NO CRUISES UNTIL NOV 1-unless Dr Fauchi changes his mind!

[pinotlover]

I wonder what would happen if Desantis had his Dept of Health put out guidelines for cruise ships sailing into or out of Fl ports and allowed those that meet the guidelines to sail? Biden could either (1) order the Navy and Coast Guard to blockade all the ports, or (2) give directions to his CDC to get the matter resolved.

[IWantToLiveOverTheSea]

Never mind. Don't wish to follow -- too much politics.

Edited March 26, 2021 by IWantToLiveOverTheSea

[Redtravel]

Not surprised at this announcement.  Nov. 1st is the end of summer and fall travel.  With all the new restrictions in Europe, it had to happen. Maybe 2022 will be better than 2020 and 2021.  Not booking anything again until safe traveling returns.  Getting tired and quite annoyed at booking, getting canceled, rebooking,...... just took my Viking refund and bought a new car.  More likely that my next vacation will be a road trip. 

[XCoastie73]

13 hours ago, bob brown said:

As much as people are disappointed (myself included),  people should realize that the CDC's mission is public health safety, first, and not recreation.   If they allowed return to business as usual, and several outbreaks resulted, imagine how they would be looked at then.

If the only tool you have available is a hammer ("Disease Control") then everything looks like a nail.  And every nail must needs be fully pounded in.

 

Forty-eight years in government at fairly high levels.  The risk-averse culture in any agency, especially at the DC/HQ rather than local level, is to avoid at all costs opening the agency up to a black-eye.  The best way not to be criticized for a disease that might linger in ANY degree is to allow NOTHING until it is (essentially) fully pounded in.

 

We depend on elected politicians to weigh the risks and rewards across competing disciplines in a sophisticated, complex, multi-dimensional manner, and to make the best rational overall decision.  Silly us.  (Flamers: N.B., this last is non-partisan.)

[kathy9]

Let's just clear up one thing here. Dr. Anthony Fauci is the director of the National Institute of Allergy at the NIH ( National Institute of Health). He does not work for the CDC.

[Daniel A]

16 minutes ago, kathy9 said:

Let's just clear up one thing here. Dr. Anthony Fauci is the director of the National Institute of Allergy at the NIH ( National Institute of Health). He does not work for the CDC.

Dr. Fauci was also appointed to the position of Chief Medical Advisor to the current President.  In that role he is responsible for advising the President on overall public health policy, especially as it relates to Covid-19.  It would make sense that there would be some overlap with CDC policies.

Edited March 27, 2021 by Daniel A

[Rob the Cruiser]

12 hours ago, XCoastie73 said:

If the only tool you have available is a hammer ("Disease Control") then everything looks like a nail.  And every nail must needs be fully pounded in.

 

Forty-eight years in government at fairly high levels.  The risk-averse culture in any agency, especially at the DC/HQ rather than local level, is to avoid at all costs opening the agency up to a black-eye.  The best way not to be criticized for a disease that might linger in ANY degree is to allow NOTHING until it is (essentially) fully pounded in.

 

We depend on elected politicians to weigh the risks and rewards across competing disciplines in a sophisticated, complex, multi-dimensional manner, and to make the best rational overall decision.  Silly us.  (Flamers: N.B., this last is non-partisan.)

 

Politicians don't make rational decisions. They are guessing. They are intoxicated by how easy it has been to control our lives. 

[Daniel A]

President Biden is committed to seeing shipping open up in the Suez Canal - just not in the US though.  😂

[howiefrommd]

20 hours ago, Daniel A said:

There is a legal concept that you cannot bring a lawsuit unless you can demonstrate you have suffered harm due to negligence or malfeasance.  Shutting down a major industry of a state without justification for more than a year may end up fitting into that concept giving Florida legal standing to bring a suit.  Maybe, it's taken until now for Florida to build up enough of a case for CDC malfeasance in light of their intransigence in the face of current conditions.  The conditions existing now are radically different from when the CDC did their first No Sail Order.  CDC can parse their words all they want but the Framework is just CDC's way of keeping their original No Sail Order in effect.  Neither CDC or Florida have the final word on whether or not CDC is justified in their actions.  It looks like the final word is going to need to come from a Federal Court.  Sometimes 'flapping your gums' with a state AG standing behind you can elicit proper conduct without even filing a suit.  As far as 'sitting idle' goes, it's the CDC doing that.  Even Walensky had no idea how to answer questions about the lockdown of the cruise industry other than saying 'No".

Although potentially an interesting argument (on an academic level) as to whether a State can have standing as a affirmative action to bring such a matter before the Federal Courts, my gut feeling is this has much more to do with theatrics than legal principle.  There are certainly other entities (other States, Cruise Lines and other potential  parties) that have explored such an action, and to date have failed to bring action.

 

I retired (from full time employment) over 8 years ago and have been involved as an expert witness in several complex Federal cases (all dealing with standing in regard to administrative law pursuant to CFR actions).  Here I sit 8 years later and they are still seeking trial time.  If Florida thinks they will rattle the Federal bureaucracy by having a news conference and threatening legal action, boy did they waste their time.

 

[Aloha 1]

22 hours ago, njhorseman said:

Flapping his gums to the press doesn't count as "not sitting idle". So far the state, the cruise industry, nor any party with legal standing has filed suit in an attempt to block the CDC's edicts...and it's not as if this whole situation started yesterday...it's been going on for a year. Why do you think that is? With all the high powered lawyers the cruise lines can hire and all the states attorneys general and not one even feeble attempt at legal action...why? Maybe they're pretty sure they'll lose...that's why.

