• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

The DeSantis gambit

quadraginta said:
The list of removed books in that article makes a very convenient list of suggested reading for parents whose minds are not filled with conservative wing-nut feces.

It may even be working toward that end. I looked up Sarah J. Maas, A Court of Thorns and Roses (the first book in a six book series which received the condemnation of the Martin County censors) in both of the libraries I subscribed to. One had twenty four copies of the ebook, all of which were being used. The other, something of a consortium of NC libraries pooling their ebooks, had twenty eight copies. All of which were also currently being used.

One thing I have found to be true to a great extent is that kids who are too young to read a particular book are also generally too young to be interested in reading it. I see no good reason to penalize those students who are progressing in maturity beyond their classmates, and every reason to encourage them.
And there is very little if anything which is going to lead them astray in any of those books. Most of them do the opposite, and tend to be morality tales of a sort. Especially the works of fiction.
Click to expand...

I agree.
 
The Don said:
Once again the "party of personal responsibility" takes away responsibility from parents to decide what their children can read in school libraries and assumes that responsibility themselves.

Small government strikes again. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

FOr the record here in Califoirnia I know a couple o people who have quit the GOP precisley because it is so hypocrtical on the issue of small government and Joined the LP .
 
Prediction: Ron DeSantis will ally himself with the Church of Scientology, the only force as powerful in Hollywood as Disney. They already have a large presence in Florida.
 
dudalb said:
You just don't mess with the Mouse. Well know rule in Hollywood.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't assume that Disney has the upper hand here. On paper, there is no legal conflict between Disney and Florida, only between the Reedy Creek Improvement District and Florida. RCID is legally supposed to be independent of Disney. If that turns out not to be the case, and Iger appears to have just admitted that it's not, that's a major problem for Disney.

 
Donal said:
Prediction: Ron DeSantis will ally himself with the Church of Scientology, the only force as powerful in Hollywood as Disney. They already have a large presence in Florida.
Click to expand...

ANother mistake: THE CO$ is not nearly as powerful as it once was in Tinseltown.
 
Ziggurat said:
I wouldn't assume that Disney has the upper hand here. On paper, there is no legal conflict between Disney and Florida, only between the Reedy Creek Improvement District and Florida. RCID is legally supposed to be independent of Disney. If that turns out not to be the case, and Iger appears to have just admitted that it's not, that's a major problem for Disney.

Click to expand...

OF course you support Meatball Mussolini.
 
dudalb said:
OF course you support Meatball Mussolini.
Click to expand...

Do you not have anything to say about my post on its merits? Or is this really the best you can do?

And while I'm sure calling people names brings you comfort, I have yet to hear anyone explain why it is that Disney should be entitled to special tax status and self-governance that no one else in Florida enjoys. The RCID should have been abolished decades ago, simply from a fairness perspective. Is your hatred for DeSantis really so deep that you think corporate fat cats should get special treatment just to spite him?
 
Ziggurat said:
Do you not have anything to say about my post on its merits? Or is this really the best you can do?

And while I'm sure calling people names brings you comfort, I have yet to hear anyone explain why it is that Disney should be entitled to special tax status and self-governance that no one else in Florida enjoys. The RCID should have been abolished decades ago, simply from a fairness perspective. Is your hatred for DeSantis really so deep that you think corporate fat cats should get special treatment just to spite him?
Click to expand...
Do you think DeSantis is taking these actions because of fairness? Since he has installed a new board to do exactly the same things as Disney was doing for the RCID, it looks much more like a turf war.

If it were about fairness (to the populace?), DeSantis should have simply disbanded (dissolved? eradicated?) the RCID entirely. Revert Disneyworld and all the surrounding areas to be under the local governance the same as every other non-RCID property in that area.

But no. He wants that cash-cow for himself. It's a takeover.
 
Ziggurat said:
I wouldn't assume that Disney has the upper hand here. On paper, there is no legal conflict between Disney and Florida, only between the Reedy Creek Improvement District and Florida. RCID is legally supposed to be independent of Disney. If that turns out not to be the case, and Iger appears to have just admitted that it's not, that's a major problem for Disney.

Click to expand...

Your video is some guy who uses a pseudonym; Andrew Esquire. I did a bit of googling on him and he appears to be a real lawyer according to one person in a video, but there's virtually nothing else on him. Whether what he's saying is accurate or not, I can't say. But I do know that Disney lawyers are some of the best and I can't see them not knowing if "RCID is legally supposed to be independent of Disney."

According to the Tallahassee Democrat:

The Reedy Creek Improvement District was created in the 1960s through a special act by the Florida Legislature.

At the time it was created, neither Orange nor Osceola counties had the services to provide power and water to the remote 25,000-acre property where the Walt Disney World Co. proposed building a recreational development.

In 1967, the Florida Legislature, working with Walt Disney World Co., created a special taxing district — called the Reedy Creek Improvement District — that would act with the same authority and responsibility as a county government, according to district's website.
Click to expand...

How does the Reedy Creek Improvement District work?

The district, through legislation from the 1960s, allows Disney to govern its own properties and levy extra taxes on top of what local governments charge. Those taxes pay for a variety of services on Disney properties.

The Reedy Creek district is led by a five-member board who are essentially hand-picked by the Walt Disney Co. DeSantis would get to appoint the board, under the legislation he envisions.
Click to expand...


I'll take Andrew Esquire's video with a grain of salt.
 
Stacyhs said:
Your video is some guy who uses a pseudonym; Andrew Esquire. I did a bit of googling on him and he appears to be a real lawyer according to one person in a video, but there's virtually nothing else on him. Whether what he's saying is accurate or not, I can't say. But I do know that Disney lawyers are some of the best and I can't see them not knowing if "RCID is legally supposed to be independent of Disney."
Click to expand...

I'm sure they do know. But they also didn't have a chance to screen Iger's live responses to shareholders. And I think it would be quite easy for Iger to say something he shouldn't have because he didn't consider all the legal implications. AFAIK Iger isn't a lawyer. Nothing about this requires the lawyers to be bad at their jobs.

According to the Tallahassee Democrat:
Click to expand...

What part of that do you think contradicts my link?
 
Ziggurat said:
I'm sure they do know. But they also didn't have a chance to screen Iger's live responses to shareholders. And I think it would be quite easy for Iger to say something he shouldn't have because he didn't consider all the legal implications. AFAIK Iger isn't a lawyer. Nothing about this requires the lawyers to be bad at their jobs.
Click to expand...

What Iger says doesn't matter if it's not backed up by legal facts. As you said, he's not a laywer.


What part of that do you think contradicts my link?
Click to expand...

What part of it supports your link?
 
Stacyhs said:
What Iger says doesn't matter if it's not backed up by legal facts. As you said, he's not a laywer.
Click to expand...

He's the CEO of Disney. What he says Disney is doing IS legally relevant to any analysis of what Disney is doing. And Iger isn't legally free to lie to shareholders either.

What part of it supports your link?
Click to expand...

That's an irrelevant standard. It doesn't need to. And do you think an article written by a journalist is supposed to represent authoritative legal analysis? That makes no sense.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom