Coronavirus and Walt Disney World general discussion

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Have you read the Disneyland threads? What’s more amazing is that no place prioritizing the economy seems to be having any success in doing that.

They’re fools...and the “we have to save the economy!!!” Are hoaxers/liars.

Ill say one thing, Disney looks real bad around here right now because Newsom was 100% right. I mean imagine if they had opened and then re-closed right away.

I’ll never be convinced Disney wanted to open on Anaheim...that looks like an inside job with some politics that I bet both sides knew was coming beforehand.

Walt Disney World opened during Florida’s summer surge.

Flor-I-dUH

...but remember that Florida opened without their out of state/country tourists and most aren’t back...they probably lost a good chunk of their snowbirds too...

Long story short: what state has had far LESS people in it to spread than under normal circumstances than Florida?

Only Hawaii is in that conversation.

 

[hopemax]

Long story short: what state has had far LESS people in it to spread than under normal circumstances than Florida?

Only Hawaii is in that conversation.

Nevada might want a word. They are only behind Hawaii in terms of unemployment, and their tax revenues are a mess.

 

[MisterPenguin]

PFIZER-BIONTECH COVID-19 VACCINE (BNT162, PF-07302048) VACCINES AND RELATED BIOLOGICAL PRODUCTS ADVISORY COMMITTEE BRIEFING DOCUMENT MEETING DATE: 10 December 2020

https://www.fda.gov/media/144246/download

3. PROPOSED EUA INDICATION​

Pfizer BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine is authorized for use under an EUA for active immunization for the prevention of COVID-19 caused by SARS-CoV-2 in individuals 16 years of age and older.​

 

[oceanbreeze77]

Do you have a link to the contact tracing studies that show that most of the spread comes from frontline essential positions? I know it is anecdotal but none of the places I frequent have had any issues with employees getting COVID. My neighbors daughter works at a nearby Publix supermarket and they haven't had issues among the employees. I live in Broward County, FL which has been a hot spot for most of the pandemic.

If WDW frontline cast was getting infected in large numbers, I'm sure word would be out by now.

I'm talking about here in CA. A lot of the communities that are deeply impacted are ones with multi generational households and employment in these areas. These are areas where community spread is easy, we have the Port, a few amazon warehouses, and other industrial factories.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

I'm talking about here in CA. A lot of the communities that are deeply impacted are ones with multi generational households and employment in these areas. These are areas where community spread is easy, we have the Port, a few amazon warehouses, and other industrial factories.

California is just not suited for this. Too many people/situations and too much going on. The nyc area isn’t either. Too many people moving between 4 states quickly in too small of a space.

Nevada might want a word. They are only behind Hawaii in terms of unemployment, and their tax revenues are a mess.

You’re right there...I’m slightly embarrassed I overlooked that.

 

[DisneyCane]

I'm talking about here in CA. A lot of the communities that are deeply impacted are ones with multi generational households and employment in these areas. These are areas where community spread is easy, we have the Port, a few amazon warehouses, and other industrial factories.

The multi generational households are most likely where most spread is occurring. If they aren't limiting capacity on mass transit that could be an issue also.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

The multi generational households are most likely where most spread is occurring. If they aren't limiting capacity on mass transit that could be an issue also.

It’s that...and a lot of other things. Public health officials are getting somewhat good at tracing...we are a year into this...

But that’s my problem with the entire “isolate the vulnerable...let me do what I want” theory (you are a big proponent of that)...it doesn’t work.

Every single thing predicted 8 months ago is coming to pass. Precautions have brought the numbers “down” - if you want to call it that - but they have still tracked on roughly the curves predicted.

Resist the urge to simplify everything into just one scenario or “solution”...it’s too convenient to be true.

 

[DisneyCane]

It’s that...and a lot of other things. Public health officials are getting somewhat good at tracing...we are a year into this...

But that’s my problem with the entire “isolate the vulnerable...let me do what I want” theory (you are a big proponent of that)...it doesn’t work.

Every single thing predicted 8 months ago is coming to pass. Precautions have brought the numbers “down” - if you want to call it that - but they have still tracked on roughly the curves predicted.

Resist the urge to simplify everything into just one scenario or “solution”...it’s too convenient to be true.

There is no solution. It is an airborne virus. The only way to stop the spread of it without a vaccine is by keeping people isolated from each other. Aside from the illegality and unconstitutional aspects of doing that, it is not practical to do for the length of time it would take. If it was 30 days and problem solved I could get behind it.

The only practical thing to do is try and protect the most vulnerable.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

There is no solution. It is an airborne virus. The only way to stop the spread of it without a vaccine is by keeping people isolated from each other. Aside from the illegality and unconstitutional aspects of doing that, it is not practical to do for the length of time it would take. If it was 30 days and problem solved I could get behind it.

The only practical thing to do is try and protect the most vulnerable.

I always give you a chance...until this part...

There is absolutely no “freedom to open your bar”...never was a thing...still isn’t.

 

[Heppenheimer]

I always give you a chance...until this part...

There is absolutely no “freedom to open your bar”...never was a thing...still isn’t.

Or in the case of our super-spreader event in Vermont that we're still struggling to contain the sequelae of... there is no constitutionally mandated freedom for adult man-children to play a game of broom ball during a pandemic.

Needless to say, the arena that hosted that event is now shuttered. I don't think too many people up here are too upset about that.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Or in the case of our super-spreader event in Vermont that we're still struggling to contain the sequelae of... there is no constitutionally mandated freedom for adult man-children to play a game of broom ball during a pandemic.

