Did you know Walt Disney had a company dedicated to innovation and new technology?

Don't miss tonight's episode of The Glenn Beck Program to see how Walt Disney's Imagineering ties into Glenn's future plans! Sign up now!

It is no secret that Glenn is a huge fan of Walt Disney. Glenn purchased Walt Disney's 1953 Disneyland Prospectus last summer, and he has told his staff the document will serve as a guide to his plans in 2013 and beyond. From his remarkable creativity to his forward-thinking vision, Glenn admires and respects Walt’s ability to craft the ubiquitous and virtually all-encompassing Disney entertainment empire we enjoy today.

The Walt Disney Company is perhaps best known for its theme parks, movies, and animation, but there is a more niche component of Walt’s business that Glenn has taken a special interest in – the design and development arm known as Walt Disney Imagineering.

Disney once said that “Disneyland would never be completed as long as there’s imagination left in the world,” and he created Walt Disney Imagineering (formally known as WED Enterprises) in order to hold true to that principle. Founded in 1952 to oversee the creation and construction of Disneyland Park, the Imagineering team is now responsible for designing and building all Disney theme parks, resorts, cruise ships, and other entertainment ventures.

Ever wonder how the audio-animatronic robotics that allow objects to come to life in three dimensions in attractions like Pirates of the Caribbean and The Haunted Mansion came to be? How about the user-friendly FastPass queuing system that lets visitors bypass long lines? Or what about the massive re-design of Walt Disney World’s Fantasyland, which utilizes basic technologies like perspective manipulation to make structures appear larger than they really are and the more complex patent-pending swinging seat technology that will be incorporated into a roller coaster? Well, Imagineering is responsible for all that and a whole lot more. In fact, over the years, their talent has even been tapped for projects like the 1960 Winter Olympics and the design of stores like Children’s Place.

While the accomplishments of Walt Disney Imagineering have proven to be revolutionary, its founding actually served as a turning point for the Disney brand. Roy O. Disney, Walt’s brother and business partner, did not support the opening of a theme park, which left Walt to finance the project on his own. He decided to create a company, independent of the one he shared with Roy, which came to be known as WED Enterprises (the initials of Walt’s name – Walter Elias Disney).

According to biographer Bob Thomas, author of Building a Company: Roy O. Disney and the Creation of an Entertainment Empire, Walt thought of WED as his “backyard laboratory,” a “workshop away from work.” He knew the preliminary idea of Disneyland would be far too abstract for investors to understand, and WED Enterprises allowed him to develop his ideas to a point where people would begin to recognize the potential.

Though WED provided a solution to a short-term problem (the funding of Disneyland), Walt had long-term plans for the endeavor. What came to be regarded as a money pit and experimental playground, ultimately created technologies that continue to drive profits for Disney properties to this day.

When Walt died in 1966, WED was acquired by Walt Disney Productions (now The Walt Disney Company), and Roy finally realized the breadth of his brother’s vision. When Walt Disney Productions was rebranded into The Walt Disney Company in 1987, WED Enterprises became Walt Disney Imagineering.

Today, the Imagineering studios are based in Glendale, California, but there are satellite offices in Disney parks around the world. Imagineers include illustrators, architects, lighting designers, writers, and graphic designers to name a few, and they are governed by the principle now known as “blue sky speculation.” This standard ensures that when it comes to the design process, there are no limitations.

It is this attitude that has allowed Walt Disney Imagineering to secure over 115 patents, all aimed at developing new models and improving old tricks. What separates Imagineering from the greater Walt Disney Company is its focus on innovation, void of the normal constraints of business that tend to stifle creativity. Walt believed that if you could dream it, you could build it, and Walt Disney Imagineering allowed him to ensure the imagination would never cease.

Glenn has made no secret that he has big… make that huge… plans for the future, and if his fascination with Walt and his Imagineering team is any indication, the sky is the limit.

 

 

Sources:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walt_Disney_Imagineering

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Retlaw_Enterprises

http://imagineerebirth.blogspot.com/2006/05/whats-in-name.html

Reform Conservatism and Reaganomics: A middle road?

SAUL LOEB/AFP/Getty Images

Senator Marco Rubio broke Republican ranks recently when he criticized the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act by stating that “there's no evidence whatsoever that the money's been massively poured back into the American worker." Rubio is wrong on this point, as millions of workers have received major raises, while the corporate tax cuts have led to a spike in capital expenditure (investment on new projects) of 39 percent. However, the Florida senator is revisiting an idea that was front and center in the conservative movement before Donald Trump rode down an escalator in June of 2015: reform conservatism.

RELATED: The problem with asking what has conservatism conserved

The "reformicons," like Rubio, supported moving away from conservative or supply-side orthodoxy and toward policies such as the expansion of the child and earned income tax credits. On the other hand, longstanding conservative economic theory indicates that corporate tax cuts, by lowering disincentives on investment, will lead to long-run economic growth that will end up being much more beneficial to the middle class than tax credits.

But asking people to choose between free market economic orthodoxy and policies guided towards addressing inequality and the concerns of the middle class is a false dichotomy.

