with large numbers where small impacts are deadly.

The health departments insistence that I wear pants while at a private business is government overreach. It should be up to every business to decide. If Walmart wants to let me shop for groceries with some extra airflow, that should be Walmart's choice and people will not shop there if they don't like it.

There's huge confusion over short term tactics, long term tactics, things that can be done when community spread is low, things that apply when community spread is high, how to move between the different scenarios, the difference between short term and longer terms goals. Combined with which ones we've actually done.

It's all rather depressing.

 

[disneycp]

Requirements do change. Sometimes it costs businesses quite a bit of money to adapt. Look at all that Disney has done for fall protection in the parks.

Sorry but equating telling companies to change their safety procedures to telling them to reduce their capacity to 50% by tomorrow is a stretch. You can plan around the former. How are you supposed to plan how many employees you need or what hours to have when you don’t know what your capacity will be like next month?

Let’s look at Disneyland, for example. Under the governor’s orders, they can only open in a certain tier of community spread. Let’s say they hit that tier and Disneyland opens - what happens when more cases crop up and they’re no longer in the “safe” tier? Do they shut down immediately? What about things like ride maintenance or food being stored on property? What are the logistics of that? And that situation could happen a dozen times.