Needless to say, the arena that hosted that event is now shuttered. I don't think too many people up here are too upset about that.

No “social distancing” in broomball...perhaps because you are required to be drunk to play?

 

[danlb_2000]

There is no solution. It is an airborne virus. The only way to stop the spread of it without a vaccine is by keeping people isolated from each other. Aside from the illegality and unconstitutional aspects of doing that, it is not practical to do for the length of time it would take. If it was 30 days and problem solved I could get behind it.

The only practical thing to do is try and protect the most vulnerable.

So its unconstitutional to isolate everyone, but not unconstitutional to isolate just the vulnerable?

 

[danlb_2000]

But we know that closing businesses and stay-at-home orders save lives. It’s a fact.

I just can’t understand why this is such a debated thing... it’s literally like when Ignaz Semmelweis couldn’t get Doctors to wash their hands!!!!

Yes, those things save lives, but I think most of the debate is about whether the downsides of doing it are worth it.

 

[GoofGoof]

So its unconstitutional to isolate everyone, but not unconstitutional to isolate just the vulnerable?

There’s an unwritten clause in the constitution which I’ve never seen but is apparently there that says all of these rules only apply to me if they don’t limit my ability to do exactly what I want.

 

[SamusAranX]

So its unconstitutional to isolate everyone, but not unconstitutional to isolate just the vulnerable?

He is saying (and maybe I’m wrong) that it is unconstitutional to shut down businesses and prevent people from patronizing them should they choose to do so or legally order someone to stay home. Not that I agree, but by “isolate” he may mean measures to protect Nh and LTCF, as well as provide incentives for those who are most at risk to stay home. Then at that point if they choose to not isolate, they take responsibility for their own fate. But that would require, oh I don’t know, a competent government and or large scale cooperation of corporate and nonprofit assistance providing financial help, practical assistance, and logistical help. And that’s not gonna happen, as we have already seen. It’s basically been every man for himself in many areas. I’m not saying people are wrong necessarily for every action they take (many disagree with my choice to go skiing soon, for example). But to not even try and take precautions or minimize risk is just not good.

 

[GoofGoof]

Yes, those things save lives, but I think most of the debate is about whether the downsides of doing it are worth it.

That should be the real debate. Is it worth it to limit activity to stop spread? Unfortunately as this thing has gotten so politicized there are many arguing whether the precautions work. Constant fights about masks being ineffective, constant talk about how the virus will surge no matter what we do, constant dispute of data on cases and deaths and claims of fradulent reporting. I am actually fine with people debating whether the Covid safety precautions are worth the impact to the economy and even if they are a violation of people’s rights. That’s a real debate. People want to have their cake and eat it too by doing what they want and claiming the science backs their actions.

 

[JoeCamel]

There’s an unwritten clause in the constitution which I’ve never seen but is apparently there that says all of these rules only apply to me if they don’t limit my ability to do exactly what I want.

"Me the People"

 

[DisneyDebRob]

Excellent article on the initial mistakes of this whole mess. Take a few minutes. Ok, more then a few minutes, it’s long but you get absorbed right in it’s so good.

USA TODAY

www.usatoday.com

 

[Chi84]

So its unconstitutional to isolate everyone, but not unconstitutional to isolate just the vulnerable?

This pandemic is leading to an unprecedented degree of governmental intrusion into personal liberties that are at the core of constitutional protections, such as the right to gather together and the privacy of one's home (orders limiting the number of people from different households). That isn't to say that the restrictions are unconstitutional, just that we don't know how legal challenges to them are going to shake out.

As long as the hard facts justify government actions and they are limited in time and scope, I think most will survive constitutional challenges. On the one hand, age is a protected class, but on the other, government intrusion into personal liberties must be the least restrictive possible in order to reach a valid government goal. This virus is disproportionately impacting the elderly, so would the least restrictive measure be to isolate them? I don't believe we'll ever face this problem because, as several posters have pointed out, effectively isolating only the elderly is not possible given the way our society is set up. And in any event, people wouldn't stand for it.

That said, it makes sense for people in the most vulnerable age groups to take extra care to isolate as much as possible in order to protect themselves and to get vaccinated as soon as possible.

 

[LuvtheGoof]

This pandemic is leading to an unprecedented degree of governmental intrusion into personal liberties that are at the core of constitutional protections, such as the right to gather together and the privacy of one's home (orders limiting the number of people from different households). That isn't to say that the restrictions are unconstitutional, just that we don't know how legal challenges to them are going to shake out.

As long as the hard facts justify government actions and they are limited in time and scope, I think most will survive constitutional challenges. On the one hand, age is a protected class, but on the other, government intrusion into personal liberties must be the least restrictive possible in order to reach a valid government goal. This virus is disproportionately impacting the elderly, so would the least restrictive measure be to isolate them? I don't believe we'll ever face this problem because, as several posters have pointed out, effectively isolating only the elderly is not possible given the way our society is set up. And in any event, people wouldn't stand for it.

That said, it makes sense for people in the most vulnerable age groups to take extra care to isolate as much as possible in order to protect themselves and to get vaccinated as soon as possible.

Ok, so I just have to ask. Exactly what part of the constitution is being violated by either a temporary stay at home order, or a temporary order to close certain businesses that may spread the virus faster than others? Please be specific.

Oh, exactly how is limiting the number of people in a household violating anyone's constitution rights?