Shanghai Disneyland opens with limitations

Posted Monday, May 11, 2020 9:51 AM | Contributed by Jeff

On Monday, one of the Walt Disney Company’s 14 closed theme parks, Shanghai Disneyland, reopened to visitors on a limited basis, offering a first peek into the kind of escape Mickey Mouse can offer in the age of face masks, social distancing and disinfectants. The Chinese government has limited capacity at the park to 24,000 people daily, less than one-third of its pre-outbreak capacity.

Read more from The New York Times.

Related parks

Tuesday, May 19, 2020 11:31 AM

Are you saying you can't wait because you have already decided it will fail and you will be able to say "Science! See, I told you so?!" Or because you genuinely are curious as to how it goes and hope it goes well enough to continue to allow other attractions and eventually the parks to reopen so that folks can start to get back to work and guests can get back to having these venues as an escape from their daily lives?

Tuesday, May 19, 2020 11:47 AM
HeyIsntThatRob?'s avatar

Tuesday, May 19, 2020 1:25 PM

Don't be bringing Florence KY into this!

Tuesday, May 19, 2020 1:41 PM
Jeff's avatar

There's nothing I'd like to be more wrong about, but the evidence doesn't suggest that opening things will go well. And forget science, I'm in no hurry to hang out at a retail/restaurant area wearing a mask in humid Orlando weather.

I don't like the undertone that a part of the population (and I'm not directing this toward anyone here specifically) believes another part "hates freedom" and doesn't want to see people get back to work, etc. Literally no one wants any of this. Everyone is actually on the same "side" that wants something resembling normal as soon as possible. That's an emotional issue. It doesn't matter that we don't like the reality of what happens when a contagious disease gets out of control, because the dislike won't change anything.

The United States has 4.5% of the population but a third of all cases and headed toward a third of all deaths globally. That is objectively true. The trends will put us even higher in that global picture. Maybe that's culturally what we're OK with as a nation, but it's an awful lot of death that could have been limited. That's my emotional issue. There are examples of thoughtful and strategic reactions by other nations with better outcomes, and I hate that we're happy to settle. You don't have to agree, but I don't like the implication that I care about being right more than I care about people being alive.

Jeff - Editor - - My Blog - Silly Nonsense

Tuesday, May 19, 2020 2:03 PM

I agree with all of that. I'm as far removed from the "but my civil rights1!! let me into Walmart without a mask because freedoms and the constitootion" crowd as the political spectrum can get.

But what I've also realized is that the decision has been made to reopen and work to find a temporary normal that allows us to proceed with the reopening process. I have no doubt at all that under a different administration we would never have gotten to this point to start with - we would have shut down in a much more responsible and deliberate way and would have reopened the same way. But the fact is that the country is reopening and many people (myself included) are OK with taking whatever risk there is in going out and participating versus continuing to hole up at home and go down internet wormholes that will scare the s**t out of you if you let them.

Tuesday, May 19, 2020 2:24 PM
Jeff's avatar

That's a false choice, and the point I was making. You don't have to man-up and accept risk or hole-up at home and be scared. I'm not doing either, but I'm endlessly frustrated that people seem to think we're in a better place. The only thing that has changed between today and two months ago is the intended practice of social distancing and other mitigation tactics, and anecdotally, that isn't even being taken very seriously. The presence of the disease has gotten far worse, not better since we started.

Jeff - Editor - - My Blog - Silly Nonsense

Tuesday, May 19, 2020 2:37 PM
HeyIsntThatRob?'s avatar

Jeff said:

... intended practice of social distancing and other mitigation tactics, and anecdotally, that isn't even being taken very seriously.

Anecdotally, I disagree with you. I think the instances you are seeing of people not taking it seriously on the news and social media is a small amount compared to those who are.

Ohio ended up citing a few businesses, but as this article says, the majority of bars and restaurants have taken this seriously.

