Lost ID and cruise is Saturday

[Flatbush Flyer]

2 hours ago, sparks1093 said:

To stay in our car insurance example one wouldn't try to ensure a 2012 Ford to the same level as a 2021 Mercedes. If someone owns a $5000 car they have to determine whether or not it is worth paying for Comprehensive coverage. Some people will decide to get the coverage, other people will decide not to, that the risk is not worth the expenditure of the money. 

That example has zero relationship to the ID.
 

It doesn’t matter who the PERSON is (we all have EQUAL value), EVERYONE’s safety, time, unplanned logistical expenses are at risk without a passport when intercontinental air travel is in the mix. (Ask anyone who travels abroad for business.)

 

Why do you think pretty much every premium/luxury line requires a passport of all passengers on all itineraries? Maintaining them is a somewhat tedious burden for the Pursers - yet a safety measure and convenience for both ship and passenger should a travel emergency arise.

 

And why do most mass market lines only require the minimum necessary IDs? As with currently allowing unvaccinated children on restarting ships (except for NCL), the bottom line for them is revenue and they don’t want even a simple task like acquiring a passport to stop anyone from paying that cruise deposit. Shameful.

 

As aforementioned, intercontinental travel without a passport is now/will always be “pennywise and pound foolish.” 
 

Finally, as for the argument that they’re “too expensive”? Folks who want to travel intercontinentally need to come to grips with the associated/realistic costs. So don’t get me started on the lunacy of not having even basic health/travel insurance and high limit credit cards to cover medical emergencies -particularly evacuation. Suffice to say that trying to cut $ corners as regards this essential item is ridiculously short-sighted. 

Edited August 25, 2021 by Flatbush Flyer

[ldubs]

Same old fuss about passport or no passport. Let it go folks.  Been over this too many times and no help to the OP.  

[donaldsc]

3 hours ago, Flatbush Flyer said:

 

 

And why do most mass market lines only require the minimum necessary IDs? As with currently allowing unvaccinated children on restarting ships (except for NCL), the bottom line for them is revenue and they don’t want even a simple task like acquiring a passport to stop anyone from paying that cruise deposit. Shameful.

 

 

 

Maybe the mass cruise lines assume and I believe correctly that it is not their responsibility to baby sit you to ensure that you have the right documentation for the cruise.  If you didn't bother to read your cruise paperwork so If you can't board because you don't have the right documents or you have problems during the cruise for the same reason, that is your problem.  Tough on you.

 

DON

Edited August 25, 2021 by donaldsc

[sparks1093]

3 hours ago, Flatbush Flyer said:

That example has zero relationship to the ID.
 

It doesn’t matter who the PERSON is (we all have EQUAL value), EVERYONE’s safety, time, unplanned logistical expenses are at risk without a passport when intercontinental air travel is in the mix. (Ask anyone who travels abroad for business.)

 

Why do you think pretty much every premium/luxury line requires a passport of all passengers on all itineraries? Maintaining them is a somewhat tedious burden for the Pursers - yet a safety measure and convenience for both ship and passenger should a travel emergency arise.

 

And why do most mass market lines only require the minimum necessary IDs? As with currently allowing unvaccinated children on restarting ships (except for NCL), the bottom line for them is revenue and they don’t want even a simple task like acquiring a passport to stop anyone from paying that cruise deposit. Shameful.

 

As aforementioned, intercontinental travel without a passport is now/will always be “pennywise and pound foolish.” 
 

Finally, as for the argument that they’re “too expensive”? Folks who want to travel intercontinentally need to come to grips with the associated/realistic costs. So don’t get me started on the lunacy of not having even basic health/travel insurance and high limit credit cards to cover medical emergencies -particularly evacuation. Suffice to say that trying to cut $ corners as regards this essential item is ridiculously short-sighted. 

It does have everything to do with people deciding whether or not it is prudent to spend money on something that isn't needed for what they plan to do, which was my point. International air travel isn't in the mix, at least not if everything goes right and that is the crux of it- what are the odds that something will go wrong? How comfortable is someone with those odds? The simple fact is that a 3 day cruise to the Bahamas doesn't have the same risk involved nor is on the same page as a 14 day trip to the ABC islands. People are going to fall far short of your expectations of what you feel is prudent because they don't have the resources that you have. 

