Almost Half of Wisconsin Hotels Might Close

We’re going to feel the economic ripples of this for a very long time. Remember that many of these businesses are owned by small business owners. Their capital is wiped out and they will be unable or unwilling to take another rick to start another business. We need a new generation of risk-taking entrepreneurs to take the helm and the Millennial generation has proven to be risk-averse.

Elliott said the extent of damage caused by the COVID-19 pandemic is becoming clear. A recent internal survey shows a staggering 47% of Wisconsin lodging establishments could be forced to close in the next year without loan or grant assistance.

“We need help from the federal level,” said Elliott. “We need help from the state level.”

More than 50% of hotel staff in the state remain furloughed or laid off.

58 Responses to Almost Half of Wisconsin Hotels Might Close

  1. Kevin Scheunemann says:

    This what an “Evers economy winning” looks like.

    Awful. Just awful.

  2. jjf says:

    If demand drops, you want to blame it on Evers?  Were these hotels ever closed?  Or are people just deciding not to travel, not to stay in hotels?

    Then there’s the room tax revenue.

  3. Le Roi du Nord says:

    Blame the bungler-in-chief residing in the WH. And all the folks that ignored earlier safety measures.

  4. Mar says:

    And Le Roi hates again.
    Since I travel for work, mostly in the Phoenix and Las Vegas areas, the hotels I have stayed at have been mostly full.
    Not sure why it is not happening in Wisconsin, but 1 reason might be that illinois residents have to or had to quarantine for 2 weeks after going to Wisconsin.
    So, blame Gov. Fat Boy Pritizker of the Land of FIB.

  5. Pat says:

    Trysting Place has also closed due to the a Trump Pandemic.

    https://www.gmtoday.com/business/trysting-place-pub-closes-in-menomonee-falls/article_7e88d93e-0319-11eb-ab16-df04d4497ed7.html?fbclid=IwAR3LS0CXI9jPG2IYuZVZ5xgNhU18OnqS8ZbkGhLfVzP61N1Z-VnZXyKmQ_w

    Zizzo also urged people to go out in November and vote. In his post online, he said the mismanagement of the COVID-19 pandemic has led to such hardships as the one his business faced, and people should act to change the representatives who were not taking care of the people at large, who promised a second stimulus and further aid to small businesses and then failed to deliver.

    “Someone (in the Legislature) should have said ‘No, we’re not leaving this room until we come up with a way to help the people,’” he said.

    “We have to eliminate the politicians that are there for themselves and the wealthy,” Zizzo said.

  6. Tuerqas says:

    The Trump Pandemic…could a more idiotic two word phrase exit an orifice?  Or maybe I am just ignorant.  I was not aware that the corona virus originally came out of Trump or that he was the ruler of Earth.

    We should have a contest!  What two word political phrase is dumber than “Trump pandemic”.

  7. Randall Flagg says:

    T:

    I disagree.  Trump minimized the pandemic and resisted and spoke against efforts to tackle it head on (including masks) all along.

    He lied about the severity of it, when he had full knowledge of what it really was and what it was capable of.

    Furthermore he lies about what he did do.  He indicates he implemented a China Travel Ban, but travel to/from China was never banned.

    Given all this, and many more examples, it is appropriate to call it the Trump pandemic in the U.S., because it is much worse in the U.S. than it could have been.

  8. Pat says:

    “We should have a contest! What two word political phrase is dumber than “Trump pandemic”.“

    Stable Genius

  9. Kevin Scheunemann says:

    Evers shut the state down, devastating these businesses.

    You liberals are disgusting. AWFUL. Disgusting, and awful.

  10. Pat says:

    “Evers shut the state down“

    Why? Was there some sort of an event that happened?

  11. jjf says:

    T, does it make more or less sense than Trump trying ever so hard to call it the Chinese virus?

  12. Mar says:

    So, the liberals have been asked this before:
    What would have done differently?
    All you get is silence.
    Pathetic.

  13. Pat says:

    A good start would be honest and truthful with the American public.
    I would have initiated a complete travel ban.

  14. Le Roi du Nord says:

    Enforce things like a mask requirement, no large gatherings, etc. it may not have stopped the trump virus cold, but would certainly make things more manageable.

  15. Mar says:

    That’s not the role of the president or federal government

  16. Mar says:

    Travel ban? International or countrywide?

  17. Pat says:

    International.

  18. Le Roi du Nord says:

    “What would have done differently?”

    I answered your question, others did as well.

    I’ll ask you this, “why isn’t that the role of the president or federal government?”.

