Florida wins so Carnival can sail with kids

[DGNewton]

From the boards:

 

[caniuseit]

My hope is that the cdc will back away and let the cruise lines make their rules.

 

It appears that they can abide by the edict of the Florida law but impose enough disincentive that the unvaxed will go elsewhere

 

Cruise lines - “we will ask you to provide proof of vaccine but it is voluntary.  Those who choose not to show proof will be tested every 3 days at a cost of $150 per test, you must wear masks when not in your cabin or eating, you have to eat only in a designated location and you can only leave the ship on a ship sanctioned tour.”

 

that should be enough of desuade them

[jimbo5544]

1 minute ago, caniuseit said:

My hope is that the cdc will back away and let the cruise lines make their rules.

 

It appears that they can abide by the edict of the Florida law but impose enough disincentive that the unvaxed will go elsewhere

 

Cruise lines - “we will ask you to provide proof of vaccine but it is voluntary.  Those who choose not to show proof will be tested every 3 days at a cost of $150 per test, you must wear masks when not in your cabin or eating, you have to eat only in a designated location and you can only leave the ship on a ship sanctioned tour.”

 

that should be enough of desuade them

Why could they not come up with something like that during mediation?   Because the cdc was totally inflexible and thought their way was the only way.

[TNcruising02]

16 minutes ago, caniuseit said:

From the article

 

The researchers acknowledged that the study didn't examine actual transmission of COVID-19 illness nor whether the masks "shorten the travel distance of droplets during coughing."

Whether face masks decrease transmission from asymptomatic individuals with COVID-19 or those who are not coughing needs further study, they added.

Yes, sorry, I picked a bad article to cite.  Another one I cited upthread basically said that if you are within six feet of of someone, then the virus can go through the mask and infect another person.  That kind of defeated the purpose of wearing one since it seems that social distancing was the key after all.  Sure, masks are effective if you are nowhere near the person. 

Edited June 20, 2021 by TNcruising02

[firefly333]

You can lead a horse to water but you cant make them drink. Both sides will never think they are wrong.

 

Was there ever a outbreak when texas removed the mask mandate as the left predicted, how about the rangers super spreader event, wrong again.

 

If the left was right florida would have had double the cases of calif who stayed sheltered in place and believed it was the right thing to do. They didnt care data suggested more was spread at home than at work.. oh businesses had better air circulation. 

 

No amount of data will ever make either side believe the other. Hopeless. There is another saying about believing my lying eyes. Doesnt matter. Time to cruise. This argument is hopeless. The blind cannot see. I'm ready to cruise. Add in more kids. I'm good with whatever carnival does.  Just let me cruise in peace. Anyone on my cruise that starts talking nonsense bye bye. 

 

Of course the cdc doesnt have data to show in the court case.. I'm not surprised. Ignore them and let's cruise. 

[broberts]

1 minute ago, caniuseit said:

My hope is that the cdc will back away and let the cruise lines make their rules.

 

 

I just don't get preferring a company only interested in immediate profit making health decisions over an organization legally obliged to protect the general health.

[jimbo5544]

1 minute ago, broberts said:

 

I just don't get preferring a company only interested in immediate profit making health decisions over an organization legally obliged to protect the general health.

Yet the judge agreed with the poster you quoted.  Me thinks you missed the entire point.  

[caniuseit]

2 minutes ago, broberts said:

 

I just don't get preferring a company only interested in immediate profit making health decisions over an organization legally obliged to protect the general health.

I don’t disagree but this has turned into a political pissing match

 

i am confident /hopeful that the cruise lines know what is at stake for them and will make the right decision (and I believe that left alone they will REQUIRE vaccine proof for all but minors)

 

[TNcruising02]

4 minutes ago, broberts said:

 

I just don't get preferring a company only interested in immediate profit making health decisions over an organization legally obliged to protect the general health.

Sure, when the rules are reasonable and based on facts and science.  Had the CDC been able to back up their requirements with current facts and data, they would have most likely won.  Nobody likes rules made just for the sake of control.  There needs to be a legitimate reason for them and they need to be made fairly across all industries.

[BlerkOne]

6 minutes ago, jimbo5544 said:

Why could they not come up with something like that during mediation?   Because the cdc was totally inflexible and thought their way was the only way.

That's the Florida MO.

 

[caniuseit]

3 minutes ago, jimbo5544 said:

Yet the judge agreed with the poster you quoted.  Me thinks you missed the entire point.  

