Coronavirus and Walt Disney World general discussion

Status
Not open for further replies.

bpiper

Well-Known Member
You're right. It was all mixed together. Not sure why I always thought of them as separate. Looks like I was wrong about Ally too; we did get our money back on that. Woohoo! Haha

I don't think there was much of a chance of GM stock reaching the levels needed for the government to make a profit, though. But I think economists still say it was the right decision.
They finished selling the last of the stock in Dec of 2013, the price was in the 39's per share. It wasn't until Oct of 2017 that the share price went over 40. It traded in the mid 30 during that time, was in the low 40's for a little while and then dropped back into the mid to upper 30's. Looks like they sold at a good peak. If they held out until late 2017, they may have broke even with the slightly higher share price coupled with the resumption of the quarterly dividend, but the pressure was on to close out the books of TARP.

Overall I think historians will look at TARP being an incredible success. It came close to getting all of its money back (name a bailout that did that), kept the banking industry from seizing up, kept the auto industry from cratering, got the auto makers headed in the right direction, especially on fuel economy.. The only problem was that it didn't do much directly for the average citizen. I believe that due to that, is why the recession dragged on for so long and we went through many years of very slow growth.
 

Rich Brownn

Well-Known Member
In terms of this I don't think it's a fair comparison given the average age of those dying and affected in Italy and our healthcare system vs theirs. Also Northern Italy has a high population of factory workers from Wuhan many of whom went home for the Chinese New Year and then flew back to Italy unchecked and unregulated.
New York City is already starting to breakdown healthcare wise. Also the outbreak wasn't traced to any Chinese workers in Italy
 

Incomudro

Well-Known Member
I could have lived without prom too...but those parties were a pretty good time :)

I didn't attend my prom.
For me, my friends were the neighborhood kids - and school was separate from that. Literally, my high school was in "the 'hood."
My neighborhood friends weren't in my school (well, one was - but he was a grade ahead of me and I never saw him) I attended school, than caught the train home to hang out with my neighborhood friends.
 

21stamps

Well-Known Member
I didn't attend my prom.
For me, my friends were the neighborhood kids - and school was separate from that. Literally, my high school was in "the 'hood."
My neighborhood friends weren't in my school (well, one was - but he was a grade ahead of me and I never saw him) I attended school, than caught the train home to hang out with my neighborhood friends.

I was the polar opposite. My senior year (and all of high school really) are some of my most cherished memories. I’ve flown in for ever single reunion that we have (every 5 years).. I loved that time of my life and still love catching up with everyone.
 

RobWDW1971

Well-Known Member
BBC: The new figures include a further 246 people in England, with patients aged between 33 and 100 years old. All of them had underlying health conditions except 13 people, who were aged 63 and over.
 

seascape

Well-Known Member
According to the Washington Post if Trump reopens the economy he will be responsible for deaths caused by the opening. The question I have is who is responsible for the deaths caused by closing the economy? If anyone thinks there will not be any they are delusional.
 

Andrew C

You know what's funny?
According to the Washington Post if Trump reopens the economy he will be responsible for deaths caused by the opening. The question I have is who is responsible for the deaths caused by closing the economy? If anyone thinks there will not be any they are delusional.

The two extremes are not long term solutions and POTUS isn’t considering either right now. I think we need to stop with this nonsense.
 

marni1971

Park History nut
Premium Member
Last year over 600,000 people died in the UK - that would be about a 1% increase over a normal year.
And that’s meant to be a good thing?

Anyone belittling this virus or crying about the economy can right off so far as I’m concerned.

And pardon my French (also edited by a moderator to save any confusion, my apologies)
 
Last edited:

marni1971

Park History nut
Premium Member
I am not trying to be argumentative (and I feel uneasy asking this of perhaps the most respected member of this board), but...

What does your statement mean? Why is any honest discussion of numbers taken to be an endorsement of death? Are there really folks on this board who think death is good and should not be combatted? Statements like "one death is to many" or "if we save just one life..." are conversation-enders that, if taken to their logical conclusion, are absurd.

Again, with all due respect! :)
Not an endorsement. Just a logical, often quoted statement.

Especially since right now, on TV, the government say the UK will be lucky to have less than 20,000 deaths.
 

marni1971

Park History nut
Premium Member
"Crying" about the economy is not merely a selfish complaint about losing money. It is often a genuine concern about the future of society, really. The "economy" is not just one's pocketbook. It is the sum total of millions of individual human interactions. Life itself, really. It think that is worth being concerned about.
The worldwide economy is crashing. That is not a reason to want to back off on life saving measures.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom