-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Disney sues city of Anaheim & NY Times makes a BIG Disney blunder!
- Thread starter d43boy
- Start date
PigletIsMyCat
Well-Known Member
Well, Disney is a fairly high priced company, and those prices do prohibit most of what you'd call the low income market from enjoying the parks. Another point to Disney's elitist ways is the fact that they don't want section 8/welfare/low income housing right outside the doors to Disneyland (at least, in that reporter's opinion) because it will lower the class of the people there.
In fact, no one wants section 8 housing anywhere near anyplace, except possibly the people on section 8. Can you imagine being a kid growing up on welfare, having to watch the kids at Disneyland every day, like Charlie and the Chocolate Factory?
As for someone trying to bite the Anaheim hand that Disney feeds them with, who and/or how? By Anaheim trying to place section 8 housing near DLR, or by a newspaper reporting trying to bring it down? I'm confuzzled :shrug:
DizFanatic
Member
Take a trip to NY and visit world famous Coney Island. What used to be a fun family attraction. Find out what happened after the "section 8" projects were built at its front door. And please be careful.
PigletIsMyCat
Well-Known Member
Amen to that. I wouldn't go to Coney Island without body armor. No way Disney wants that at Disneyland's front door. Not that all people that live in section 8 housing ARE that kind of element. Just enough are, and they attract more of that element. Take it from me.
Mr Bill
Well-Known Member
Thanks for your message to our Reader Comment mailbox. Your e-mail will reach the appropriate editor promptly. We are grateful to readers who take the time to help us report thoroughly and accurately.
Ordinarily a comment about news coverage will receive a further reply. And we do pay respectful attention to all messages, even those that are part of organized letter-writing campaigns, for which we are not staffed to reply individually. A correction generally takes two or three days to appear on Page A2, after fact checking.
Ordinarily a comment about news coverage will receive a further reply. And we do pay respectful attention to all messages, even those that are part of organized letter-writing campaigns, for which we are not staffed to reply individually. A correction generally takes two or three days to appear on Page A2, after fact checking.
thedisneyfan
Member
Disney offers resident discounts to themeparks all the time. Comparing them to a local amusement park one can see that Disney is not that expensive. Disney has every right to protect its image and not have its elite guests view unkempt homes and lawns and trash all over the place while the guests are staying at their resorts or riding their attractions.
As the article correctly states, Disney is responsible for a huge portion of all of Anaheim's revenue. Attacking Disney for all that they do in that community is sheer stupidity. I think that the Mayor and Disney are correct in keeping the area designated as commercial and resort/themepark development. Where will these Section 8 residents think future employment will come from?----the theme parks that can't be built?, the hotels that can't be built?, the shopping and restraunt locations that can't be built? Disney is not just an economic engine for Anaheim it is THE economic engine for Anaheim!
When you add up all of the direct jobs from Disney, all of the ancillary jobs that Disney has created, all of the business that Anaheim has developed due to Disney, all of the residents, it's clear that the section 8 housing can be built in a residential area away from the parks. (Perhaps a Section 8 development in the back yard of each council person's house whom favored it in Disney's future expansion land?)
On a brighter note if Anaheim's stupidity continues and Disney's development in Anaheim is hindered, then we can look forward to more development in central Florida by Disney!
JDM
New Member
The New York Times do research?
Don't be ridiculous. They never met a "fact" they couldn't change (or invent) to suit their agenda.
durangojim
Well-Known Member
I think they meant Disney's Discovery Island in Bay Lake. Back in the 80s it cost about $30 so even though it's closed now, if you take into account for inflation and price raises, it would cost $249. I'm sure that's what the reporter meant
morgan22
Active Member
They didn't .... I was just making a point that is frustrates me when people get simple things like calling it Disneyland in Orlando ....
WDWFigment
Well-Known Member
Disney offers resident discounts to themeparks all the time. Comparing them to a local amusement park one can see that Disney is not that expensive. Disney has every right to protect its image and not have its elite guests view unkempt homes and lawns and trash all over the place while the guests are staying at their resorts or riding their attractions.
