Disney 1, DeSantis 0
-
That declaration is valid until “21 years after the death of the last survivor of the descendants of King Charles III, king of England living as of the date of this declaration,”
lolz
-
-
DeSantis floats idea of state prison near Disney park
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-65305166 -
I agree that Disney should not have special "perks" that other companies do not get, it seems like Gov. DeSantis is doing this the wrong way. He could have handled it much better and not made it so personal. Makes him look petty.
I can see Disney Co. quietly funding a campaign about small local businesses losing money because less tourists come to Orlando
increased hotel tax
increased tolls
decreased property values.
etc.Probably, Florida needs Disney more than Disney needs Florida.
-
DeSantis and Elizabeth Warren are cut from the same cloth. It’s shocking how few people see that, and are ok with with it conceptually, as long as the right companies are being threatened.
"You never know what worse luck your bad luck has saved you from."
-Cormac McCarthy -
DeSantis and Elizabeth Warren are cut from the same cloth. It’s shocking how few people see that, and are ok with with it conceptually, as long as the right companies are being threatened.
-
DeSantis and Elizabeth Warren are cut from the same cloth. It’s shocking how few people see that, and are ok with with it conceptually, as long as the right companies are being threatened.
@jon-nyc said in Disney 1, DeSantis 0:
DeSantis and Elizabeth Warren are cut from the same cloth. It’s shocking how few people see that, and are ok with with it conceptually, as long as the right companies are being threatened.
I'm sure that's trivially true, in that they are both politicians who do things to appeal to the base.
But if you would like to attempt to establish in the heads of other forum members, the extent to which they are tribally motivated rather than principled, I would suggest you respond to my thought experiment, which you've avoided twice before:
If a private company in California, with an established business relationship with the state, decided to come out as conservative, anti-gay-marriage, and anti-abortion, what would you think about the government of California adjusting the business relationships with that company, within the law?
-
@jon-nyc said in Disney 1, DeSantis 0:
DeSantis and Elizabeth Warren are cut from the same cloth. It’s shocking how few people see that, and are ok with with it conceptually, as long as the right companies are being threatened.
I'm sure that's trivially true, in that they are both politicians who do things to appeal to the base.
But if you would like to attempt to establish in the heads of other forum members, the extent to which they are tribally motivated rather than principled, I would suggest you respond to my thought experiment, which you've avoided twice before:
If a private company in California, with an established business relationship with the state, decided to come out as conservative, anti-gay-marriage, and anti-abortion, what would you think about the government of California adjusting the business relationships with that company, within the law?
@Horace It seems unlikely, which is why I thought Disney would just take this to court earlier.
But it's not a trivial resemblance - what you describe is true of any and all politicians. What these two have in common is they both like to use state power to punish private entities they don't like, and have proposed permanent structures where they would have continuous leverage over such entities, in order to keep them in line in an ongoing manner. The only differences are the companies and the definitions of 'in line'.
THat's not something you can say about every politician.
"You never know what worse luck your bad luck has saved you from."
-Cormac McCarthy -
@Horace It seems unlikely, which is why I thought Disney would just take this to court earlier.
But it's not a trivial resemblance - what you describe is true of any and all politicians. What these two have in common is they both like to use state power to punish private entities they don't like, and have proposed permanent structures where they would have continuous leverage over such entities, in order to keep them in line in an ongoing manner. The only differences are the companies and the definitions of 'in line'.
THat's not something you can say about every politician.
@jon-nyc said in Disney 1, DeSantis 0:
@Horace It seems unlikely, which is why I thought Disney would just take this to court earlier.
But it's not a trivial resemblance - what you describe is true of any and all politicians. What these two have in common is they both like to use state power to punish private entities they don't like, and have proposed permanent structures where they would have continuous leverage over such entities, in order to keep them in line in an ongoing manner. The only differences are the companies and the definitions of 'in line'.
THat's not something you can say about every politician.
Duly noted that you avoid my thought experiment for a third time. I suggest you recall it next time you want to use your DeSantis/Disney cudgel on TNCR. Which I guess will be within a few weeks.
