Coronavirus and Walt Disney World general discussion

[MrMcDuck]

I don't really see Incomudro's comment as an idiotic statement. It's approaching the basic question from a different point of view. And while I'm very pro-mask, I start with a similar point of view. Forcing people to cover their nose and mouth, without which we cannot take in air, and which can cause great distress in some people, is a very serious matter and is a denial of a very fundamental freedom and thus it can only be justified by an overwhelmingly good reason and only for as long as that reason exists. Where I disagree with anti-maskers is that I think this pandemic is just such a reason. But we are soon coming to that point where masks can no longer be justified.

 

[GaBoy]

No offense this is an idiotic statement.

You are "forced" to wear a seatbelt when in a vehicle.
You are "forced" to wear hardhats and safety glass when on certain job sites.
You are "forced" to get certain vaccines before going to school as a child.
You are "forced" to pay sales tax when purchasing something.
You are "forced" to drive on a certain side of the road.
You are "forced" to drive a certain speed on a road.
You are "forced" to wear clothing when entering a store.
You are "forced" register your vehicle.
You are "forced" to require a license when operating a vehicle.

I mean, we live in a society. You are "forced" to do a lot of things for the relatively safety for you and those around you.

When you guys say forced you mean because the state is forcing you to wear them outside? As I understand, a lot of people here have to wear them outside (say parking lot) and not just inside a store. I cant see arguing with a merchant requiring it inside their store although enforcement has been hit and miss. We haven't worn them ever outside (beach, parking lots, sidewalks). Its a different paradigm I suppose. It is also why for us it would be a bigger deal wearing them walking around anywhere outside (especially a Disney vacation where you're paying big bucks) when we never have as a rule. So... we just don't go till that goes away.. Not that we don't see some people wearing them walking around. We just assume they are probably tourists.

 

[JD80]

I don't really see Incomudro's comment as an idiotic statement. It's approaching the basic question from a different point of view. And while I'm very pro-mask, I start with a similar point of view. Forcing people to cover their nose and mouth, without which we cannot take in air, and which can cause great distress in some people, is a very serious matter and is a denial of a very fundamental freedom and thus it can only be justified by an overwhelmingly good reason and only for as long as that reason exists. Where I disagree with anti-maskers is that I think this pandemic is just such a reason. But we are soon coming to that point where masks can no longer be justified.

Point is you, as a citizen of the US, do not have the "freedom" to do whatever you want. You can't just pick arbitrary things and say "I'm losing my freedom!!!!" when a new law is passed or new public safety measures are put in to place.

 

[ParentsOf4]

I think you might be misunderstanding him. That "skeptical" person wouldn't likely be skeptical to begin with if the anti-vaxxer (vaccines in general) lies hadn't become so pervasive.

Respectfully, we disagree.

IMO, you are lumping 2 distinct groups together.

There's a group of crazies who believe every insane thing they read, as long as it validates what they already feel.

Then there's a second group who are uncomfortable with the rapid pace of the development of this vaccine. After all, in September 2020, (now) Vice President Harris said we should question any vaccine developed under the Trump administration. Well, as it turns out, that's the same vaccine she's now encouraging us to take.

Science is never settled, and I understand those who feel a rational degree of skepticism towards these vaccines. Historically, skepticism is a natural part of science.

We simply need to be more persuasive convincing this second group to take the vaccine. We will win them over eventually.

 

[pixie225]

Just back from 1 week in Disney. Restaurants did a nice job of social distancing tables. People wore their masks as soon as they sat down - did not put them on again until they left their table. Felt very comfy eating inside. (had only eaten inside once (in the past year) right before Disney. For the most part people at the Contemporary followed rules. Loved the mobile ordering. The parks - well, social distancing was pretty much gone. We kept 6 feet in front, but at times people were 6 inches away from our backs, so our 6 feet went down to 3 feet as we crept up to put some space between them and us. Would not have minded 3 feet even, but many masks were worn under nose or on chin until they were caught by a cm. (we hit a heat wave - 93-95 degrees and humid most of the days). As soon as the cm left, masks went back down. Rides were well-done - plexiglass/every other row on most. (I won't even mention MCO airport - around 50% of those at our boarding area wore masks - the others not at all until boarding. Weren't eating - just talking or sitting there with no masks. We were quite pleased with our stay at the Contemporary - they did a great job. Only "complaint" was we had a ton of dirty towels and garbage with housekeeping every other day. I actually felt bad for the cleaners, but left them a nice tip at end of stay. Oh yeah - good news for NY - covid infection rate down to 1.27%

 

[GoofGoof]

Isn’t that close to the covid survival rate as well?