  19. Mar says:

    Well, didn’t President Trump do that with China and Asia first, then Europe and eventually closed the border between Mexico and Canada?
    Well before the Democrats would have. Biden said Trump was xenophobic for banning travel from China. Nancy Pelosi and Bill DeBlasio wanted people to come to their cities when the Chinese virus started.
    So, please try again.

  20. Mar says:

    Because Le Roi, it is illegal to do. Everyone but you apparently agrees with that opinion.

  21. Le Roi du Nord says:

    Why is it illegal? Just you say so doesn’t make it true. Citation ply.

  22. Le Roi du Nord says:

    Hmmmm, “the border between Mexico and Canada” .

    And since the Democrats aren’t in the WH, this makes no sense, “Well before the Democrats would have”.

  23. jjf says:

    I dunno, Le Roi, Trump could’ve not out-bid the states trying to buy PPE.

  24. Randall Flagg says:

    Well, didn’t President Trump do that with China and Asia first, then Europe and eventually closed the border between Mexico and Canada?

    Travel to/from China was never stopped Mar.  Neither with Europe.

    There is free flow of goods via truck and train  between the US Mexico and Canada so those borders were not closed.

    Another set of swings and a misses for old Marbles.

  25. Pat says:

    Marbles,

    What Randall said.

  26. Pat says:

    He should have been honest with the America public.

  27. Mar says:

    Oh, ok, Randall. Completely shut the borders?
    That means no goods come. Things like medicine, PPE equipment, food, material goods, essential employees and then we could not send out our goods, destroying many parts of the economy.
    Good call, Randall.

  28. Mar says:

    “He should have been honest with the America public”
    He was. But even if he was not, it would not have saved any lives.
    So, basically no one would have done anything different.
    Thanks for playing.

  29. jjf says:

    Mar, are you familiar with Trump’s usual methods of “trade”?  What’s a tariff?

  30. Le Roi du Nord says:

    mar, are you saying trump was honest with the American public regarding coronavirus? You will need to provide extensive proof of that claim, as the facts and recorded history surely don’t agree with you.

  31. dad29 says:

    it is much worse in the U.S. than it could have been.

    “If the South won the Civil War………….”

    “If Kennedy had not been shot…………”

    “If Washington had not crossed the Delaware………”

    Fabulism lives loudly within you, Pfluggg.

  32. dad29 says:

    Enforce things like a mask requirement

    Under exactly which provision in the Constitution, dipwad?

  33. dad29 says:

    Good call, Randall.

    Reality is not within his grasp.  But not to worry!!  He’ll find a way to blame the Catholic Church for this any day now.

  34. penquin says:

    Under exactly which provision in the Constitution

    Same part of the Constitution that allows the Federal Gov’t to impose a national speed limit.

    And actually – this might not even require congressional approval (like the federal speed limit did). Isn’t Trump denying funding to cities that he beleives aren’t doing a good enough job of maintaining law&order? Couldn’t another President do the same thing to cities/states which aren’t doing a good enough job of fighting the pandemic?

    (Nevermind for a moment if you think masks work or not – the question is If Trump can do this then why can’t another President do so as well?)

  35. penquin says:

    are you saying trump was honest with the American public regarding coronavirus?

    Isn’t Trump on record as saying he downplayed the dangers of this virus in order to avoid panic?

    Big Brother lied to us, but only did so to protect us from ourselves

  36. jjf says:

    Which brother taught you the word “dipwad,” Dad29?

  37. Mar says:

    “Same part of the Constitution that allows the Federal Gov’t to impose a national speed limit”
    Here is no national speed limit. The Federal government does not set the speed limit on North Ave or Swan Blvd. In Wauwatosa. They do not set the speed limit on Hwy 67 in Oconomowoc.

  38. Mar says:

    Liberals will say President Trump lied because they hate him, like you Le Roi.
    But he was right most of the time, like hydroxychloroquine. And if he was wrong, it was because of the science at the time.

  39. Pat says:

    “Liberals will say President Trump lied because they hate him“

    No, the majority of the population say Trump lies because it’s true. Is difficult for those with TAS to admit it, though they know it’s true.

  40. Tuerqas says:

    Hey Randall, we’ll have to agree to disagree then:

    I happen to agree with the Swedish method, which believes in playing it down and letting it take its course like any other virus.  We may have had more deaths than we have now, but we would be much further along building resistances to it.  Trump lies about just about everything according to liberals, it may as well be his moniker.  Even the majority of his followers have to admit he ‘changes his mind’ a lot.  However, a pandemic by definition crosses national borders to be global.  Blaming Trump for the virus as it affects other countries is, well, foolhardy?  Far-fetched?  Certainly beyond your reasoning above.  I would have disagreed, but said nothing if Pat had used ‘Trump Epidemic’.