It's just that you use it to attempt to establish that somehow some of us are less objective to others. And then you face plant in your attempts to establish that.
-
How on earth did I avoid it? I strongly believe it would be illegal. The legal podcasts I listen to think so. The scotus precedent was out of Illinois, IIRC the case had the word O’Hare in the title. I’m pretty sure it would protect your hypothetical company and I’m pretty sure it would protect Disney.
-
How on earth did I avoid it? I strongly believe it would be illegal. The legal podcasts I listen to think so. The scotus precedent was out of Illinois, IIRC the case had the word O’Hare in the title. I’m pretty sure it would protect your hypothetical company and I’m pretty sure it would protect Disney.
@jon-nyc said in Disney 1, DeSantis 0:
How on earth did I avoid it? I strongly believe it would be illegal. The legal podcasts I listen to think so. The scotus precedent was out of Illinois, IIRC the case had the word O’Hare in the title. I’m pretty sure it would protect your hypothetical company and I’m pretty sure it would protect Disney.
No. I'm wondering if you would have an issue if a private company in California, with an established business relationship with the state, decided to come out as conservative, anti-gay-marriage, and anti-abortion, what would you think about the government of California adjusting the business relationships with that company, within the law?
Oh, now you're pretending you're gonna be the guy to use that as a cudgel here on TNCR? Really? Because the rest of us are probably not buying that...
-
You forget who you’re speaking to and/or have developed more outgroup homogeneity bias.
I’m even against boycotts in general, and of course am against state punishment of companies for their political positions. I’m the one always lamenting the eroding political DMZ
-
You forget who you’re speaking to and/or have developed more outgroup homogeneity bias.
I’m even against boycotts in general, and of course am against state punishment of companies for their political positions. I’m the one always lamenting the eroding political DMZ
@jon-nyc said in Disney 1, DeSantis 0:
You forget who you’re speaking to and/or have developed more outgroup homogeneity bias.
I’m even against boycotts in general, and of course am against state punishment of companies for their political positions. I’m the one always lamenting the eroding political DMZ
I don't actually forget who I'm speaking to. In fact I know exactly who I'm speaking to. The causes and results. The guy who literally finds it insufferable to be deconstructed. I'm speaking to a person I understand.
-
Apparently not.
But I do understand you. We both know Horace 1.0 would call me drunk with fawning praise. Am I all that different now?
I remember the very moment you changed your tune about me. Do you?
"You never know what worse luck your bad luck has saved you from."
-Cormac McCarthy -
Apparently not.
But I do understand you. We both know Horace 1.0 would call me drunk with fawning praise. Am I all that different now?
I remember the very moment you changed your tune about me. Do you?
@jon-nyc said in Disney 1, DeSantis 0:
Apparently not.
But I do understand you. We both know Horace 1.0 would call me drunk with fawning praise. Am I all that different now?
I remember the very moment you changed your tune about me. Do you?
You don't really have the resources to have this conversation.
Wait, you think I care what the very moment was that I changed my tune about you, a typical social climber with a high IQ who cares foremost about winning personally? Which point was that, little guy?
-
Apparently not.
But I do understand you. We both know Horace 1.0 would call me drunk with fawning praise. Am I all that different now?
I remember the very moment you changed your tune about me. Do you?
@jon-nyc said in Disney 1, DeSantis 0:
Apparently not.
But I do understand you. We both know Horace 1.0 would call me drunk with fawning praise. Am I all that different now?
Did my IQ change since then? My social climbing abilities? My desire to win? Because your attitude to me really has.
-
@jon-nyc said in Disney 1, DeSantis 0:
Apparently not.
But I do understand you. We both know Horace 1.0 would call me drunk with fawning praise. Am I all that different now?
Did my IQ change since then? My social climbing abilities? My desire to win? Because your attitude to me really has.
@jon-nyc said in Disney 1, DeSantis 0:
@jon-nyc said in Disney 1, DeSantis 0:
Apparently not.
But I do understand you. We both know Horace 1.0 would call me drunk with fawning praise. Am I all that different now?
Did my IQ change since then? My social climbing abilities? My desire to win? Because your attitude to me really has.
I don't always say what I understand.
