Coronavirus and Walt Disney World general discussion

[LittleBuford]

It's called modeling - I used 1,000, 10,000, etc. Feel free to use a number, 100,000, million?

I have zero inclination to make up my own numbers. I’m going with the experts on this.

 

[DisneyCane]

You are of course assuming that a vaccination is found. How many years have they looking for a vaccine for HIV or the SAR virus and not found one... how long did it take to find a vaccine for polio... Vaccines are not as simple as splintering off a few bits of an RNA from a virus and presto instant vaccine. You have to come up with something that triggers just enough of the person's immune system to be successful... too little and it doesn't work, too much and you end up killing the person. While I hope they can find a vaccine in the next year, I would not be surprised if they couldn't find one in the next 20 years.

After the initial shock passes most government will likely move back to a business as usual mindset and accept that every year they are going to have a small percentage of the people die from it. China opened up Pandora box and there is probably no way to put the monster back in.

For SARS they just didn't bother pursuing the vaccine because it was contained and the outbreak died down.

An HIV vaccine hasn't been discovered because the virus attacks the immune system itself. The only "vaccine" likely to ever exist for HIV is along the lines of the current PREP drugs that are out there where you are artificially blocking the infection. However, they don't have any lasting effect if you stop taking them. The immune system can't be "taught" to protect the body from an HIV infection the way that other vaccines work.

Specifically for SARS-CoV-2, it is likely that at least a "short duration" vaccine will be available in a year to 18 months but you'll have to get a shot every year like the flu shot.

 

[DisneyCane]

Finding a cure for cancer is basically impossible because cancer isn't one thing. It's hundreds (or maybe even thousands) of different things that we just lump in together as cancer. They have essentially found cures for specific types of cancer, though.

Regardless, this isn't like HIV or cancer. Finding a vaccine, or at least a highly effective treatment, shouldn't be that difficult. It just takes some time.

Also, cancer isn't an infection like a virus or bacteria. It is basically cell mutations. Our immune systems aren't designed to fight cancer. Treatments have to either kill or remove those cells.

 

[hopemax]

Fully understand - terrified doctors and overwhelmed hospitals are horrible, but those numbers you just described would not crater the economy. If the number of elderly dying jumped 20% from 2.1M to 2.3M, the economy would keep going. If the number of people dying from cancer went from 600,000 last year jumped 20% to 720,000, the economy would keep going.

You're actually proving my point - the scale of the incremental death is nowhere near the level of economic devastation we are voluntarily creating.

Would American businesses losing significant portions their A. raw materials B. imports C. customers in China, Japan, South Korea, Italy, France, Germany, Spain, the UK, Brazil, Australia, Canada, Mexico, we can keep going crater the economy?

 

[hopemax]

Global slowdowns will always impact our exports and economy, but you are greatly underestimating the US economy's role in the world economy. Not to mention domestic-centric businesses like the casual dining chain that was mentioned yesterday laying off 18,000 workers - those are impacts within our domestic economic bubble we are self-creating.

And I am saying that enough Americans would take a look at the world around them, and stay home that those casual dining chains would still see significant reduction in their business. Sure some portion of this country would be running around like yahoos, as we have seen, but enough would make independent decisions of self-preservation, that it would have a chilling enough impact to start the cascading affect of layoffs.

 

[hopemax]

Not to this extent, not even close.

I would like to see some proof of that, please.

 

[UNCgolf]

Fully understand - terrified doctors and overwhelmed hospitals are horrible, but those numbers you just described would not crater the economy. If the number of elderly dying jumped 20% from 2.1M to 2.3M, the economy would keep going. If the number of people dying from cancer went from 600,000 last year jumped 20% to 720,000, the economy would keep going.

You're actually proving my point - the scale of the incremental death is nowhere near the level of economic devastation we are voluntarily creating.

It's not about the incremental death. That's not what would cause the economic collapse. That's just an awful side effect, which by the way, would not only affect the elderly. People across all age groups would die.

More importantly, though, is that FAR more people would be sick for longer periods of time. That's what you're not grasping. Instead of a few weeks or a month of businesses being shut down, it could be 4 or 5 months. Supply chains could be completely disrupted in a way they aren't right now. That would cause an economic meltdown.

 

[LittleBuford]

BTW, you yet again didn't answer my question, is it worth this level of economic destruction to save one person? 1,000? 10,000? I say no, no, and no. You?

As I said, you're posing a false dichotomy.

 

[UNCgolf]

Not to this extent, not even close.

You don't understand how the economy works if you think losing access to world markets, imports, and raw materials wouldn't absolutely crater it.

 

[jt04]

Disney World would have 2 hour waits for Space Mountain right now (like the day they did before closing) if the parks weren't closed. I'll leave it up to you describe those people, but from an economic standpoint, the machine would keep going.

Yep. Prices and wages would adjust to the market if allowed to do so. As would rent, food prices etc.

 

[thomas998]

Would American businesses losing significant portions their A. raw materials B. imports C. customers in China, Japan, South Korea, Italy, France, Germany, Spain, the UK, Brazil, Australia, Canada, Mexico, we can keep going crater the economy?

I think you are overestimating the US's role in some other countries economies. The US doesn't manufacture that much stuff compared to countries like China... so if someone waved a magic wand and stop the US from interacting with the world who would it really hurt?

 

[JoeT63]

"Dogs and cats...living together!! MASS HYSTERIA!"

