Disneyland Resort delays theme park reopening indefinitely

At the rate we are going...this won't be the last we hear about delays...or shutdowns of parks that have already reopened.

I don't see park operators making this call, but rather the state governments. Which means Florida parks won't be closing, and WDW will open as scheduled.

What if the county makes the call?

The way things are going around here I suppose there's a chance of that. I would assume that would also include re-closing Universal and SeaWorld as well.

As bad as it's getting, I still don't see that happening unless it gets way worse. WDW stated today they have no intention in changing their reopening date.

Jeff said:

What if the county makes the call?

That’d be an interesting fight. I don’t know what deference RCID has to Orange there.

BrettV said:

As bad as it's getting, I still don't see that happening unless it gets way worse. WDW stated today they have no intention in changing their reopening date.

I agree with you that this will happen. I still think it's the most shortsighted and self defeating response. Do the local governments think that things will do anything but get catastrophically worse with Universal, Sea World, and Disney open?

Please keep in mind that the worst spots for the spikes in Florida are south Florida and Jacksonville. I don’t think the parks being open as a major contributing factor to the spikes, or at least not yet. Also, and I really don’t say this to be a jerk, but isn’t it at least possible that these spikes are fallout from the protests that took place? It seems like it’s about that time where any spread caused by those would be happening.

I realize there’s also the rather disappointingly large anti-mask crowd that likely isn’t helping.

I'm sure there's confirmation bias in my selection of this article, but NPR reported that they think it's the lack of masks, not the protests:
https://www.npr.org/sections/coronavirus-live-updates/2020/06/24/88...oronavirus

I'd say it's almost entirely the lack of masks. Pretty much every intelligent voice in this has stated that with 95-100% mask usage and common sense social distancing we can go back to a very familiar level of normalcy (restaurants, offices, amusement parks, etc) and keep things under control. The protests didn't help. But the majority of the protest crowd stereotypically is also the pro-mask crowd. That plus the Great Clips example alone should be all anyone needs to be pro mask for the next few months.

Good to know that it’s more than likely the lack of masks that some people are wearing, but then that begs the question, why would opening parks where masks are required be a really bad idea?

My completely non-scientific speculation (since we're all going there) is it's probably more air conditioning culture in closed air circulation systems vs. protests. Look at the HOT spots: LA, Houston, Arizona, Florida. All places encroaching high temps and cranking it as people retreat from the heat. The counter clockwise of flu season. And no masks.

I probably mis-stated/overstated my point. It's not specifically that Universal, Sea World, and Disney are open that concerns or upsets me. I don't think they will be some disproportionate source of super spread events or anything. It's that they are, especially to my eyes back in late May, a symbol of a government that was way too flippant about the real risks of reopening. My point includes indoor eating, movie theaters, bowling alleys, etc. etc.

Orange County went from an average of 30-ish new cases a day to 700+ in three weeks, while ICU saturation went from 3% to 30% in the same time. I think everyone knows how this goes even if everyone locked themselves in today and stayed there for two weeks.

ApolloAndy said:

It's that they are, especially to my eyes back in late May, a symbol of a government that was way too flippant about the real risks of reopening. My point includes indoor eating, movie theaters, bowling alleys, etc. etc.

The government reopenings as a major cause were rendered moot the moment tens of thousands of people took to the streets for the protests. You’re going to say that spaced-out tables at Five Guys are a bigger problem from a spread perspective than the hordes that were in the streets a couple weeks ago? That’s the point I’ve been trying to make since the Shanghai thread. It’s absolutely fine to be okay with the protests, but unless I’m missing some key part of the equation, you have to accept that you essentially have to forfeit your right to complain about the reopenings unless you want to run the risk of politicizing your science. From a social distancing perspective, the protests were dramatically worse than the reopenings, and I find there to be a potential correlation considering that at least in Florida, a lot of the new infections are younger people. I’m not going to declare the two related, but I do think it’s worth investigating.

Personally, I’m fine with all the peaceful protests that took place, including the really crowded ones. I’m also fine with all the reopenings. I accept the risks associated with both.

Now, if it turns out that the people who aren’t wearing masks are the spreaders, then it still isn’t really a governmental issue in a number of areas where mask rules are in effect.

sirloindude said:

The government reopenings as a major cause were rendered moot the moment tens of thousands of people took to the streets for the protests. You’re going to say that spaced-out tables at Five Guys are a bigger problem from a spread perspective than the hordes that were in the streets a couple weeks ago? That’s the point I’ve been trying to make since the Shanghai thread. It’s absolutely fine to be okay with the protests, but unless I’m missing some key part of the equation, you have to accept that you essentially have to forfeit your right to complain about the reopenings unless you want to run the risk of politicizing your science. From a social distancing perspective, the protests were dramatically worse than the reopenings...

There is some initial research that indicates that just isn't true. It's just an anecdote, one county in Washington, but if masks are a decent mitigation tactic, it makes sense since protests were overwhelmingly filled with mask-wearing people.

I also disagree with your value statement. Maybe you're cool with finding moral equivalence between a civil rights protest and getting a burger, but I certainly don't. What's at stake relative to the risk is not the same thing.

I agree with both of you. I agree with Jeff - the moral equivalence between a civil rights protest and going to a restaurant or amusement park isn't even in the same book, let alone on the same page.

But I also agree that if the protests were deemed acceptable in the midst of the pandemic, it's hard to then tell people they shouldn't go eat in a restaurant or go ride roller coasters.

No one "deemed it acceptable." I don't even know what that means, or who gets to decide that. Millions of individuals decided that it was worth the risk relative to the enduring injustice, despite the timing of it. If Karen wants to get a haircut and a burger just because of deep feelings of entitlement, I'm not about to judge that as worth the risk, or invalidating of a necessary civil rights movement.

Jeff said:

No one "deemed it acceptable." I don't even know what that means, or who gets to decide that.

What I am trying to say is that millions of people deemed it to be "socially acceptable" or "a cause worth the risk" to attend and participate in these protests. Because of that, your average apolitical citizen doesn't understand why the mass protesting is ok, but having a gathering in the party room at Golden Corral is not.

Well, civic engagement isn't our strong point in this country. :)