Yeah, the survival rate of the whole population from Covid is 99.8%. Funny how some people who spent over a year railing about how 99%+ of the population has survived covid as a reason it’s not a big deal now won’t take a vaccine because it’s dangerous and point to the JnJ rare incidents but 99.99997% of the people who took that vaccine survived. Great example of how people carve out statistics when they support their narrative and ignore them when they don’t.

 

[ParentsOf4]

No offense this is an idiotic statement.

You are "forced" to wear a seatbelt when in a vehicle.
You are "forced" to wear hardhats and safety glass when on certain job sites.
You are "forced" to get certain vaccines before going to school as a child.
You are "forced" to pay sales tax when purchasing something.
You are "forced" to drive on a certain side of the road.
You are "forced" to drive a certain speed on a road.
You are "forced" to wear clothing when entering a store.
You are "forced" register your vehicle.
You are "forced" to require a license when operating a vehicle.

I mean, we live in a society. You are "forced" to do a lot of things for the relatively safety for you and those around you.

Reposting something I wrote earlier...

You're conflating rights with privileges. You're comparing apples to oranges.

Privileges are granted to us after birth. Rights preexist our birth.

As courts have ruled long ago, operating a motor vehicle (or an airplane or heavy machinery or ...) is a privilege. We were not born with a right to drive a car. As such, the government can place restrictions on this, such as mandating driver's licenses and seat belts.

Conversely, the Founding Fathers believed that rights are not given by the government. Rights predate the existence of government. Rights come from God. Quoting a famous passage from the Declaration of Independence:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.​

Still, as codified by the Supreme Court, all rights have limits. As such, the government can place reasonable limits on our rights. The famous example is yelling "fire" in a crowded theater.

If we step back from the two entrenched camps, we can ask our ourselves at what point are governments placing reasonable limits our our rights, and at what point have they crossed the line?

One side argues, "the government can't tell me what I can do." Well, yes they can. As I just described, they can tell you what you can and cannot do if it's a privilege. They also can place reasonable (as defined by the Supreme Court) limitations on your rights.

The other side argues, "500,000 Americans have died." Yes they have. Yet in the recent past, we've had over 60,000 annual deaths from influenza. Did the government issue (for example) mask mandates because of these 60,000 deaths? Did they have the legal right to?

If 50 million Americans had died from COVID, there still would be some saying the government is trampling on our rights. Now that COVID has become so political, I'm sure there will be some who insist we should (for example) wear masks forever. Sound inconceivable? A year ago, Dr. Fauci stated that we should never shake hands again.

What's clear (at least to me) is that there is a point where the government does step over the line. Are we going to be required to wear masks indoors when the number of COVID deaths drops below the historical average of influenza death (36,000 per year)? Are we going to be allowed to shake hands again? At what point does the government step over the line and violate our pre-existing rights?

 

[JD80]

Reposting something I wrote earlier...

You're conflating rights with privileges. You're comparing apples to oranges.

Privileges are granted to us after birth. Rights preexist our birth.

As courts have ruled long ago, operating a motor vehicle (or an airplane or heavy machinery or ...) is a privilege. We were not born with a right to drive a car. As such, the government can place restrictions on this, such as mandating driver's licenses and seat belts.

Conversely, the Founding Fathers believed that rights are not given by the government. Rights predate the existence of government. Rights come from God. Quoting a famous passage from the Declaration of Independence:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.​

Still, as codified by the Supreme Court, all rights have limits. As such, the government can place reasonable limits on our rights. The famous example is yelling "fire" in a crowded theater.