[rkacruiser]

1 hour ago, sparks1093 said:

The simple fact is that a 3 day cruise to the Bahamas doesn't have the same risk involved nor is on the same page as a 14 day trip to the ABC islands.

 

I don't have the same risk on a short cruise as I do on a long cruise of slipping on a slippery pool deck and fracturing my skull?  I didn't realize short cruises were so safe.  😀

[sparks1093]

1 minute ago, rkacruiser said:

 

I don't have the same risk on a short cruise as I do on a long cruise of slipping on a slippery pool deck and fracturing my skull?  I didn't realize short cruises were so safe.  😀

And what are the actual odds of someone doing that? 

[Flatbush Flyer]

4 hours ago, sparks1093 said:

And what are the actual odds of someone doing that? 

Actually, given the nature of the uncontrolled variables, the odds are 50/50. On any given day, in any location (regardless of how many folks are onboard your ship), something requiring emergency medical Tx will either happen or not happen to you.

Kind of like Covid-19, the incidence of infection may be low across a population. But, every time you venture out without vaccination and a mask you can become infected.

[njhorseman]

46 minutes ago, Flatbush Flyer said:

Actually, given the nature of the uncontrolled variables, the odds are 50/50. On any given day, in any location (regardless of how many folks are onboard your ship), something requiring emergency medical Tx will either happen or not happen to you.

Kind of like Covid-19, the incidence of infection may be low across a population. But, every time you venture out without vaccination and a mask you can become infected.

No the context you're citing isn't an appropriate use of 50/50 . 50/50 means having an equal chance of one of two results occurring...in other words they have equal probability.

It's definitely not equally probable that on any particular day any individual will or will not catch COVID or fall and hit their head versus not doing so.

If the definition of 50/50 suddenly has become what you claim I'll invite you to a public burning of my mathematics degrees. Heck..at my age I have no use for them anyway.

 

[Flatbush Flyer]

10 minutes ago, njhorseman said:

No the context you're citing isn't an appropriate use of 50/50 . 50/50 means having an equal chance of one of two results occurring...in other words they have equal probability.

It's definitely not equally probable that on any particular day any individual will or will not catch COVID or fall and hit their head versus not doing so.

If the definition of 50/50 suddenly has become what you claim I'll invite you to a public burning of my mathematics degrees. Heck..at my age I have no use for them anyway.

 

But, in the world of statistics, wouldn’t that statement require controlled variables?

[njhorseman]

1 minute ago, Flatbush Flyer said:

But, in the world of statistics, wouldn’t that statement require controlled variables?

Sorry...you've lost me...

[Flatbush Flyer]

1 hour ago, njhorseman said:

Sorry...you've lost me...

It’s been a very long time for me as regards grad school and a course in research methods where I seem to remember being taught that probability is not predictability. While you can know that the probability of a fair coin toss will land on heads is 50%, it does not mean you can accurately predict the next flip. 
Too often we are over confident because probabilities make unlikely events seem impossible when in fact they are extremely possible.

[njhorseman]

10 minutes ago, Flatbush Flyer said:

It’s been a very long time for me as regards grad school and a course in research methods where I seem to remember being taught that probability is not predictability. While you can know that the probability of a fair coin toss will land on heads is 50%, it does not mean you can accurately predict the next flip. 
Too often we are over confident because probabilities make unlikely events seem impossible when in fact they are extremely possible.

 Probability is a bit more complicated than it may appear on the surface. Usually what's taught to grad students in nonmathematical disciplines is a KISS version that just gives them enough information to not totally botch any calculations they may have make in support of their doctoral dissertation. My off the cuff observation over the years is that the KISS versions are probably responsible for a lot of the garbage that gets published in medical and social science research that later is withdrawn when peer reviewed by people who actually understand the math concepts or later contradicted by other studies. There seems to be a substantial lack of understanding of the difference between correlation and causality that colors a lot of it.  But excuse my ramblings...

