[jimjamuser]

Originally Posted by golfing eagles

Blah, blah, blah.........

All I know is I don't want some teacher, or school board policy to be teaching my 5 year old granddaughter about hetero or homo sex, nor transgenders, or anything in between, and neither do her parents. And Disney has no right to speak out on an issue if it could possibly negatively impact their profits---it would be a breach of fiduciary responsibility by their board of directors.

Disney DOES have the right to speak out. In this particular case, it is practically an obligation. They have 40,000 YOUNG employees that have a VESTED INTEREST in America being a continuing Democracy. Stockholders are often only interested in profits and some would sell their country into an autocracy if they thought that they would end up at the top end of the money and POWER pyramid. We are in a unique time period of world history......balanced on an edge between Dictatoships and free countries. Everyone, including Corporations must make a choice!

[jimjamuser]

Originally Posted by MartinSE

We are supposed to be a secular society. If you look for videos of religious leaders, particularly of the Evangelicals you can find them talking about making the government a theocracy. The steps they are taking right now, attacking anyone that believes different, attacking LGBTQ, attacking atheists, and on and on. They even installed a religious zealot on the Supreme Court. So, much for separation of church and state.

I agree!

[jimjamuser]

Originally Posted by golfing eagles

You think "good" people want sexuality and its variations taught in schools to 5-8 year olds??? Think again.

I think that religious wing-nut zealots are the problem in the school systems and ALL of general society.

[jimjamuser]

Originally Posted by jdulej

I really don't know how or why people got off track so far that they start to believe the nonsense about anyone wanting to teach children about "sexuality and its variations" beyond acknowledging that some children have two mothers, some have two fathers and that's okay. No one is suggesting teaching children how anyone has sex which is what many seem to think is going on.
This would all be silly if it wasn't so damaging to some. The CRT BS didn't move the needle far enough, so now this made up BS is being floated. What is next week going to bring us, I wonder?

Liberals eat babies!

[jimjamuser]

Originally Posted by JMintzer

Your entire rant is based on a false premise. There is no "Don't say gay law"...

You may call it what you will. I think my version is more true and informative.

[jimjamuser]

Originally Posted by Madelaine Amee

Talk, talk, talk and more talk. All you need to know is that someone poked a very large bear with an inexhaustible amount of money for legal representation and this will go on long after the present Gov. has moved on, but the damage may have been done. It could change Florida for ever.

I tend to agree, but we can't be sure what the future offers.

[keepsake]

You and I have to get building permits (permission) for many things on property WE OWN.

Why not Disney ???!

[jimjamuser]

Originally Posted by OrangeBlossomBaby

What it DOES do, however, is it sets a precedence. He can say "anything before 1968" today. And if the Villages does something to annoy him next month, he can make a new one to say "anything before 1993." His decision is against the Florida Constitution. That is a legal document, and he is violating his own state's constitution to create a pathway to punishing companies that express an opposing opinion or do things that offend some, while being celebrated by others.

It is an attempt to curry favor with the wing-nut types. And push further forward dark conspiracy theories while making public school teachers into the new most HATED group of the week. Hitler used the Jewish People. Others tried Muslims. It's all about white supremacy waning.

[jimjamuser]

Originally Posted by golfing eagles

First of all, it isn't "his" decision. It is an issue that will be decided by the Florida legislature----the elected representatives of the people.
Second, I haven't read the Florida constitution, but I doubt it states anything like once a special district is formed, it can never be rescinded.
Third, "companies" are supposed to make money, not render political opinions.

Any given Corporation could decide to forgo profits and just work on improving social issues. They are called non-profits.

[golfing eagles]

Originally Posted by jimjamuser

Any given Corporation could decide to forgo profits and just work on improving social issues. They are called non-profits.

And Disney is NOT ONE OF THEM!

[golfing eagles]

Originally Posted by jimjamuser

Disney DOES have the right to speak out. In this particular case, it is practically an obligation. They have 40,000 YOUNG employees that have a VESTED INTEREST in America being a continuing Democracy. Stockholders are often only interested in profits and some would sell their country into an autocracy if they thought that they would end up at the top end of the money and POWER pyramid. We are in a unique time period of world history......balanced on an edge between Dictatoships and free countries. Everyone, including Corporations must make a choice!

And you would be WRONG

Disney’s mission statement is “to entertain, inform and inspire people around the globe through the power of unparalleled storytelling, reflecting the iconic brands, creative minds and innovative technologies that make ours the world’s premier entertainment company.