If we step back from the two entrenched camps, we can ask our ourselves at what point are governments placing reasonable limits our our rights, and at what point have they crossed the line?

One side argues, "the government can't tell me what I can do." Well, yes they can. As I just described, they can tell you what you can and cannot do if it's a privilege. They also can place reasonable (as defined by the Supreme Court) limitations on your rights.

The other side argues, "500,000 Americans have died." Yes they have. Yet in the recent past, we've had over 60,000 annual deaths from influenza. Did the government issue (for example) mask mandates because of these 60,000 deaths? Did they have the legal right to?

If 50 million Americans had died from COVID, there still would be some saying the government is trampling on our rights. Now that COVID has become so political, I'm sure there will be some who insist we should (for example) wear masks forever. Sound inconceivable? A year ago, Dr. Fauci stated that we should never shake hands again.

What's clear (at least to me) is that there is a point where the government does step over the line. Are we going to be required to wear masks indoors when the number of COVID deaths drops below the historical average of influenza death (36,000 per year)? Are we going to be allowed to shake hands again? At what point does the government step over the line and violate our pre-existing rights?

Fair enough, I'm not a lawyer but yes I track what you're saying.

Wearing a mask is not codified into law, but is a public safety measure enacted in a State of Emergency.

 

[Heppenheimer]

Or we recognize that medical professionals and scientists do not agree 100% on everything.

Science is a never-ending investigation into the unknown. Science is learning that what we today as "fact" sometimes is wrong. It happens more often than you think.

I believe the vaccines are safe for the overwhelming majority. I have taken both doses, as have all my children.

But I'm not going to punish someone for having a different opinion.

No vaccine is 100% risk-free. Large numbers have had documented adverse reactions to this vaccine, especially the second dose.

I believe the benefits of getting vaccinated far outweigh the risks and I encourage everyone to get vaccinated.

But I'm not going to punish anyone who decides not to.

Just like I'm not going to punish anyone who insists on wearing masks in situations where the science tells us that masks are not needed.

"Follow the science" cuts both ways.

We could all learn to be a little more tolerant of one another.

At a certain point, though, the evidence becomes overwhelming in favor of one side. With hundreds of millions of people vaccinated, the relative safety and efficacy can not be denied after rationally analyzing the numbers. If hesitancy remains, it's either because of irrationality, or the debate has been polluted by malignant actors, or a combination of both.

Science is a never-ending process, but eventually accumulated evidence allows a consensus to be reached, and it takes extraordinary contrary evidence to switch to a new paradigm. We're at consensus with the vaccines. Any legitimate health care professional who continues to argue the contrary, for whatever reason, is outside of the mainstream.

 

[ImperfectPixie]

Respectfully, we disagree.

IMO, you are lumping 2 distinct groups together.

There's a group of crazies who believe every insane thing they read, as long as it validates what they already feel.

Then there's a second group who are uncomfortable with the rapid pace of the development of this vaccine. After all, in September 2020, (now) Vice President Harris said we should question any vaccine developed under the Trump administration. Well, as it turns out, that's the same vaccine she's now encouraging us to take.

Science is never settled, and I understand those who feel a rational degree of skepticism towards these vaccines. Historically, skepticism is a natural part of science.

We simply need to be more persuasive convincing this second group to take the vaccine. We will win them over eventually.

I'm not lumping them together at all. I've already stated that I understand vaccine hesitancy, especially in regards to the COVID vaccines because 1) they're new vaccines, and 2) the mRNA vaccine type is "new" to the general public. I almost became an anti-vaxxer when my oldest was born in 2006...because I'd already heard of the anti-vaccine movement and my thought process was that it wouldn't be growing if there wasn't some validity to their claims (there isn't).

THIS is the problem - that the people who buy into whatever they read have been spreading misinformation for SO LONG, that the idea is already planted in the minds of people who under normal conditions (without screaming anti-vaxxers) wouldn't even think twice about getting a vaccine, new or not.

The flat-earth movement is gaining steam too...and all because "opinions need to be respected". Sorry, no. When something is scientifically proven to be so, your differing "opinion" is no longer valid and should no longer be respected. Period.