 

You just gave an example of something that actually is 50/50, a single coin flip.  But catching COVID or falling and hitting your head are not the same types of events as a coin flip . Yes or no as in a single coin flip are not appropriate measures that can be substituted for the actual probability of catching COVID or hitting your head on a single day . Let's just leave it at that. This old man really lost all interest in mathematics years ago.

[Flatbush Flyer]

22 minutes ago, njhorseman said:

 This old man really lost all interest in mathematics years ago.

Though not math, I know that feeling.

[sparks1093]

10 hours ago, Flatbush Flyer said:

Actually, given the nature of the uncontrolled variables, the odds are 50/50. On any given day, in any location (regardless of how many folks are onboard your ship), something requiring emergency medical Tx will either happen or not happen to you.

Kind of like Covid-19, the incidence of infection may be low across a population. But, every time you venture out without vaccination and a mask you can become infected.

I know that I, personally, have never fallen on any type of flooring or terrain in 63 years to the extent that I needed medical attention. In any event these types of things are a better argument for having travel insurance, to cover those "what ifs" because if someone gets hurt they will be better served by that then by having a passport. It must be remembered that the regulations that give us the close loop exceptions also contain provisions for the waiver of the passport requirement for emergencies and for humanitarian reasons, so if something happens and someone does have to fly back from one of the ports it can be done without a passport. 

[rkacruiser]

On 8/25/2021 at 3:27 PM, rkacruiser said:

 

I don't have the same risk on a short cruise as I do on a long cruise of slipping on a slippery pool deck and fracturing my skull?  I didn't realize short cruises were so safe.  😀

 

Flatbush Flyer, njhorseman:  Surprised that my simple post (above) prompted such an interesting discussion.  The statistics course for my Master's was of the KISS type, geared specifically for the degree towards which I was working.  Thanks to both of you for participating in this discussion!

 

9 hours ago, sparks1093 said:

I know that I, personally, have never fallen on any type of flooring or terrain in 63 years to the extent that I needed medical attention

 

Well, I have.  And, the first time was when I was 31.  On any given morning, getting into/out of my bath tub, there is a 50-50 chance that I will slip and fall.  Do I try to prevent that from happening?  You'd better believe it!  But, accidents happen regardless of how careful one is.  

 

And, as you grow older, sparks1093, you may learn that your stability isn't what it once was at age 63.  

[Flatbush Flyer]

21 minutes ago, rkacruiser said:

....And, as you grow older, sparks1093, you may learn that your stability isn't what it once was at age 63.  

So true!

[sparks1093]

15 hours ago, rkacruiser said:

 

Flatbush Flyer, njhorseman:  Surprised that my simple post (above) prompted such an interesting discussion.  The statistics course for my Master's was of the KISS type, geared specifically for the degree towards which I was working.  Thanks to both of you for participating in this discussion!

 

 

Well, I have.  And, the first time was when I was 31.  On any given morning, getting into/out of my bath tub, there is a 50-50 chance that I will slip and fall.  Do I try to prevent that from happening?  You'd better believe it!  But, accidents happen regardless of how careful one is.  

 

And, as you grow older, sparks1093, you may learn that your stability isn't what it once was at age 63.  

Yes, accidents can, and do happen, which is a very good argument for having good travel insurance. Not for having a passport. And I fully understand that now that I'm older I am more at risk for certain things happening and if we were starting cruising now my decision to have a passport or not could be different because of the increased risk (but in any event we do have passports now because our travel needs changed). Everyone's risk and everyone's tolerance of that risk are different and should be factored into this decision. (And again if someone has decided that they don't need a passport for their cruise I wouldn't expect that after reading this thread they would all of a sudden change their mind and decide that it's a good idea to have one for redundancy, which is what started us down this path.)

Edited August 27, 2021 by sparks1093

[Flatbush Flyer]

3 hours ago, sparks1093 said:

Yes, accidents can, and do happen, which is a very good argument for having good travel insurance. Not for having a passport. And I fully understand that now that I'm older I am more at risk for certain things happening and if we were starting cruising now my decision to have a passport or not could be different because of the increased risk (but in any event we do have passports now because our travel needs changed). Everyone's risk and everyone's tolerance of that risk are different and should be factored into this decision. (And again if someone has decided that they don't need a passport for their cruise I wouldn't expect that after reading this thread they would all of a sudden change their mind and decide that it's a good idea to have one for redundancy, which is what started us down this path.)