Today I got my hair cut at the barber shop. EVERYONE wore a mask. They only allowed 8 people in the shop which left people standing outside and were at least 6 ft apart. The hardware store that I've been frequenting during my furlough weeks I've observed closer to 80% of the shoppers wearing masks. My observations have seen lots of mitigation measures being taken seriously.

Tuesday, May 19, 2020 2:58 PM
Vater's avatar

The curve has also flattened, which was the primary objective when states started implementing stay-at-home policy. So yes, we are in a better place. Yes, as we ease up on restrictions more and more, the infection and death numbers will rise, but we've known that since day 1. But people in general are practicing social distancing, certainly more than they were two months ago.

Tuesday, May 19, 2020 3:36 PM
Jeff's avatar

I'm not seeing it on the news, I'm seeing it out in the world. I mean, I do leave my house for contactless liquor purchases. 🍸 The anecdotes of non-compliance unfortunately matter. When a thousand people are grinding on the beach together (Florida, of course), you don't know where those people will be next.

Here's what I'm talking about though, in terms of misplaced optimism:

Flattening the curve is great, unless you create a new one that's not flat, and I'm pretty sure that's what we're doing. Mostly we've plateaued the curve in the US, which is why it's a little premature to start celebrating.

Jeff - Editor - - My Blog - Silly Nonsense

Tuesday, May 19, 2020 4:49 PM

As someone who has been out of the house and in the world daily now for the last few weeks I have yet to see a situation where it's not being done well. I've been to several restaurants for both indoor and outdoor dining, I have been back at work for a few weeks, I continue to do my own grocery shopping, I've gotten a haircut, and I've visited friends. I have done all of these things safely and following the recommended distancing guidelines and everyone I have come into contact with has done the same.

When you say we aren't in a better place than we were two months ago - none of the physical distancing protocol or guidelines were in effect at any of these places two months ago as they started to shut down. That we've found a way to get some things open while still adhering to the recommended guidelines is, to me, a better place than we were in two months ago. That many furloughed retail, restaurant, and hospitality workers are being called back to work in Central Florida is, to me, a better place than we were two months ago.

Of course there will be assholes that create bad situations and one-off situations like what has happened at some beaches and some bars that have reopened under the guise of being a restaurant. What do you think the answer should have been? A stricter shutdown? A lengthier shutdown? There is obviously an incredible lack of leadership at the top, but in a "perfect" world where this virus still showed up *and* testing was what it currently is, what do you think the right answer is?

Tuesday, May 19, 2020 6:16 PM

Another thought I just had while driving home from work for those in the "how dare anywhere consider opening up or how dare anyone consider leaving their home" camp (not targeted to anyone here, just a general thought) - are we actually safer by allowing things like restaurants, retail, heck, even amusement parks to reopen?

Hear me out. If everything stayed closed for another six months, 'Mericans being 'Mericans would have found a way. People would have been more inclined to gather at each others homes or in random public places or parks where they may not have taken as many (or any) precautions. Small business owners, especially restaurants, bars, and salons would have been "closed to the public" but may have started operating like stealthy little speakeasys - again with no restrictions or safety protocols. Especially if the other option is to permanently close.

There are obviously risks and a cost/benefit analysis that is literally about measuring the value of human life involved with reopening. But knowing who we are as a people, is there a chance that safely gathering at Disney, Cedar Point or even your local Chili's this summer where you are forced to adhere to a certain set of regulations is actually safer than having some big underground gatherings because there is no other option?

Last edited by BrettV, Tuesday, May 19, 2020 6:16 PM
Tuesday, May 19, 2020 6:42 PM
Jeff's avatar

I don't disagree that we need to figure out how to get things moving again, I just don't believe it has been particularly thoughtful. The feds put out restart guidelines and most states ignored them. So what do we do when infection rates start to rise again? Do we lock it down again and repeat the process of trying to limit infection? It can't be targeted isolation, because our testing sucks and there's no contact tracing.

