- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Should FL revoke Disney special privileges and leave it at that?
Posted on 5/31/23 at 9:43 am to stout
Posted on 5/31/23 at 9:43 am to stout
quote:
If they break the law then I agree but there is no law against Target selling trans clothes and no law against BL putting a trans on their can.
And no such penalties by government are being levied on these companies. The suffering these 2 companies are going through are via their former customers.
quote:
Can you tell me what Target and BL did that was illegal?
Nothing. And they have not suffered any penalties from govenrment because of that.
quote:
Disney too while you are at it.
Again, they didn't break any laws. But they decided to use their corporate stature to promote child grooming. They didn't get penalized by government. No additional taxes have been levied on them. They are simply being told, if you continue on this path, your special privileges will be removed and you will be treated like everyone else. As another poster stated, being treated as an equal is punishment for the privileged.
1
Posted on 5/31/23 at 9:44 am to Bjorn Cyborg
quote:
The examples you gave about Hobby Lobby and Chick-Fil-A are bad, because they don't get any special privileges that I am aware of.
I think Hobby Lobby does enjoy some tax privileges due to the RFRA exempting them from contraceptive mandates in the ACA. That is due to their legal maneuvering, though.
It was just a hypothetical on my part.
quote:
The revoking (for political reasons) of special privileges (granted for political reasons) is not the small government issue you think it is.
The issuing of it was not small Government either I agree but admitting it was politically motivated is a slippery slope. Most small businesses are conservative and would get crushed if the Government came after them.
Revoke the privilege, let the lawsuit play out, and move on. Glad to see it happening but not just because of why it happened but mostly because I think Government shouldn't be involved in business one way or the other. I am a true free-market guy though I know that doesn't happen anymore in America.
Posted on 5/31/23 at 9:47 am to stout
quote:
So you would be cool when Dems start coming after a conservative company like Hobby Lobby or Chick-fil-A?
What special privileges and benefits do those companies have?
When you're granted special rights and privileges by politicians, you're at the whims of politicians in changing political landscapes.
Posted on 5/31/23 at 9:47 am to BugAC
quote:
And no such penalties by government are being levied on these companies. The suffering these 2 companies are going through are via their former customers.
Yea I get that. My response was to Adam and the others saying they would be OK with the Government going after them for any reason they can dig up.
quote:
Nothing. And they have not suffered any penalties from govenrment because of that.
See above.
quote:
Again, they didn't break any laws. But they decided to use their corporate stature to promote child grooming. They didn't get penalized by government. No additional taxes have been levied on them. They are simply being told, if you continue on this path, your special privileges will be removed and you will be treated like everyone else. As another poster stated, being treated as an equal is punishment for the privileged.
I will say it yet again since you seem to have missed it the other 3 times but I am OK with that and yes they will have to pay additional taxes now so you are wrong on that. They are losing their tax breaks. Again, I am OK with it happening.
Posted on 5/31/23 at 9:48 am to BugAC
quote:
False. It was morally motivated.
Desantis admitted in his memoir it was politically motivated, and Disney has been using his own words from the memoir in court.
Posted on 5/31/23 at 9:51 am to stout
quote:
Every business in America does now so by your standard we should start using Government power to abuse the ones that we don't agree with politically.
So every business has a CEO threaten to fund litigation against the State giving it a sweetheart tax deal? Let alone spread false propaganda about the law being passed by elected representatives?
You are better than this!
Posted on 5/31/23 at 9:53 am to stout
quote:
So you would be cool when Dems start coming after a conservative company like Hobby Lobby or Chick-fil-A?
If the CEO publicly states he will fund litigation and lie about the bill….yes!
Posted on 5/31/23 at 9:53 am to TomJoadGhost
quote:
Desantis admitted in his memoir it was politically motivated, and Disney has been using his own words from the memoir in court.
Why are his motivations relevant? It's either a special privilege that can be revoked, or it is not.
Posted on 5/31/23 at 9:54 am to ABearsFanNMS
quote:
If the CEO publicly states he will fund litigation and lie about the bill….yes!
So corporations should not be allowed to lobby? I am OK that but currently it is not illegal
Posted on 5/31/23 at 9:57 am to Bjorn Cyborg
quote:
Why are his motivations relevant? It's either a special privilege that can be revoked, or it is not.
Because Disney expanded their lawsuit based on his words and is now painting it as purely being out of spite and vengeance. His words may hurt the lawsuit.
Posted on 5/31/23 at 10:00 am to Bjorn Cyborg
quote:
Why are his motivations relevant? It's either a special privilege that can be revoked, or it is not.
If it’s politically motivated it’s likely in violation of the 1st Amendment.
Posted on 5/31/23 at 10:04 am to TomJoadGhost
quote:
If it’s politically motivated it’s likely in violation of the 1st Amendment.
Disney has a decent case considering this as well
quote:
The amended lawsuit also includes the new measure passed last week by Florida lawmakers giving the state authority to inspect Disney World’s monorail system, which previously had been conducted in-house.
Disney is the only company impacted by the new measure and it "was precision-engineered to target Disney alone, just as Governor DeSantis intended and previewed," said the amended lawsuit.
The more FL does, the more it looks like the Government targeting them specifically.
Posted on 5/31/23 at 10:08 am to TomJoadGhost
quote:
If it’s politically motivated it’s likely in violation of the 1st Amendment.
That would be an extremely tortured interpretation.
Everything politicians do is politically motivated. The privileges were granted to Disney in the first place due to political motivation.
Circular logic.
Posted on 5/31/23 at 10:26 am to Bjorn Cyborg
The political motivation here though is to punish Disney for speaking out against a policy of the DeSantis administration, and DeSantis admitted as much in his own words.
Posted on 5/31/23 at 10:45 am to TomJoadGhost
I have no issue with special privileges granted at the whims of politicians, being revoked at the whims of politicians.
You lie with dogs, you get fleas.
We are not talking about violations of rights. The idea that Disney was ever granted these privileges is a travesty to begin with. I would say the same about any company, regardless of their political leanings.
Boil this down to some small company in a small town doing something egregious that the local politicians don't like and losing their special privilege to use the town hall at no charge or something like that. Happens all the time and no one cares about political motivations.
Posted on 5/31/23 at 10:48 am to stout
Wow, talk about circular logic.
Disney is the only company allowed to inspect their own monorail system. So, any law - for or against - is singling out Disney. So, by definition, this law "targets" Disney.
Insanity.
Disney is the only company allowed to inspect their own monorail system. So, any law - for or against - is singling out Disney. So, by definition, this law "targets" Disney.
Insanity.
Posted on 5/31/23 at 10:49 am to Bjorn Cyborg
So why was it never an issue until now?
Posted on 5/31/23 at 10:50 am to Bjorn Cyborg
How the court interprets it will be interesting
Posted on 5/31/23 at 11:05 am to Adam Banks
Disney is winning and will always win. Ron is a pissant compared to the mouse.
Posted on 5/31/23 at 11:09 am to UGA_3281
quote:
So why was it never an issue until now?
That's your argument? By that logic, anything not addressed immediately can never be addressed.
What a moronic statement.
There are problems that exist in this country that have been there hundreds of years.
Page 2 of 2
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News