As we see on the news every day, all sorts of folks make all sorts of wrong (and often very costly) decisions.

[sparks1093]

2 hours ago, Flatbush Flyer said:

As we see on the news every day, all sorts of folks make all sorts of wrong (and often very costly) decisions.

They are their decisions to make. I don't like others to make decisions for me and I try not to make decisions for others. The regulations give people a choice and it is up to them to make that choice. 

[donaldsc]

2 hours ago, sparks1093 said:

They are their decisions to make. I don't like others to make decisions for me and I try not to make decisions for others. The regulations give people a choice and it is up to them to make that choice. 

 

As long as you accept all of the possible consequences resulting from the decision including a possible death and you do not expect society to bail you out from a bad decision, we all should have no problem with your choices.  As an example, if you go out hiking in a bad place or you are not prepared, don't expect first responders to go out and rescue you.

 

DON

[rkacruiser]

2 hours ago, sparks1093 said:

I don't like others to make decisions for me and I try not to make decisions for others.

 

I think I understand your point of view.  But, it is not what happens in our lives.

 

Others make decisions for me that I would rather not have them do.  (My doctor says its time for another colonoscopy.)  I have a choice of accepting his decision or not.  If not, then I have to accept the consequences of that choice.  

 

I'd rather not have to make decisions for the homeowners in my HOA.  But, it is my responsibility to do so.  If we need to increase our condo fees by X%, I (along with my fellow Board members) have to accept the howls that we will hear.  

 

8 hours ago, sparks1093 said:

Everyone's risk and everyone's tolerance of that risk are different and should be factored into this decision. (And again if someone has decided that they don't need a passport for their cruise I wouldn't expect that after reading this thread they would all of a sudden change their mind and decide that it's a good idea to have one for redundancy, which is what started us down this path.)

 

I agree with your statement.  But, maybe, just maybe, our discussion will have provided some "food for thought" for the novice traveler. 

[Toofarfromthesea]

On 8/25/2021 at 5:58 PM, Flatbush Flyer said:

But, in the world of statistics, wouldn’t that statement require controlled variables?

 

So you think the likelihood of getting struck by lightening is 50% because the only 2 possibilities are getting hit or not getting hit?  Math is hard.

 

As to the 3 day cruise risk vs. the longer cruise risk, obviously the risk is greater on the longer cruise because you are exposed to, e.g., 7 days of the risk rather than 3 days of the risk.  The odds of not getting a heads in 3 tosses of a coin are 1/8.  The odds of not getting a heads in 7 tosses of a coin are 1/128.  Same principle.

[sparks1093]

14 hours ago, rkacruiser said:

 

I think I understand your point of view.  But, it is not what happens in our lives.

 

Others make decisions for me that I would rather not have them do.  (My doctor says its time for another colonoscopy.)  I have a choice of accepting his decision or not.  If not, then I have to accept the consequences of that choice.  

 

I'd rather not have to make decisions for the homeowners in my HOA.  But, it is my responsibility to do so.  If we need to increase our condo fees by X%, I (along with my fellow Board members) have to accept the howls that we will hear.  

 

 

I agree with your statement.  But, maybe, just maybe, our discussion will have provided some "food for thought" for the novice traveler. 

I have been around long enough to know that others do make decisions for me at times and if they have the proper authority to do that then c'est la vie. As for your last statement that is exactly why I participate in these discussions. Someone making the decision should have as much information as they can.

[sparks1093]

15 hours ago, donaldsc said:

 

As long as you accept all of the possible consequences resulting from the decision including a possible death and you do not expect society to bail you out from a bad decision, we all should have no problem with your choices.  As an example, if you go out hiking in a bad place or you are not prepared, don't expect first responders to go out and rescue you.

 

DON

Of course one must accept one's decision but those who help others help the wise and unwise alike. 

[donaldsc]

5 hours ago, sparks1093 said:

Of course one must accept one's decision but those who help others help the wise and unwise alike. 

 

I guess that I would be a very bad 1st responder then.

 

DON