Coronavirus and Walt Disney World general discussion

[thomas998]

That is certainly part of it. What I haven't been able to figure out is what made the media and governments around the world create the same panic.

I think there was considerable panic in other countries during some of the past pandemics like N1H1 or SARS... but in this country the panic was subdued to non-existent.

 

[RobWDW1971]

Congratulations and if you can afford to still live in NJ and pay the highest property taxes in the nation, that's a great accomplishment.

And if you think the taxes in CA, NY, IL, and NJ are high now, wait until the bill comes due on these mandatory shutdowns.

 

[GoofGoof]

It is pretty clear now that even if only half the people get infected in the US that you will have more than a million dead from it. The lowest mortality rate yet push is 1.5%... so if I was going to place a bet on the final death figure it would be way north of a million. Vaccines and cures are a long ways off and the virus seems to be moving pretty quickly.

Depends on the speed of the spread. If the spread is slowed and much less than half the population get it then herd immunity can be achieved through vaccine instead of infection. That’s what happened with H1N1.

 

[disneygeek90]

What was your opinion when China flights were cut off? Did you agree with it at that time?

Yes, and we waited entirely too long to cut flights off from Europe. That should have been enacted months ago. Sure, people would have yelled that it was an overreaction, but if we did literally anything to try and close ourselves off, maybe we wouldn't be in the position we are now where we are closing the entire country.

 

[TrainsOfDisney]

But once it started spreading to other parts of the world you can’t just close all borders because something might happen... by the time it was bad enough to close the borders it was too late. But that’s a chance you take operating a world where you let people make choices and travel.

 

[solidyne]

Can you imagine the uproar if international flights had blocked in January?

 

[disneygeek90]

But once it started spreading to other parts of the world you can’t just close all borders because something might happen... by the time it was bad enough to close the borders it was too late. But that’s a chance you take operating a world where you let people make choices and travel.
[/QUOTE]
I think it was quite obvious that something was going to happen. There was no "might" about it.

 

[ToTBellHop]

It is pretty clear now that even if only half the people get infected in the US that you will have more than a million dead from it. The lowest mortality rate yet push is 1.5%... so if I was going to place a bet on the final death figure it would be way north of a million. Vaccines and cures are a long ways off and the virus seems to be moving pretty quickly.

The mortality rate will end up no where near that. It’s far more widespread than reported. I was turned away three times from testing because I hadn’t traveled. Finally got the test. Positive. At least I was self-isolating. Many would get turned away once and just go to work.

They claim 8000 cases in NYC. It’s far higher than that. As long as immunity is protective, this will quickly run through big cities killing far fewer than 1% of the population. Even with shelter in place, it’s still doubling every 3 days.

 

[disneygeek90]

Exactly. Can you imagine the uproar if international flights had blocked in January?

Would that have overall been better than the situation we're in now?

 

[flynnibus]

I think you are arguing semantics, what was done during those time of "national emergencies" were things which would under the normal circumstance never be allowed under the Constitution.

No - incorrect. And the scotus judgements define that they were in fact constitutional.

being "unusual" or the like does not make them unconstitutional nor does their existence mean that the president is now above the constitution if declaring a "national emergency".

you cant use those examples to claim they can ignore the constitution when in fact the challenges to the actions found they were not.

this is classic "close enough for me..." leaps of logic.

 

[GoofGoof]

The mortality rate will end up no where near that. It’s far more widespread than reported. I was turned away three times from testing because I hadn’t traveled. Finally got the test. Positive. At least I was self-isolating. Many would get turned away once and just go to work.

They claim 5000 cases in NYC. It’s far higher than that. As long as immunity is protective, this will quickly run through big cities killing far fewer than 1% of the population. Even with shelter in place, it’s still doubling every 3 days.

I think it’s too early to see the impact of shelter in place. Most of the positive tests today are people infected before it went into effect. It’s gonna take a week or so to see if the spread is slowed at all.

 

[TrainsOfDisney]

I think it was quite obvious that something was going to happen. There was no "might" about it.

At what point did everyone agree it was going to happen? That’s where it gets tricky.

 

[solidyne]

Would that have overall been better than the situation we're in now?

Most assuredly. This point is that, at the time, such a move would have been seen as extreme by a majority of citizens (across the political spectrum).

 

[Lilofan]

It is pretty clear now that even if only half the people get infected in the US that you will have more than a million dead from it. The lowest mortality rate yet push is 1.5%... so if I was going to place a bet on the final death figure it would be way north of a million. Vaccines and cures are a long ways off and the virus seems to be moving pretty quickly.

If this doesn't scream nationwide lockdown and some may be opposed??

 

[GoofGoof]

If this doesn't scream nationwide lockdown and some may be opposed??

If the states all do it that takes the responsibility from the federal government.

 

[21stamps]

Most assuredly. This point is that, at the time, such a move would have been seen as extreme by a majority of citizens (across the political spectrum).

Exactly.

 

[csmat99]

Being airborne would mean that it literally lives in the air. There is no solid proof this is the case with CV19. The so-called 6 foot rule is due to droplets from coughing and/or sneezing.

Researchers have concluded it can live in the air for up to 30 minutes.

 

[DisneyCane]

Researchers have concluded it can live in the air for up to 30 minutes.

Live in air and stay suspended in air in high enough quantity to infect someone are two different things. The latter has not been thoroughly researched yet.

 

[ImperfectPixie]

Live in air and stay suspended in air in high enough quantity to infect someone are two different things. The latter has not been thoroughly researched yet.

Viral load makes a huge difference in whether you'll be infected or not, too.

 

[DisneyCane]

I know you weren't talking to me, but I would say "NO"...because I keep getting flashes of that scene in Outbreak where the lab tech coughs and the virus spread in the movie theater.

Of course those movie images are a large part of what is leading to the panic and reactions. Just like I believe The Walking Dead is a big driver behind the hoarding of supplies.