    For a liberal to accuse Trump of lying is like accusing him of breathing.  I think he lies a lot, but not as much as a liberal.  He could say 2+2=4 and at least half the liberals in the US would call it a hoax.

  41. Tuerqas says:

    “We should have a contest! What two word political phrase is dumber than “Trump pandemic”.“
    Stable Genius

    HA! Excellent.

  42. Mar says:

    “He could say 2+2=4 and at least half the liberals in the US would call it a hoax.”
    Ha, that is very true. I can of at least 2 bat shit crazy liberals here who would call it a hoax.

  43. Tuerqas says:

    T, does it make more or less sense than Trump trying ever so hard to call it the Chinese virus?

    Ahhhh, less.  It makes orders of magnitude less sense.  The virus began in China.  The regions in which real pandemics have begun is the most common form of identification.  Spanish flu, Asian bird flu, etc.  Being named after a leader of a country where it spread to?  That is not a good ‘first’, unless of course you are in the opposite political party in the US.  Then equating with Hitler, naming flus or toilets after the opposite party leader is all fair dinkum in the ole’ US anonymous internet of today.  Disgusting really…awful, awful and disgusting:).

  44. Tuerqas says:

    That’s not the role of the president or federal government

    DING, DING, DING!  We have a winner!

  45. jjf says:

    The regions in which real pandemics have begun is the most common form of identification.

    No, read your history.  There’s plenty of examples of leaders and countries doing exactly what Trump did.  And it usually stems from xenophobia and nationalism.  The French disease.

    I don’t think there’s anyone who claims the Spanish flu originated in Spain, and it may very well have originated in the US.

    Given the thousands of clear outright lies that Trump has laid, it takes a special kind of twisted to use “2+2=4” as the example that liberals will oppose… and then to say the liberals are the ones at fault here, because they’re so worked up about his lies.

  46. Tuerqas says:

    I’ll ask you this, “why isn’t that the role of the president or federal government?”.

    Same part of the Constitution that allows the Federal Gov’t to impose a national speed limit.

    It is not the role of Government to force compliance with health habits because it is not listed among the limits of the national Government to control.  Despite this, new interpretations are being invented all of the time, for instance under ’emergency powers’, and most often veiled under the guise of protecting non-participants.  Smoking became ‘illegal’ in public places to protect others.  Seatbelts were originally just required to be installed in all new vehicles to protect the users.  There was no law to wear them initially.  From that it has progressed to click it or ticket.  Health can control what we eat, what surgeries we could or could not have, what drugs we could or could not take.  It can control what we wear, how we wear it and how close we can come to others.  It can control our entertainment and how/where we watch it from and clearly what jobs we can have.  We are currently flirting with all of these right now, but I bet there are a dozen other things you do every day that the Government can force you to do or not do in the name of health if we let them.

    You want to hand the keys to your life to Government in the name of health and safety, I do not.  Mar and Owen do not, I believe.  We do not give a damn if you want to wear masks to protect your health if you think it does, but I think most conservatives here want to preserve the right to disagree with you, with Government etc., and that often poorly interpreted document the Constitution is pretty clear about guaranteeing us those rights.  You have to get down-right murky and Trump-like to use the Constitution to defend your position.

  47. jjf says:

    Trump pandemic?  Sure, why not?

    Of the flood of misinformation, conspiracy theories and falsehoods seeding the internet on the coronavirus, one common thread stands out: President Trump.

    That is the conclusion of researchers at Cornell University who analyzed 38 million articles about the pandemic in English-language media around the world. Mentions of Mr. Trump made up nearly 38 percent of the overall “misinformation conversation,” making the president the largest driver of the “infodemic” — falsehoods involving the pandemic.

    The study, to be released Thursday, is the first comprehensive examination of coronavirus misinformation in traditional and online media.

    “The biggest surprise was that the president of the United States was the single largest driver of misinformation around Covid,” said Sarah Evanega, the director of the Cornell Alliance for Science and the study’s lead author. “That’s concerning in that there are real-world dire health implications.”