As the article correctly states, Disney is responsible for a huge portion of all of Anaheim's revenue. Attacking Disney for all that they do in that community is sheer stupidity. I think that the Mayor and Disney are correct in keeping the area designated as commercial and resort/themepark development. Where will these Section 8 residents think future employment will come from?----the theme parks that can't be built?, the hotels that can't be built?, the shopping and restraunt locations that can't be built? Disney is not just an economic engine for Anaheim it is THE economic engine for Anaheim!
When you add up all of the direct jobs from Disney, all of the ancillary jobs that Disney has created, all of the business that Anaheim has developed due to Disney, all of the residents, it's clear that the section 8 housing can be built in a residential area away from the parks. (Perhaps a Section 8 development in the back yard of each council person's house whom favored it in Disney's future expansion land?)
On a brighter note if Anaheim's stupidity continues and Disney's development in Anaheim is hindered, then we can look forward to more development in central Florida by Disney!
The simple fact is no one wants low income housing anywhere. Low income housing is about as desirable as a nuclear power plant, landfill, or waste treatment center. People cry, "not in my backyard," and usually, whomever has the least money to fight the undesirable building ends up with it in their neighborhood. Eventually, that will happen in Anaheim, too.
I would bet this is a calculated move by the city of Anaheim. They want to win the liberal vote. The liberal vote can be won by making concessions to the poor. The poor don't understand economics (a bit of a generalization), so they don't see the 'bigger picture' of Disney directly or indirectly providing their jobs (or tax revenue to support their low income housing and welfare benefits) so they think of Disney as an evil company looking to unfairly displace them. The city probably fully expects to lose in court, and at least when that happens, they can say, "see, we tried," and still win the liberal vote.
What may backfire is if Disney loses in court and decides take a corporate mega-giant approach to getting their way. If they decide to fund the election campaigns of opponents in City Hall who will take pro-Disney stances or take the issue to the voters themselves via referendum, and spend millions campaigning for its cause, they will get their way. Wal-Mart has done this successfully for years (see Asheville, NC and Contra Costa County, CA among others).
njblackberry
New Member
A correction will be printed in this Sunday's Real Estate Section. I sent them an e-mail and get a response in less than five minutes..
Dear Mr. xxxxxxx:
Indeed, you are correct -- and we were wrong. We are publishing a correction this Sunday in the Real Estate section where the article appeared.
I am no fan of the New York Times, but mistakes can and do happen.
Dear Mr. xxxxxxx:
Indeed, you are correct -- and we were wrong. We are publishing a correction this Sunday in the Real Estate section where the article appeared.
I am no fan of the New York Times, but mistakes can and do happen.
Mr Bill
Well-Known Member
I received the same email
Dear Mr. Magoo:
Indeed, you are correct -- and we were wrong. We
are running a correction this Sunday in the Real
Estate section where the article appeared.
Thank you for reading The Times, and for taking
the time to write and keep us on our collective
toes. We appreciate readers like you, Mr. Shackleford,
who insist that we meet the standards you have
come to expect of our reporters and editors.
Best regards,
Greg Brock
Senior Editor
Wilt Dasney
Well-Known Member
I know your pain. There have been many times where I felt like a story with my name on it should have had 2 or 3 other bylines after all the tinkering it received.
haveyoumetmark
Well-Known Member
Might as well just call it Disney's Orlando. :lol:
Im lost, this article was in the New York Times. Who is the reputable publication involved?
njblackberry
New Member
And here is the correction from tomorrow's paper
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/27/realestate/27rcxn.html?_r=1&oref=slogin
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/05/27/realestate/27rcxn.html?_r=1&oref=slogin
tirian
Well-Known Member
NYT has had a bad reputation for decades. Everyone--Republicans and Democrats, liberals and conservatives, Disney haters and lovers--has complained about that paper at some time or another.
This was probably just a mistake, but it shows how their "journalists" concentrate more on making statements than reporting news.
It's the principle of the thing.