Well, there are two points. 
get the cdc out of it AND get Florida law out of it. 
 

that is how you allow the cruise lines to do what they think is best

[broberts]

2 minutes ago, jimbo5544 said:

Yet the judge agreed with the poster you quoted.  Me thinks you missed the entire point.  

 

I didn't miss it, I just don't understand the preference. It seem dangerous to me to trust a for profit company to make decisions that might go against its fiduciary interests.

[caniuseit]

4 minutes ago, broberts said:

 

I didn't miss it, I just don't understand the preference. It seem dangerous to me to trust a for profit company to make decisions that might go against its fiduciary interests.

True. But in this case I find that more palatable then letting a politician make arbitrary rules to bolster their election chances

[jimbo5544]

28 minutes ago, broberts said:

 

I didn't miss it, I just don't understand the preference. It seem dangerous to me to trust a for profit company to make decisions that might go against its fiduciary interests.

The reply to that is if they did as you suggest they could be shut down for a long long time.  That is most certainly something the stockholders do not want.  All that said, we all have our own views.  

Edited June 20, 2021 by jimbo5544

[jimbo5544]

3 minutes ago, caniuseit said:

True. But in this case I find that more palatable then letting a politician make arbitrary rules to bolster their election chances

I think you are on the same side as the poster you quoted.  For the record, the cruise lines are the one making the choice, not some political official.  He just got them that opportunity to control their fate vs the over reaching cdc.  

[AtSeaWithChris]

13 minutes ago, broberts said:

 

I didn't miss it, I just don't understand the preference. It seem dangerous to me to trust a for profit company to make decisions that might go against its fiduciary interests.

It's not about trusting a company that makes the preference, it about the choice the company, that's willing to offer me a service, provides.

[caniuseit]

Just now, jimbo5544 said:

I think you are on the same side as the poster you quoted.  For the record, the cruise lines are the one making the choice, not some political official.  He just got them that opportunity to control their fate vs the over reaching cdc.  

So, you seriously do not consider it an “over reach” to forbid the cruise line from asking for proof?  Doesn’t this give them the ability to determine and control their risks?

 

 

[skridge]

Common sense says that the CDC has mostly handled the situation with the cruise industry perfect.  They were not pushed into a  bad decision by a bunch of people that care more about cruising than they do about loss of life.  I am glad to see that they are going to allow vaccinated people to cruise.  Another great decision by the CDC.  Looking forward to my Christmas cruise with my fully vaccinated family.

 

 

[TNcruising02]

The cruise lines can ask for vaccination status, they just can't deny service based on that status.  It looks like Carnival is able to deny service based on meeting the CDC's guidelines of percentage of unvaccinated passengers allowed.  RCL is asking, but not denying service.  The unvaccinated will have different rules.

 

Edited June 20, 2021 by TNcruising02

[AtSeaWithChris]

1 minute ago, caniuseit said:

So, you seriously do not consider it an “over reach” to forbid the cruise line from asking for proof?  Doesn’t this give them the ability to determine and control their risks?

 

 

The Florida law about vaccination status was not about cruising, it was a reaction to the talks about requiring vaccine passports. Florida is fighting for freedoms that some would like to erode with overreaching demands and political correctness agendas.

 

[AtSeaWithChris]

2 minutes ago, skridge said:

Common sense says that the CDC has mostly handled the situation with the cruise industry perfect.  

 

 

oh lawd

[jimbo5544]

1 minute ago, caniuseit said:

So, you seriously do not consider it an “over reach” to forbid the cruise line from asking for proof?  Doesn’t this give them the ability to determine and control their risks?

 

 

It was not part of the lawsuit.  I think it is over reach to demand health information in order to do something.  In this particular case, I would be willing to share it in order to cruise.  As I previously had mentioned, it is my view,  based upon both sides stating as much, that this will not be an issue.

[BlerkOne]

2 minutes ago, TNcruising02 said:

The cruise lines can ask for vaccination status, they just can't deny service based on that status.  It looks like Carnival is able to deny service based on meeting the CDC's guidelines of percentage of unvaccinated passengers allowed.  RCL is asking, but not denying service.  The unvaccinated will have different rules.

 

They can ask and any who don't volunteer proof can be treated as unvaxxed. Once out of Florida waters, cruise lines can deny anything they like.

[jimbo5544]

2 minutes ago, MamallamaAndDaddy said:

oh lawd

Trust me move on.  

[jimbo5544]

1 minute ago, BlerkOne said:

They can ask and any who don't volunteer proof can be treated as unvaxxed. Once out of Florida waters, cruise lines can deny anything they like.

Probably true