YARDT (Yet Another Ron DeSantis Threat) - DeSantis to Take Control of Disney’s Orlando District Under New Bill

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

VRAMdemon

Diamond Member
Aug 16, 2012
6,447
7,616
136
This is not the kind of fascism wall street would agree to.

I Guess I'll "enjoy" my fucking tax increase when I move there permanently (not part time as I was) at the end of March. Thanks you little dictator.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
83,717
47,406
136
Disney isn't a private citizen.
They made a business deal, that deal has now ended because of the actions Disney has taken.
Bite the hand that feeds you, then lick the boot that kicks you.
Under the law Disney is 100% a private citizen. What are you talking about? The government of Florida took this action in retaliation for Disney speaking in a way Florida does not like. This is a blatant violation of the first amendment. The government is not permitted to begin or end business deals based on the contents of Disney's speech.

But just so we're clear you think that the federal government should be able to award contracts only to companies that advertise in support of Biden?
 

IronWing

No Lifer
Jul 20, 2001
68,852
26,641
136
What's amusing here is that I, for one, think that granting corporations constitutional rights is ridiculous and dangerous. Defending Disney's "right" to free speech just ain't in the cards for me. On the other hand, Desantis is clearly a fascist scumbag abusing his position for petty political gain.
 
  • Like
Reactions: akugami and Pohemi

VRAMdemon

Diamond Member
Aug 16, 2012
6,447
7,616
136
The entire issue with Disney is tied up in the courts. And nearly every bit of it is a Retalition. Disney has a First Amednemnt right to free speech and DeSantis does not like that. So he is punishing Disney, the very thing our founding fathers feared would happen. The Federal Judge seeing the case needs to issue an Injunction barring DeSantis from moving forward with anything until after the court has ruled if the original law is Constitutional or not.

Sure, the Lawmakers can Dissolve the areas of its self- government but it cannot do so as a Punishment over Political Speech.

Their actions are illegal, and DeSantis, most likely knows it, and is trying to do all of this before the court has a chance to rule it was all illegal
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
83,717
47,406
136
What's amusing here is that I, for one, think that granting corporations constitutional rights is ridiculous and dangerous. Defending Disney's "right" to free speech just ain't in the cards for me. On the other hand, Desantis is clearly a fascist scumbag abusing his position for petty political gain.
If we want to revisit corporate personhood as a legal idea I'm down with that but under current US law Disney is clearly a 'person' with a first amendment right to freedom of speech. Florida punished them for speaking in ways the state didn't like, which is unconstitutional.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
83,717
47,406
136
So you are against the first amendment and freedom of speech? You spoke out about California's government all the time, should they have been allowed to deny you building permits?
Why stop there? Remember the fake 'IRS scandal' where conservative groups were falsely thought to have been targeted for audits? Under Greenman's logic Biden should audit them back to the stone age as they are getting what they asked for - they stepped into the political arena and now they're going to suffer the consequences for speaking in ways the government doesn't like.

It's startling to me how few people truly believe in free speech and really only believe in free speech that agrees with them.
 

MrSquished

Lifer
Jan 14, 2013
21,004
19,443
136
Greenman straight up admits he is a fascist finally.

Who would have thought? What a surprise!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pohemi

VRAMdemon

Diamond Member
Aug 16, 2012
6,447
7,616
136
What's amusing here is that I, for one, think that granting corporations constitutional rights is ridiculous and dangerous. Defending Disney's "right" to free speech just ain't in the cards for me. On the other hand, Desantis is clearly a fascist scumbag abusing his position for petty political gain.

I agree and that should be talked about again, but the whole thing just boils down to DeSantis wanted to pick a fight with Disney over the rights of the LGBTQ community. Going up against a multi-billion dollar entertainment giant and one of the largest employers in Florida... all over LGBTQ+ rights. I see Mickey Mouse taking off his gloves. This will not bode well for DeSantis.
 

JTsyo

Lifer
Nov 18, 2007
11,709
871
126
Yeah moving Disney World is not happening. I could see them saying they will limit future investment in Florida but that’s about it.

If I were Disney I would focus more on how DeSantis just put Florida taxpayers on the hook for maintaining a vast and expensive infrastructure. Hope they like higher taxes!
Disney World is already at capacity. They are increasing prices to keep the crowds down. It would make sense for them to start a 3rd park. Probbaly somewhere in the Mid-West. While they wouldn't be closing down Disney World, it would make Florida nervous.
 

IronWing

No Lifer
Jul 20, 2001
68,852
26,641
136
Disney World is already at capacity. They are increasing prices to keep the crowds down. It would make sense for them to start a 3rd park. Probbaly somewhere in the Mid-West. While they wouldn't be closing down Disney World, it would make Florida nervous.
I think if Disney were to open another theme park in the Americas, southern Mexico (Veracruz maybe) or somewhere in South America would make the most sense. In the US, it's either Texas or someplace with too much winter, neither of which have strong appeal.
 

Homerboy

Lifer
Mar 1, 2000
30,856
4,974
126
I think if Disney were to open another theme park in the Americas, southern Mexico (Veracruz maybe) or somewhere in South America would make the most sense. In the US, it's either Texas or someplace with too much winter, neither of which have strong appeal.