My questions are largely rhetorical. The doing it right ship has sailed. We're not equipped to do it right and we actively resist trying. We don't accomplish very many hard things anymore. It will be interesting to see how we fare versus, say, New Zealand, which is setup to test and trace when/if community spread occurs. We're not even though the first wave of community spread.

Jeff - Editor - - My Blog - Silly Nonsense

Tuesday, May 19, 2020 8:06 PM
ApolloAndy's avatar

This certainly doesn't help anybody.

tl;dr - The manager of the Geographic Information System team at Florida's Department of Health (basically the person who runs their case count vs. geography dashboard) said her dismissal came after she refused to "manually change data to drum up support for the plan to reopen."

Last edited by ApolloAndy, Tuesday, May 19, 2020 9:28 PM

Hobbes: "What's the point of attaching a number to everything you do?"
Calvin: "If your numbers go up, it means you're having more fun."

Tuesday, May 19, 2020 9:17 PM
Jeff's avatar

#floridaman #floriduh

Jeff - Editor - - My Blog - Silly Nonsense

Tuesday, May 19, 2020 11:39 PM

BrettV said:

Another thought I just had while driving home from work for those in the "how dare anywhere consider opening up or how dare anyone consider leaving their home" camp (not targeted to anyone here, just a general thought) - are we actually safer by allowing things like restaurants, retail, heck, even amusement parks to reopen?

Do those people actually exist?

Wednesday, May 20, 2020 1:24 AM

Who, the "how dare anywhere consider opening up or how dare anyone consider leaving their home" people?

They must exist. My Failbook feed is absolutely polluted with them. Of course that same feed is also well represented with the "Why the shpx did we shut down in the first place?" group. What is interesting is the geographic representation. It seems the people complaining about being shut down are in places that don't seem to be interested in re-opening, while the people complaining about things opening up are in places that are starting to open up. Everybody else is in Ohio, where everybody has something to complain about.

--Dave Althoff, Jr.

    /X\        _      *** Respect rides. They do not respect you. ***
/XXX\ /X\ /X\_ _ /X\__ _ _ _____

Wednesday, May 20, 2020 8:23 AM

Yes - they absolutely exist. I have a few co workers absolutely livid that we are beginning an opening process and will open our facility to the public again on June 1. I see them on my Facebook feed. Some probably genuinely feel that way, others probably do just because they want to distance themselves from the "open it up 'Merica!" folks as much as possible.

Wednesday, May 20, 2020 8:47 AM

But being against opening up and being against considering opening up are not the same thing. I haven't encountered anyone who believes that people should not leave their house for any reason.

In my experience the "lock yourself in the house" and "open everything up right now crowds" are very much in the majority. I think most people are in favor of opening things up with a measured approach. But who are we supposed to look to for that guidance? The federal government released guidelines and almost immediately the president wants to liberate states.

I am looking forward to things opening up just to shut up the conspiracy theorists.

Wednesday, May 20, 2020 1:16 PM

I look forward to opening things up to help minimize the financial impacts of the virus. Not in an "everything open like its 2019" but in a balanced way.

Not sure a federal, one size fits all approach makes the most sense. Should each part of the US be treated like NYC? Yes there is travel but its no uniform across the country. Regional approaches like several states have formed seem to make sense.

The main office where I work is in a building for which we are the sole tenant. Its not a huge building but we have 100% control of who comes and goes. Should we re-open under same criteria as a 57 story high rise with multiple tenants sharing lobbies and elevator banks?

Should all colleges and universities open with the same criteria? Commuter schools. Small residential colleges populated predominately with students from same state? Larger school with kids from across the country and world?

Wednesday, May 20, 2020 1:30 PM

Of course not and I'm not suggesting that. What I'm referring to is the federal government releasing guidelines on April 16th recommending a downward trajectory of cases for at least two weeks before states should consider lifting restrictions. The very next day Trump tweets to "liberate" three states who just happen to have Democratic governors. He doesn't even believe in the guidance he is providing.


You must be logged in to post

POP Forums - ©2021, POP World Media, LLC