How cities can fix tourism hell • Hacker News Board

Re: How cities can fix tourism hell

#91

Post by volkl48 » Sun, Nov 18, 2018, 9:06 AM UTC

eigenvector wrote: post #68

kaffee wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think YUL has some of the highest airport fees for any major North American city. For example, there's an "Airport Improvement Fee" of 30 CAD (on every flight) https://www.aircanada.com/us/en/aco/home/legal/surcharges.ht... My sense is that this is just one of many fees that hit you when you fly into Montréal. I think the total fees are more like 60-90 USD on every flight. (I'm not suggesting that high taxes are ba…

All Canadian airports have high AIFs (Toronto's is $25 for instance), and they are charged to everyone not just tourists. It's more to do with how airports are structured and managed in Canada versus other countries. It's a user-pay model rather than having them subsidized by the government. In fact many actually pay ground rent to the federal government.

It's arguably not a model that has actually worked out very well for Canada. They push a significant portion of their air travelers over the US border for much cheaper flights.

And they wind up with fewer flights and worse route options to their own domestic airports as a result.

Ex: Burlington VT is about 40% Canadian, Plattsbugh + Niagara Falls NY are almost entirely Canadian traffic.

Re: How cities can fix tourism hell

#92

Post by bogomipz » Sun, Nov 18, 2018, 9:32 AM UTC

pj_mukh wrote: post #35

buboard wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

but if it's not enough to put them off, the tax doesn't work

The idea isn't to put them off, that seems like a mindlessly cynical goal. Build the infrastructure to support the larger numbers. If the infrastructure needs to discriminate against tourists, that's fine too (e.g. added trains for tourists vs. commuters), new digital methods tool can allow for this.

>"The idea isn't to put them off, that seems like a mindlessly cynical goal. Build the infrastructure to support the larger numbers."

Except in many places there is no room to build that infrastructure to support larger numbers of tourists - Venice, NYC and Amsterdam being examples. Nor do many of the people living in places that are over-touristed want infrastructure built to support yet more tourists. "Putting them off" is exactly the point in the tax.

Re: How cities can fix tourism hell

#93

Post by isostatic » Sun, Nov 18, 2018, 9:37 AM UTC

frio wrote: post #86

akvadrako wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's obvious why this is a problem. Just look at Venice - when a city is mostly filled with tourists it becomes like a theme park. Are you serious about building subways and widening sidewalks there? I suppose you'll say everybody should just move out if they don't like it, but most people consider it the better option to plan how their cities evolve.

Venice is an extreme case, I agree. That's one of the places that we visited that had the small kind of bed tax I'm thinking of; unfortunately that probably isn't fixing their problems. Many of their tourists stay in cruise ships (which have to have the lagoon dredged to support them; sinking Venice itself...); a bed tax doesn't target them, and they're completely and utterly overwhelmed regardless. It was a fascinat…

Significant bed tax in Venice leads to people staying in Mestre or further afield and commuting in. From your post it sounds like cruise ships are the main problem. Why not increase the cost for them to dock?

A tourist tax doesn’t really increase the cost of staying somewhere - if I’m willing g to spend $200 on a hotel in Venice it doesn’t matter if it’s $190 for the hotel and $10 for the tax, or $100 each.

On the other hand if the hotel could get customers willing to pay $300, they would charge that anyway.

A tourist tax shifts the money away from the hotel owner to the local government to pay for the externalities the hotel owner doesn’t. By targeting tourists rather than beds it also means that people on a business trip pay less, helping diversify the economy.

The problem with charging a tourist tax is of course defining what a tourist is, ensuring that Airbnb hosts pass on the tax, and ensuring it’s leveed on day trippers

Re: How cities can fix tourism hell

#94

Post by isostatic » Sun, Nov 18, 2018, 9:41 AM UTC

dgzl wrote: post #82

thenanyu wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Locals who stay at hotels? Usually these taxes are only on short term accommodations like hotels and Airbnb

Yes, if the destination is say a city, then those who live even just an hour away want to come and stay sometimes. Same is true for beaches and lakes, near ski resorts, ect.

They’re tourists, so they pay the tax

Re: How cities can fix tourism hell

#95

Post by isostatic » Sun, Nov 18, 2018, 9:47 AM UTC

forrestthewoods wrote: post #24

elbasti wrote: post #3

At risk of being labeled a "neoliberal idealist," why isn't the answer here simply taxing tourists more? Pigovian taxes have been a thing for fifty years, yet they are still seldom used. It seems like such an obvious solution to me that the fact it's not used more often (ex: towns banning airbnb vs taxing it) suggests to me that I'm missing something obvious.