Instead of advocating policies that many conservatives might dismiss as redistributionist, reformicons should look at the ways government action hinders economic opportunity and exacerbates income inequality. Changing policies that worsen inequality satisfies limited government conservatives' desire for free markets and reformicons' quest for a more egalitarian America. Furthermore, pushing for market policies that reduce the unequal distribution of wealth would help attract left-leaning people and millennials to small government principles.

Criminal justice reform is an area that reformicons and free marketers should come together around. The drug war has been a disaster, and the burden of this misguided government approach have fallen on impoverished minority communities disproportionately, in the form of mass incarceration and lower social mobility. Not only has the drug war been terrible for these communities, it's proved costly to the taxpayer––well over a trillion dollars has gone into the drug war since its inception, and $80 billion dollars a year goes into mass incarceration.

Prioritizing retraining and rehabilitation instead of overcriminalization would help address inequality, fitting reformicons' goals, and promote a better-trained workforce and lower government spending, appealing to basic conservative preferences.

Government regulations tend to disproportionately hurt small businesses and new or would-be entrepreneurs. In no area is this more egregious than occupational licensing––the practice of requiring a government-issued license to perform a job. The percentage of jobs that require licenses has risen from five percent to 30 percent since 1950. Ostensibly justified by public health concerns, occupational licensing laws have, broadly, been shown to neither promote public health nor improve the quality of service. Instead, they serve to provide a 15 percent wage boost to licensed barbers and florists, while, thanks to the hundreds of hours and expensive fees required to attain the licenses, suppressing low-income entrepreneurship, and costing the economy $200 billion dollars annually.

Those economic losses tend to primarily hurt low-income people who both can't start businesses and have to pay more for essential services. Rolling back occupational licenses will satisfy the business wing's desire for deregulation and a more free market and the reformicons' support for addressing income inequality and increasing opportunity.

The favoritism at play in the complex tax code perpetuates inequality.

Tax expenditures form another opportunity for common ground between the Rubio types and the mainstream. Tax deductions and exclusions, both on the individual and corporate sides of the tax code, remain in place after the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. Itemized deductions on the individual side disproportionately benefit the wealthy, while corporate tax expenditures help well-connected corporations and sectors, such as the fossil fuel industry.

The favoritism at play in the complex tax code perpetuates inequality. Additionally, a more complicated tax code is less conducive to economic growth than one with lower tax rates and fewer exemptions. Therefore, a simpler tax code with fewer deductions and exclusions would not only create a more level playing field, as the reformicons desire, but also additional economic growth.

A forward-thinking economic program for the Republican Party should marry the best ideas put forward by both supply-siders and reform conservatives. It's possible to take the issues of income inequality and lack of social mobility seriously, while also keeping mainstay conservative economic ideas about the importance of less cumbersome regulations and lower taxes.

Alex Muresianu is a Young Voices Advocate studying economics at Tufts University. He is a contributor for Lone Conservative, and his writing has appeared in Townhall and The Daily Caller. He can be found on Twitter @ahardtospell.

Is this what inclusivity and tolerance look like? Fox News host Tomi Lahren was at a weekend brunch with her mom in Minnesota when other patrons started yelling obscenities and harassing her. After a confrontation, someone threw a drink at her, the moment captured on video for social media.

RELATED: Glenn Addresses Tomi Lahren's Pro-Choice Stance on 'The View'

On today's show, Pat and Jeffy talked about this uncomfortable moment and why it shows that supposedly “tolerant" liberals have to resort to physical violence in response to ideas they don't like.

President Donald Trump has done a remarkable job of keeping his campaign promises so far. From pulling the US from the Iran Deal and Paris Climate Accord to moving the US Embassy to Jerusalem, the president has followed through on his campaign trail vows.

RELATED: The media's derangement over Trump has me wearing a new hat and predicting THIS for 2020

“It's quite remarkable. I don't know if anybody remembers, but I was the guy who was saying he's not gonna do any of those things," joked Glenn on “The News and Why it Matters," adding, “He has taken massive steps, massive movement or completed each of those promises … I am blown away."

Watch the video above to hear Glenn Beck, Sara Gonzales, Doc Thompson, Stu Burguiere and Pat Gray discuss the story.

Rapper Kendrick Lamar brings white fan onstage to sing with him, but here’s the catch

Matt Winkelmeyer/Getty Images for American Express

Rapper Kendrick Lamar asked a fan to come onstage and sing with him, only to condemn her when she failed to censor all of the song's frequent mentions of the “n-word" while singing along.

RELATED: You'll Never Guess Who Wrote the Racist Message Targeting Black Air Force Cadets

“I am so sorry," she apologized when Lamar pointed out that she needed to “bleep" that word. “I'm used to singing it like you wrote it." She was booed at by the crowd of people, many screaming “f*** you" after her mistake.

On Tuesday's show, Pat and Jeffy watched the clip and talked about some of the Twitter reactions.

“This is ridiculous," Pat said. “The situation with this word has become so ludicrous."