He met with the top cruise line execs to map strategy. You call it flapping, I call it recognizing the problem and working to fix it.

[Petoonya]

After four cancellations I'm accepting cruises with deposit on them as ho-de-hum, blah-blah-blah or whatever. Meanwhile I'll have the house painted outside, and put on a new roof. The house is blue/gray. I can climb up on the roof and pretend I'm cruising on a brand new ship.

[mcgilldj]

Under President Trump, I seem to remember VP Pence meeting with cruise line executives to try and get cruising going in the United States. The CDC isn’t going to do anything that will hinder President Biden’s very cautious and overly safe approach to opening anything, except maybe 4th of July activities with limited family involvement. So, I don’t expect the Biden administration or the CDC to do anything.

[DrHemlock]

10 hours ago, Daniel A said:

President Biden is committed to seeing shipping open up in the Suez Canal - just not in the US though.  😂

Last time I checked, "shipping" was not the same business as "cruising" despite the latter taking place aboard ships.  Cargo containers, no matter how closely together they may be stacked, don't infect each other with viruses which may then be further transferred to other containers in their destination port.  

 

In fact, on the reasonably safe assumption that at least some of the cargo aboard that container ship is headed for Amazon and/or other US merchants/manufacturers, the president would appear to have quite a justifiable interest in getting the bloody boat moving again...as one would expect any US president to do.  Do you disagree?

[Host Jazzbeau]

20 minutes ago, DrHemlock said:

Last time I checked, "shipping" was not the same business as "cruising" despite the latter taking place aboard ships.  Cargo containers, no matter how closely together they may be stacked, don't infect each other with viruses which may then be further transferred to other containers in their destination port.  

 

In fact, on the reasonably safe assumption that at least some of the cargo aboard that container ship is headed for Amazon and/or other US merchants/manufacturers, the president would appear to have quite a justifiable interest in getting the bloody boat moving again...as one would expect any US president to do.  Do you disagree?

I think you missed the joke...

[mamaclark]

8 hours ago, Petoonya said:

After four cancellations I'm accepting cruises with deposit on them as ho-de-hum, blah-blah-blah or whatever. Meanwhile I'll have the house painted outside, and put on a new roof. The house is blue/gray. I can climb up on the roof and pretend I'm cruising on a brand new ship.

My 2020 cruise looked like Bathroom renovations, painting, a new car (replacing one 12 years young) and new landscaping. It was not nearly as much fun.

[Host Jazzbeau]

6 minutes ago, mamaclark said:

My 2020 cruise looked like Bathroom renovations, painting, a new car (replacing one 12 years young) and new landscaping. It was not nearly as much fun.

But now you can take a lot of money out of the 'necessities' pot and move it to the 'cruising' pot.  Unless, like me, you consider cruising to BE the 'necessities' pot!!!

[DrHemlock]

13 hours ago, Host Jazzbeau said:

I think you missed the joke...

Yes, apparently I did miss the joke.  Shipping is vital to the economy of our country; cruising (much as we love it) is not.  Therefore, any president should rightly take an interest in the Suez situation and offer resources to help resolve it.  Whether that same president should take an interest in frustrated cruisers is a different matter and open to debate.  What's funny?

Edited March 28, 2021 by DrHemlock

[Daniel A]

1 hour ago, DrHemlock said:

Yes, apparently I did miss the joke.  Shipping is vital to the economy of our country; cruising (much as we love it) is not.  Therefore, any president should rightly take an interest in the Suez situation and offer resources to help resolve it.  Whether that same president should take an interest in frustrated cruisers is a different matter and open to debate.  What's funny?

Gee Doctor, prescribe yourself a Valium.  Irony can be funny even if it's gallows humor.

 

Definition of irony:  "a state of affairs or an event that seems deliberately contrary to what one expects and is often amusing as a result."

 

[Aloha 1]

Solution to Suez blockage: Ship is too heavy; Many heavy containers on ship; Bring in military choppers capable of lifting some of the containers off to lighten the ship. 

 

Solution to Restarting Cruising: 2022 elections for House and Senate.

[Paulchili]

1 hour ago, Aloha 1 said:

Solution to Restarting Cruising: 2022 elections for House and Senate.

Again, was it not you that objected to political posts?

I guess it was only posts that did not agree with your point of view.

[clo]

1 hour ago, Aloha 1 said:

Solution to Suez blockage: Ship is too heavy; Many heavy containers on ship; Bring in military choppers capable of lifting some of the containers off to lighten the ship. 

 

Solution to Restarting Cruising: 2022 elections for House and Senate.

The fully-loaded 40-foot-long container weighs over 30 tons (67,200 pounds). For a regular helicopter, lifting it is simply impossible: the Sikorsky UH-60 Black Hawk has a maximum cargo capacity of 1,200 kilograms (2,640 lb); the Mil Mi-8, a considerably heavier helicopter, can barely lift 4,000 kg (8,800 lb).3 days ago

 

Could helicopters solve the Suez canal blockage?

[clo]

1 minute ago, Paulchili said:

Again, was it not you that objected to political posts?

I guess it was only posts that did not agree with your point of view.

Also that would push return to cruising out to 2023.

[Aloha 1]

1 hour ago, Paulchili said:

Again, was it not you that objected to political posts?

I guess it was only posts that did not agree with your point of view.

Nothing political about my reply. Simple stating a fact. Nothing will change until the government changes. Prove me wrong.