Everybody calm down. For crying out loud. We live with all kinds of crazy-dangerous infectious diseases every day. Is this scary? Yep, but so are all the others. Do what you're asked to do, stay inside as the wave crashes, and let the waters calm. When they do, people will still catch this virus and they'll be treated. When the vaccine is produced and widely available, get vaccinated. The markets will return, people will have jobs again, and toilet paper will flow in the streets. It might be tough for a while but we've been through tough...toughER...times before. Panicky hyperbole and rumor-mongering doesn't help. Far from it.

 

["El Gran Magnifico"]

Yep. Prices and wages would adjust to the market if allowed to do so. As would rent, food prices etc.

Not Disney tickets though. Nor Deluxe and Moderate hotel room rates. At best they may give us 20% off of the parking fees,

 

[bryanfze55]

The non essential businesses who have the ability to practice the recommended in office procedures during this time. Ohio’s Governor has laid out the rules. He has told us that he will not shut all non-essential businesses as of yet, but he will if they do not follow his rules.

A lot of us are thinking about people.. trying to maintain their health and their livelihoods. The people who work under me aren’t minimum wage and they aren’t rich- the two easiest reboundable categories during a recession. They’re middle class with annual incomes range between $80k - $150k per year.. if they lose their jobs they will not be easily able to find another. These are real people, real decisions... where we can try to protect them while protecting the general health of the population. Not just protect them, but make sure that companies aren’t forced to do so many layoffs moving forward, crushing our economy.

There are no easy decisions here.

Why would they not be able to find other jobs? At that wage level, I would hope they have some kind of skill set that would make them marketable even in a recessionary period. Recessions actually hit the low class way harder than the upper middle class ($100K+ as an individual income is upper middle, come on, less than 10% of W-2 workers make that individually). I saw some graphics showing how the bottom 20% had not recovered at all since the 2008 recession.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Fully understand - terrified doctors and overwhelmed hospitals are horrible, but those numbers you just described would not crater the economy. If the number of elderly dying jumped 20% from 2.1M to 2.3M, the economy would keep going. If the number of people dying from cancer went from 600,000 last year jumped 20% to 720,000, the economy would keep going.

You're actually proving my point - the scale of the incremental death is nowhere near the level of economic devastation we are voluntarily creating.

You keep falsely describing this as something that only/primarily effects the elderly. That is not true. Young, heathy people getting sick for a week or two in large numbers is going to have an impact.

 

[21stamps]

We absolutely know - we can look at what's happening in other countries around the world to see.

We do not absolutely know this. Not even close. Different countries, and even states, are trying different things. That’s what we know right now

And to your underlined statement...I would much rather be given a number of people to layoff, than to wait and have a percentage of those people be dead because hospitals were overwhelmed. Laid off people can collect unemployment...and when people are hungry (not the literal use of the term "hungry" here), they can be incredibly creative in finding a way to better their situation. I also have a feeling that we may see the return of multi-generational households in some cases going forward (which I don't think is necessarily a bad thing...it takes a village and all).

Unemployment is not a way of life, it doesn’t pay the same income. People’s lives will be severely affected. The economy in general will be severely affected. Does everyone not realize that when you taking buying power or consumer confidence away, then all aspects of the economy are affected? It’s not just about the people who are laid off.
Your post ignores the many comments I have made regarding the safety of the health of employees.. that anyone high risk can take time off, than no one is allowed for two weeks if sick or any grade of a fever- these are rules set by our governor.

I don’t want to go around in circles, I just want people to realize that it’s not as simple as telling everyone else to bunker down at home and then collect government money later on.

 

["El Gran Magnifico"]

Young, heathy people getting sick for a week or two in large numbers is going to have an impact.

A rather large impact as they will spread this to everybody else. And then go play beach volleyball while drinking a Heineken.

 

[jt04]

My optimistic take. A lot of businesses will be returning after this is over. We have to regulate the percentage of goods and services we get from overseas. I had no idea what a high percentage of our medical resources are imported. It is insane to have it be more than 40% or so. National security has to come before economic considerations.

So you will see limits on critical products produced outside of North America and jobs coming back to fix stuff like this. IMO.

 

[RobWDW1971]

You keep falsely describing this as something that only/primarily effects the elderly. That is not true. Young, heathy people getting sick for a week or two in large numbers is going to have an impact.

Absolutely, they will get sick, 80% will not require hospitalization, and they will recover in a couple of weeks. That would not shut down the US economy. We are focusing on the elderly as that is the bulk of the serious/critical/fatalities. Governments are not shutting down states because they are concerned young people are going to have to stay home for a week with a cough. They are doing it to stop the spread so it won't impact the most impacted, which is the elderly and people with existing conditions.

Let's play out a scenario (warning to those easily triggered by hypothetical scenarios), imagine this disease impacted only young people, they got it in masses, they all just got a fever and cough for a week, and then were fine. Would the entire economy be shut down and would we be trapped in our homes to stop it? Of course not.

 

["El Gran Magnifico"]

My optimistic take. A lot of businesses will be returning after this is over. We have to regulate the percentage of goods and services we get from overseas. I had no idea what a high percentage of our medical resources are imported. It is insane to have it be more than 40% or so. National security has to come before economic considerations.

So you will see limits on critical products produced outside of North America and jobs coming back to fix stuff like this. IMO.

We can't even make penicillin without China

Coronavirus Spurs U.S. Efforts to End China’s Chokehold on Drugs (Published 2020)

The Trump administration says the U.S. is too dependent on China for vital drugs. But it’s unclear how much Washington can do to alter global supply chains

www.nytimes.com