  48. Tuerqas says:

    Jjf, from your link:

    The first written records of an outbreak of syphilis in Europe occurred in 1494 or 1495 in Naples, Italy, during a French invasion (Italian War of 1494–98).[10][37] Since it was claimed to have been spread by French troops, it was initially called the “French disease” by the people of Naples

    At the time of European outbreak it was written as being gotten from the French.  Just because it was false is irrelevant to my point, imo.  Your example had nothing to do with xenophobia or nationalism.  The Spanish flu was called that because it was believed that the new strain of virus hit Spain hardest(So sure, it is not always named after the true region of origin you are right  and I am wrong on that detail).  In the past, there was no world news that was one minute old, it was all an hour, a day, a year old or more.  Since we have had global breaking news, new viruses have most commonly been named after the region or country where it began if known, or its scientific name.  Go ahead and tell us about all of the illnesses named after people that were not named after the discoverer or the first or most famous person it attacked.  it is called German measles, not Hitler measles.

    Given the thousands of clear outright lies that Trump has laid, it takes a special kind of twisted to use “2+2=4” as the example that liberals will oppose… and then to say the liberals are the ones at fault here, because they’re so worked up about his lies.

    No it is exactly on point.  Name one fact that Trump did not lie about or that you agreed with.  Bet you will have to spend some time on the internet to do it, because you are programmed to believe that everything is a lie from him.  You have made no individual judgments on specifics from his mouth in 5 years.  Trump said it?  It’s a lie.

  49. Tuerqas says:

    That is the conclusion of researchers at Cornell University who analyzed 38 million articles about the pandemic in English-language media around the world. Mentions of Mr. Trump made up nearly 38 percent of the overall “misinformation conversation,” making the president the largest driver of the “infodemic” — falsehoods involving the pandemic.

    Well sure, those articles are written by the professionals in fields that are overwhelmingly liberal.  Trump was right about hydroxychloroquine and as testing progresses it will be further borne out.  But the hundreds of thousands of articles that have that drug mentioned also have Trump noted as lying about it.  Take one thousand Covid related posts from the Huffington post and one thousand Covid related posts from Boots and Sabers and how many show Trump as a pure liar in HP versus how many from B&S?  I bet a Trump supporter could look through a few million articles from conservative sites and find a much smaller correlation.  Liberal Universities will always prove the liberal point and conservative “Business” think tanks will always prove the conservative point.  Get the money out and the objectivity back in to either of those entities and we can talk.

  50. Tuerqas says:

    And of course you would like “Trump pandemic” even if it is an oxymoron, you are in the ‘other Party’.  I am sure there are conservatives on the net somewhere calling it the Fauci pandemic, but they are being obtuse as well.

  51. Mar says:

    jjf is one of those bat shit crazy liberals who would argue 2+2=4 if President Trump said it was true.
    Probably would try to use some computer coding or logic to prove his point.

  52. Merlin says:

    -That is the conclusion of researchers at Cornell University who analyzed 38 million articles about the pandemic in English-language media around the world.

    Cornell University, being the bastion of liberalism that it is, has “researchers” determining what is and isn’t misinformation in media reporting. How utterly convenient for achieving a predetermined confirmation of bias conclusion. That’s pretty much a non-starter from the outset.

  53. Pat says:

    “ jjf is one of those bat shit crazy liberals who would argue 2+2=4 if President Trump said it was true.”

    Of course jjf would argue 2+2=4, because 2+2 does equal 4. Do you come up with a different number???

  54. jjf says:

    Pat, I think it depends on which computer language Mar is using.

  55. dad29 says:

    Smoking became ‘illegal’ in public places to protect others.  Seatbelts were originally just required to be installed in all new vehicles to protect the users.  There was no law to wear them initially.  From that it has progressed to click it or ticket

    Smoking:  state law or local ordinance.  Seatbelts:  Federal ‘safety’ requirement–dubious Constitutionality, but automakers caved largely due to threats from Insurance Institute and mommies (!); as to click/tick, that’s State legislation, not Fed–but the Feds will de-fund highways if the States don’t BOHICA.

    There is such a thing as a “national emergency” of course; but there will be a lot of well-founded lawsuits claiming that Covid is NOT a national emergency (AIDS was not, nor was polio, nor the Spanish flu, etc.).

    So answer my question:  under what specific Constitutional text would Trump or Harris have that right?

     

  56. jjf says:

    To “promote the general welfare” has been used to cover a lot of things, hasn’t it?  

  57. Tuerqas says:

    dad29, who are you asking that question of?

  58. Mar says:

    Another governor gets bitch slapped by a Supreme Court.
    The dictator governor was found to have abused her power, so the State Supreme Court of Michigan slapped her down.
    Good for the Michigan Supreme Court.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.