I can think of one guy worth over $120B who invested $5B in one of the fastest growing third world countries ( India ) for Amazon.
Because he could get labor at prices that would make him even wealthier.
I can think of one guy worth over $120B who invested $5B in one of the fastest growing third world countries ( India ) for Amazon.
That's what it used to mean. Now it means a country that is developing, has a robust economy, but is not quite first world."Second world" meant industrialized but communist, showing that the whole First, Second and Third World classification is not particularly relevant anymore.
Modern day definitions are"Second world" meant industrialized but communist, showing that the whole First, Second and Third World classification is not particularly relevant anymore.
That's why approx 75% of our meds are made in China.Because he could get labor at prices that would make him even wealthier.
You are 900+ pages and 18,000+ posts in. With lots and lots of direct references to the RCID charter not being about creating an actual EPCOT city. With nobody able to cite anything saying a city was needed, and lots of cites, directly from the RCID charter that tourism is the goal.Everyone who claims the Epcot issue needs to give me the reason why it continued to exist until this year and what changed in the last year.
The specifics were probably written with the needs of a real lived-in city in mind but I don't believe for a minute the Disney Co. couldn't have pushed for and gotten what they got and used, without talk of EPCOT... maybe not the nuclear power plant that never was and such but again, pretty much everything else, including the airport that they have made use of.
It was, but has since been redefined based on the economic development of a country, with SOME political connotations still remaining in the definitions of second and third worlds.That term was coined to describe communist-socialist states and has been largely obsolete since the fall of the USSR.
Why not have a dim view of them? According to you, the whole batch of them was so dumb that they truly believed the main reason to implement RCID was so Disney could build a fancy apartment complex with some office space and stores and then NEVER ONCE mention it in any of the laws/contracts.It's a pretty dim view of Florida politicians to think that they would have granted such powers had mention of EPCOT never been made, but to be honest, they don't seem all that bright these days either.
I deleted my post after seeing that @Heppenheimer had said the same thing.It was, but has since been redefined based on the economic development of a country, with SOME political connotations still remaining in the definitions of second and third worlds.
Agreed is overly simplistic.I deleted my post after seeing that @Heppenheimer had said the same thing.
The sense in which you’re using the term isn’t standard, even if it is out there. “Developed”, “developing”, and “least developed” is the more current (though still overly simplistic) way of dividing the world, with India falling in the middle category.
Why not have a dim view of them? According to you, the whole batch of them was so dumb that they truly believed the main reason to implement RCID was so Disney could build a fancy apartment complex with some office space and stores and then NEVER ONCE mention it in any of the laws/contracts.
How about a much more plausible explanation?
None, or nearly none of them cared one iota about EPCOT being built.
New update on the lawsuit from today
![]()
Disney World Amends Federal Lawsuit to Include Bill Nullifying Reedy Creek Contract & DeSantis' Recent Comments on Retaliation
Disney World has amended its lawsuit against Florida Governor Ron DeSantis to include recent legislative action and comments by the Governorblogmickey.com
Prove it. Cite a source where they (I am assuming the lawmakers at the time?) actually said that.
It's not a dim view at all if you choose to view this through the lens of the period in which all of this happened rather than from today.It's a pretty dim view of Florida politicians to think that they would have granted such powers had mention of EPCOT never been made, but to be honest, they don't seem all that bright these days either.
But the broader point is: we will never really know. Disney pitched the whole affair, creating the two municipalities and the district, on the premise that it was absolutely necessary to build EPCOT. They kept advertising EPCOT and talking it up in the press and privately among the lawmakers in the run up to get their charter passed. There is not a shred of evidence anywhere that they passed Disney's legislation, satisfied in knowing EPCOT wouldn't be built, and yet that bit of misinformation persists.
It's not a dim view at all if you choose to view this through the lens of the period in which all of this happened rather than from today.
Tourism was already our major business. Our state officials were well aware of the Disney company as an animation company and movie company and the company that owned Disneyland and who had a weekly show promoting that park on ABC across the nation.
What Disney was not was an urban planing company.
Disney was offering to turn central Florida, known mostly for cow pastures, costly-to-develop swamp land, and orange groves into a major tourism hub and Disney was willing to foot 100% of the bill to put the infrastructure in to get it all started.
Even Universal jokingly acknowledged the state of this area pre-Disney in the Minion's movie.
The EPCOT thing was a wild dream - too wild of a dream as it turned out. Walt had a saying "You can't top pigs with pigs" but he agreed to do that very thing in order to secure the control he was after over the land in Florida for his project. The MK was his concession to the state at the time. He had no plans for the sprawling WDW resort we have today with another three under-built theme parks, 13+ resorts and timeshares out the wazoo.
All he'd ever built at that point was the Disneyland park and the guts for some Worlds Fair pavilions. I'm sure they were happy to get whatever they could with EPCOT (which probably would have been a disaster that bankrupted the company and definetly would not have lasted this long, even if it had been successful for 10-20 years) but MK was always the prize - the sure bet, the thing that was going to spur growth in Orlando and create a tourism bridge from east to west relatively close to port Canaveral which had promise as a cruse launching site but which was still mostly dominated by commercial vessels and not too far from Tampa Bay which already was established as a tourist area - that's what made this whole project appealing to the state.
To suggest EPCOT was the carrot would be silly. Our state officials weren't that nieve, even if Walt kind of was.
We all know Walt never got his EPCOT but the state got far more than we ever expected from the WDW resort and basically everything tourisim related that you see in central Florida today bloomed from that initial deal with Disney.
Heck Orlando International Airport started as the McCoy Air Force Base. It was in joint military/civilian use with the Air Force largely subsidizing its operation up until 1975. Disney is the reason it became a major international facility.
Legit question, what part of this would you say Disney has not done? Do you not think a multi-theme park multi-water park, multi-resort with literally tens of thousands of hotel rooms does not fit the bill? It has to have people that rent apartment's or else it is failing in its charter? How many, what percentage? Why are these things not included? Why was there no stipulation on the amount of residents that had to included? Why did the very same law makers not come back later and strip the district when it became apparent that it was not going to happen?to promote and create favorable conditions for the development and practical application of new and advanced concepts, designs and ideas for a recreation-oriented community and to undertake, and enable enterprises conducted within the District to undertake, a broad and flexible program of experimentation and development
So Disney was smart enough to know EPCOT wouldn't fly in it's original format but the state was too stupid? They still expected a city to be built or are you saying that both sides knew that tourists is what the whole thing was about? If so then mission accomplished, I would say the WDW complex gets a lot of "temporary visitors" and the state of Florida has benefited from those visitors while not having to pay for the WDW infrastructure.The more plausible explanation is that Disney's lawyers knew that having permannent residents in EPCOT, under Disney's control was most likely unconstitutional, and they purposefully wrote the charter with the idea of referring to EPCOT's residents as temporary visitors, aka tourists.
No need, I can just look at their actions which I believe say everything you need to know. If building EPCOT the city was what the state really wanted, they would have removed RCID decades ago. They didn't because they didn't care, or if they did, not enough to do anything about it.Prove it. Cite a source where they (I am assuming the lawmakers at the time?) actually said that.
So you know EXACTLY what that was like.Bingo
And I flew through the pre-1975 Orlando Airport at least 6 times a year.
Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.