Now we're in the middle of a pandemic. And the loonies have made anti-science stances mainstream...and it's actively hurting us.

 

[GoofGoof]

The sad part of this whole Covid pandemic is that freedom should have never been in question. People should actually want to wear a mask and distance and get vaccinated and do whatever they can to stop spread and keep themselves and their neighbors safe. The government and businesses shouldn’t have to require it. If there was never a mask mandate anywhere and no business required it but the public health experts said we should do it I would still wear a mask. The difference is a lot of people wouldn‘t because they just don’t really care. That is why the government and businesses had to mandate it. So if people acted right their freedom wouldn’t be challenged because there wouldn’t be a need for mandates.

I‘m sure this post will result in a bunch of replies about why masks don’t work or why the safety measures are unnecessary but that will just enforce my point.

 

[GaBoy]

I actually felt bad for the cleaners, but left them a nice tip at end of stay.

What is a good tip? I never know. I know its off topic but I don’t have nearly the experience a lot of folks here do.

 

[GoofGoof]

What is a good tip? I never know. I know its off topic but of I don’t have nearly the experience a lot of folks here do.

I think the standard is $2 to $5 a night but IMHO also depends on level of service. If they go above and beyond I may tip more.

 

[ImperfectPixie]

What is a good tip? I never know. I know its off topic but of I don’t have nearly the experience a lot of folks here do.

Under normal conditions, we would leave $5 per day for a family of 4 (and we aren't messy - we give the room a tidying up every morning).

 

[GhostHost1000]

others have responded to this point already, but I also wanted to add that death is not the only unfavorable conclusion to a COVID diagnosis. Don’t forget “long COVID”, lung damage, etc.

Just playing devils advocate here but we don’t know the long term affects of the vaccine either

 

[GoofGoof]

Just playing devils advocate here but we don’t know the long term affects of the vaccine either

We don’t know for sure, but so far there are zero suspected long term issues with the vaccine. In the history of all vaccines adverse effects from the vaccine itself rarely if ever occur more than a few months after the injection. The other factor is the vaccine leaves your body pretty quickly so there is nothing left in your body long term but the T cells and anti-bodies that your body naturally created. If those cells cause a long term problem (highly unlikely) then anyone naturally infected would have the same issues. We don’t know 100% for sure but it’s highly unlikely there will be any long term issues.

 

[correcaminos]

Just playing devils advocate here but we don’t know the long term affects of the vaccine either

How many times do people have to reply to prove this wrong? Vaccines are not medicines that build toxins. No effects past 3 months have ever been recorded. No one has become more sick after getting vaccinated and covid. Answer is they are safe with no long term side effects.

 

[drizgirl]

The one thing from over a year of this thread that astounds me more than anything is just how many people here think they are so, so much smarter than the average, ignorant American and look down their noses at their fellow citizens. The amount of arrogant elitism in this one thread on a Disney forum is just astonishing.

But also quite revealing. Which can be interesting to see.

 

[GaBoy]

I think the standard is $2 to $5 a night but IMHO also depends on level of service. If they go above and beyond I may tip more.

Generally speaking or per person? Also I employed the stratagem that I would tip daily to encourage the staff that there will be reward instead of waiting till the end of the stay. I dont know. Just didn't want to be a cheapskate but not silly either.

 

[Heppenheimer]

Not exactly correct.

As a bit of a science history buff, I assure you that there are numerous instances in history where the scientific consensus was wrong.

When it comes to vaccines, I believe the scientific consensus is right, but I also acknowledge that they (and I) could be wrong.

Again, I encourage everyone to get vaccinated. It is the safest thing you can do.

Yes, scientific consensus can be wrong, but that's why I offered the caveat that it takes extraordinary evidence to change the consensus. And usually, the new paradigm becomes accepted because the consensus had already recognized that the old model was inadequate to explain new findings. For example, Einstein didn't so much come up with ideas that overturned Newtonian physics, rather, he found elegant solutions to known problems that the Newtonian model couldn't explain. To cite another, this is the reason we're still waiting on a grand unified theory to reconcile quantum mechanics and relativity.