Gross. Gross gross gross. Tourists already get taxed. Hotel taxes are huge. It sucks. Traveling for conferences to meet new people and learn new things is soooo expensive and tourist taxes are a big part of why. Tourist taxes are how you destroy diversity and trap people into the tiny bubble in which they were born. We should be striving for the opposite.

What city has a high tourist tax that’s even 30% of the total cost of a typical hotel. I just checked in Rome. I can get a room for €88 for two, €8, or 9%, of which is the city tax.

Re: How cities can fix tourism hell

#96

Post by isostatic » Sun, Nov 18, 2018, 9:49 AM UTC

forrestthewoods wrote: post #40

viraptor wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A good solution here seems to be - don't organise conferences in places which are full of tourists already. You want to meet new people and learn? Great - book a country hotel and transport from the airport, or maybe a place in some town with reasonable plane connections. You want to also see the city? You're a tourist.

I could not possibly disagree more. Conferences are almost always a split of local and non-local attendees. Forcing conferences to be exclusively non-local attendees makes zero sense. It would be even more expensive, in absolute dollars and environmental cost, to have everyone travel to the middle of Nebraska. I know it's not your intent, but your stance here reeks of elistism, xenophobia, and othering. Extrapolating…

> Travel is so expensive it's almost crazy NOT to make the most out of your trip.

And you’re worried about an extra $5 a night to pay for tourist infrastructure?

Re: How cities can fix tourism hell

#97

Post by isostatic » Sun, Nov 18, 2018, 9:57 AM UTC

nikanj wrote: post #60

toofy wrote: post #55

I’m a far cry from an economist, but I’m curious if the sharp rise in tourism over the last couple of decades is an indication that people have much more disposable income than we previously had access. As the article mentions, travel and lodging has definitely gotten cheaper, however I still feel like, due to stronger economy and more disposable income, world travel is no longer limited to the obscenely wealthy. If…

The narrative nowadays heavily encourages people to #yolo and live on credit. When everyone around you is getting into debt via epic trips, getting into debt no longer seems like a major problem.

It’s not. It takes two to get in debt, the borrower and the lender. Lenders are lending money and don’t see a problem, and it’s their money at risk.

As millennials get more power and reach a majority, entering their 40s with no monetary assets to speak of, many debts, but still have income, they’ll push for policies to increase inflation and keep interest rates low. This means the debt they owe reduces, their salaries increase, cost of living increases, but only those with cash investments lose out.

This is a failure of the previous generations to ensure that the wealth is spread widely.

When you’re dribbling in a nursing home the millions of dollars you’ve saved aren’t going to wipe your ass, it’s the downtrodden youth.

Re: How cities can fix tourism hell

#98

Post by IIAOPSW » Sun, Nov 18, 2018, 11:30 AM UTC

toofy wrote: post #55

I’m a far cry from an economist, but I’m curious if the sharp rise in tourism over the last couple of decades is an indication that people have much more disposable income than we previously had access. As the article mentions, travel and lodging has definitely gotten cheaper, however I still feel like, due to stronger economy and more disposable income, world travel is no longer limited to the obscenely wealthy. If…

The quick answer is that the price of airplane tickets has taken a nose dive in our lifetime. This is caused by a combination of airline deregulation (in the 80s iirc) and the slow march of fuel economy in aircraft engines. GE/P&W/RR pumped out a ~1% more efficient engine every year for 30 years and the gains have added up. Furthermore online booking cuts out the travel agent middle man.

Couple this with airbnb and now travel is far more within reach to an average person. Why not spend on it.

Re: How cities can fix tourism hell

#99

Post by holografix » Sun, Nov 18, 2018, 12:15 PM UTC

elbasti wrote: post #3

At risk of being labeled a "neoliberal idealist," why isn't the answer here simply taxing tourists more? Pigovian taxes have been a thing for fifty years, yet they are still seldom used. It seems like such an obvious solution to me that the fact it's not used more often (ex: towns banning airbnb vs taxing it) suggests to me that I'm missing something obvious.

I guess it’s up to the city to decide whether it wants to: A) use tax and revenues from tourists to progressively change it self to accommodate more and more tourists. B) raise taxes so much that only cashed up tourists can afford to visit. C) preserve the city as it is, and install some form of tourist lottery to avoid only cashed up tourist from visiting.

Re: How cities can fix tourism hell

#100

Post by crawfordcomeaux » Sun, Nov 18, 2018, 3:47 PM UTC

How about educating people on the overlap between colonialism and tourism?

What if tourism wasn't solely focused on one's own experiences, as though such things exist in a vacuum, and was a spiritual practice in connecting with and respecting other cultures?

Maybe what we need to fix tourism hell is cultivating global cultures of interdependence, respect,community, and service?

Educate tourists to make their effects less hellish; trying to control people is old school management-oriented nonsense. It's time to start respecting people's autonomy more than that.