Georgia, but that's about as purple as you can get.
 

Zorba

Lifer
Oct 22, 1999
14,452
9,837
136
What's amusing here is that I, for one, think that granting corporations constitutional rights is ridiculous and dangerous. Defending Disney's "right" to free speech just ain't in the cards for me. On the other hand, Desantis is clearly a fascist scumbag abusing his position for petty political gain.
So you don't think corporations should be protected from retribution from the government? It doesn't have to be all or nothing. A corporation can have speech, but it can't have religion. Money shouldn't be considered speech, but actually speech should be.
 

MrSquished

Lifer
Jan 14, 2013
21,004
19,443
136
So you don't think corporations should be protected from retribution from the government? It doesn't have to be all or nothing. A corporation can have speech, but it can't have religion. Money shouldn't be considered speech, but actually speech should be.

Amen to that.
 

Zorba

Lifer
Oct 22, 1999
14,452
9,837
136
Why stop there? Remember the fake 'IRS scandal' where conservative groups were falsely thought to have been targeted for audits? Under Greenman's logic Biden should audit them back to the stone age as they are getting what they asked for - they stepped into the political arena and now they're going to suffer the consequences for speaking in ways the government doesn't like.

It's startling to me how few people truly believe in free speech and really only believe in free speech that agrees with them.
Growing up in Oklahoma, I've always known that love of freedom of speech and religion meant "My Speach, My religion."
 

IronWing

No Lifer
Jul 20, 2001
68,852
26,641
136
So you don't think corporations should be protected from retribution from the government? It doesn't have to be all or nothing. A corporation can have speech, but it can't have religion. Money shouldn't be considered speech, but actually speech should be.
"Corporations protected from retribution from the government" is not the same thing as granting corporations first amendment rights. Corporations are government chartered entities and should be granted only those privileges deemed to be in the public interest. IMHO, free speech is not one of privileges that should be granted to corporations.
 

Pohemi

Diamond Member
Oct 2, 2004
8,612
10,841
146
Disney isn't a private citizen.
Citizens United would like a word.
Disney World is already at capacity. They are increasing prices to keep the crowds down. It would make sense for them to start a 3rd park. Probbaly somewhere in the Mid-West. While they wouldn't be closing down Disney World, it would make Florida nervous.
Midwest would cut out an entire portion of the year that the park would have to be closed down, rides disassembled for the season, etc. I have doubts Disney would build a park anywhere that revenue would be so limited by seasons.
 

Zorba

Lifer
Oct 22, 1999
14,452
9,837
136
Disney World is already at capacity. They are increasing prices to keep the crowds down. It would make sense for them to start a 3rd park. Probbaly somewhere in the Mid-West. While they wouldn't be closing down Disney World, it would make Florida nervous.
They should leak that they are looking somewhere to build WDW2.

They should also stop the move of imagineering to Orlando.
 
  • Like
Reactions: thilanliyan

Zorba

Lifer
Oct 22, 1999
14,452
9,837
136
"Corporations protected from retribution from the government" is not the same thing as granting corporations first amendment rights. Corporations are government chartered entities and should be granted only those privileges deemed to be in the public interest. IMHO, free speech is not one of privileges that should be granted to corporations.
Thats what free speech is. Freedom from government retribution over said speech.
 

woolfe9998

Lifer
Apr 8, 2013
16,188
14,090
136
This is a slam dunk case of First Amendment relatiation. It's not even a close case. Disney has a legal right of action against the State of Florida under 42 USC 1983. The following jury instruction defines the elements of that claim:

1. the plaintiff was engaged in a constitutionally protected activity;
2. the defendant’s actions against the plaintiff would chill a person of ordinary firmness from continuing to engage in the protected activity; and
3. the plaintiff’s protected activity was a substantial or motivating factor in the defendant’s conduct.

.

So long as corporations having First Amendment rights is current law, these laws apply. There is literally a federal statute that grants a civil right of action for any level of government taking punitive action against a private citizen in retaliation for something they said. It is illegal and unconstitutional, period. Zero ambiguity.
 

ivwshane

Lifer
May 15, 2000
32,200
14,875
136
This is a slam dunk case of First Amendment relatiation. It's not even a close case. Disney has a legal right of action against the State of Florida under 42 USC 1983. The following jury instruction defines the elements of that claim:



.

So long as corporations having First Amendment rights is current law, these laws apply. There is literally a federal statute that grants a civil right of action for any level of government taking punitive action against a private citizen in retaliation for something they said. It is illegal and unconstitutional, period. Zero ambiguity.

I’d be perfectly fine if the Florida courts rejected the personhood idea and the Supreme Court upheld the ruling.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pohemi

Zorba

Lifer
Oct 22, 1999
14,452
9,837
136
I’d be perfectly fine if the Florida courts rejected the personhood idea and the Supreme Court upheld the ruling.
So does that mean you are good with the government punishing corporations for speech? Knowing this would include charities like Planned Parenthood, and collective action corporations like HOAs and Unions. Your HOA president runs against the mayor, say goodbye to your trash collection.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hal2kilo