There is no mention of obligation to speak out or venture into a political stance favoring a small minority that objects to a law that an overwhelming majority of people favor. It is NOT a free speech issue, it is NOT a democratic issue, it is simply the scope of what a publicly held corporation should and should not be involved in.

[jdulej]

Originally Posted by golfing eagles

And you would be WRONG

Disney’s mission statement is “to entertain, inform and inspire people around the globe through the power of unparalleled storytelling, reflecting the iconic brands, creative minds and innovative technologies that make ours the world’s premier entertainment company.

There is no mention of obligation to speak out or venture into a political stance favoring a small minority that objects to a law that an overwhelming majority of people favor. It is NOT a free speech issue, it is NOT a democratic issue, it is simply the scope of what a publicly held corporation should and should not be involved in.

I don't think you are looking deep enough into their mission statement. To do any of the goals listed above requires top level creative and satisfied employees. Especially in the entertainment industry, you will not be able to hire those people by standing by and allow such hateful and misguided actions to be enacted without objecting.
The entertainment arm of Disney is nothing without its staff, and those folks have a lot of options right now - Florida not being very high on their list.

[golfing eagles]

Originally Posted by jdulej

I don't think you are looking deep enough into their mission statement. To do any of the goals listed above requires top level creative and satisfied employees. Especially in the entertainment industry, you will not be able to hire those people by standing by and allow such hateful and misguided actions to be enacted without objecting.
The entertainment arm of Disney is nothing without its staff, and those folks have a lot of options right now - Florida not being very high on their list.

WOW, just incredible!!!

Are you stating that disallowing the teaching of sexuality to 5-8 year olds is a "hateful and misguided action"????? That might just be what is wrong with America today, it certainly fits in with both the "woke" and gay agendas.

I think you would find the majority of people think it is a long overdue and necessary action. And to that I submit that the people of Florida, through their elected representatives, voted 70-38 to abolish the Reddy Creek development zone yesterday.

[Diverdave]

I suspect that the article is fear mongering. Disney collects sales tax which they pocket to pay for so.e of their expenses. Now they will have to give that money to the county who will then be responsible for those same expenses. It has been suggested that this could be a net profit for the county as it eliminates a number of duplicate services. Disney may elect to.again raise the price of things but that's what they do consistently. In the last 20 years they have I creased many items over 300%

[Love2Swim]

Originally Posted by golfing eagles

And you would be WRONG

Disney’s mission statement is “to entertain, inform and inspire people around the globe through the power of unparalleled storytelling, reflecting the iconic brands, creative minds and innovative technologies that make ours the world’s premier entertainment company.

There is no mention of obligation to speak out or venture into a political stance favoring a small minority that objects to a law that an overwhelming majority of people favor. It is NOT a free speech issue, it is NOT a democratic issue, it is simply the scope of what a publicly held corporation should and should not be involved in.

Corporations have a history of taking stands on issues they find important, and it is becoming more commonplace as research shows the younger generation prefers to do business with companies that take social stands they believe in. I agree that Disney had an obligation to stand up for the rights and safety of its thousands of employees who are LGBTQ. Be that as it may, the bill was sponsored and passed by the legislature, obviously in retribution, without full disclosure or even understanding of its implications, a knee-jerk reaction if you will.

The debt service for this district is well over one billion dollars. Who is going to take over the bond payments for the infrastructure? Roadway maintenance? Emergency services? Building inspections? This could end up being a tremendous burden on the taxpayers.

This special district was originally set up as a win-win for both the state and for Disney. Disney took over uninhabited land that was just swamp and pasture, invested enormous amounts of money and provided services like roads, power, and water, and ultimately brought millions of tourists to Florida. The economic benefit to Florida is huge and showcases a prosperous business/government partnership. In recent years, Disney has gone above and beyond in giving back to the state. They have plans for a new 80 acre affordable housing development. They had plans to move 2000 jobs from California to Florida at a new Florida campus. They gave $500,000 to the food bank of Central Florida. $500,000 to Toys for Tots....

But dissolution of this partnership could have devastating effects for the state. The counties where the district lies could end up being liable for roads, fire protection, waste management, paying off debts, etc. There really is no precedent for this government retaliation, and the powers that be may find that it backfires on them. Attacking the state's largest employer, coupled with the recent debacle of banning 40% of math textbooks makes Florida looks like a bunch of ignorant wing nuts.