Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Don’t bail out the cruise industry

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 205 posts

Re: Don’t bail out the cruise industry

#181

Post by manigandham »

joshvm wrote: post #72
lmm wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They are blocking perfect vistas of the sea. Counterpoint: they absorb a lot of tourist demand for visiting particular places, while taking up a minimum of space. Building the equivalent hotel capacity in the same places would be far more intrusive.

No, it's the opposite. Places which are already at capacity (like Venice, Mallorca, Santorini, etc) then receive multiple cruise ships a day which dump thousands more people into the system. There are cruises which are "just looking" but the ones which visit heavily touristic areas tend to stop and let passengers off. Also these ships are enormous , loud and polluting. I think most locals would prefer hotels which at…

How much tourism would there be contributing to the economy without those cruise ships bringing the tourists in the first place?

Re: Don’t bail out the cruise industry

#182

Post by icebraining »

jjeaff wrote: post #179
icebraining wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Headquartered in Miami, but incorporated in Panama.

That doesn't matter. If you have operations in the US, you have to pay US taxes. Now they may be getting around those taxes, but they have to file.

Yes, they have to file, but it does matter:

> In general, under Section 883 of the Internal Revenue Code, certain non-U.S. corporations (such as our North American cruise ship businesses) are not subject to U.S. federal income tax or branch profits tax on U.S. source income derived from, or incidental to, the international operation of a ship or ships

From https://www.carnivalcorp.com/financial-information/annual-re...

Re: Don’t bail out the cruise industry

#183

Post by manigandham »

There's no easy solution to a once in-a-century pandemic. The most important issue is economic continuity.

It's better to prop up companies and industry for the short term if it means thousands of people continue receiving a paycheck and can afford to live.

Suddenly laying off all those people while companies and vendors collapse will lead to major cascading effects that can be far more disastrous.

Re: Don’t bail out the cruise industry

#184

Post by bluntfang »

xiphias2 wrote: post #12

Tourists from cruise ships destroy nice vacactions. Many hundreds of people come on the streets in groups, go throught the streets loudly and fast to take photos, than go back to the ship. People who really go to these places and spend money for staying and try to blend in to have a peaceful vacation can't.

>People who really go to these places

did you just no true scottsman vacations?

Re: Don’t bail out the cruise industry

#185

Post by WalterBright »

lb1lf wrote: post #53
WalterBright wrote: post #26

I went on a cruise ship once. Was very bored. I was so bored I tried to wangle a tour of the engine room (after all, I'm an engineer) but no way said the captain. The food was nice. The captain avoided a big storm. I figured if I ever went on a cruise again it would be an a much smaller boat. After all, who doesn't want an oar thrust in their hands and have someone yell "ramming speed!" at them? "We keep you alive to…

The Hurtigruten is a coastal freighter cum cruise line traversing the Norwegian coast between Bergen in the south and Kirkenes near Murmansk up north, making loads of stops underway to on- and offload cargo and passengers. The Norwegian coast can be quite rough in the wintertime - a friend of mine is the steward on one of the ships, and she assures me every winter there are numerous passengers who insist on being dre…

Do they make the passengers walk the oars, too? https://youtu.be/8SW6a1z_hUk?t=112

Re: Don’t bail out the cruise industry

#186

Post by TomMarius »

computerphage wrote: post #176
Cthulhu_ wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They'll likely get it because they can pay politicians to vote in favor, or said politicians own a stake in those companies - probably indirectly to avoid an apparent conflict of interest, but who will find out? Actually they did, see Panama Papers. So many higher-ups turned out to have a lot of money stashed away abroad. Politicians are corrupt. I mean take Trump; while he 'officially' renounced control / ownership…

The problem with statements like "politicians are corrupt" is that it makes it possible for people to see what Trump is doing as just more of the status quo. It needs to be possible for some politicians to not be corrupt in order for the allegation of corruption towards Trump to carry any meaning.

Maybe politicians shouldn't have as much power?

Re: Don’t bail out the cruise industry

#187

Post by TomMarius »

manigandham wrote: post #181
joshvm wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, it's the opposite. Places which are already at capacity (like Venice, Mallorca, Santorini, etc) then receive multiple cruise ships a day which dump thousands more people into the system. There are cruises which are "just looking" but the ones which visit heavily touristic areas tend to stop and let passengers off. Also these ships are enormous , loud and polluting. I think most locals would prefer hotels which at…

How much tourism would there be contributing to the economy without those cruise ships bringing the tourists in the first place?

Still too much

Re: Don’t bail out the cruise industry

#188

Post by rstuart4133 »

csomar wrote: post #151
edejong wrote: post #14

The cruise industry is one of the most polluting and damaging industries in the world. It ruins cities worldwide. Their ships are petri-dishes for disease, spreading it directly into our vital cities. They are blocking perfect vistas of the sea. They are ruining local sea life and are spreading non-native species. Their exhaust fumes are extremely detrimental to local air quality in cities. The swarms of tourists are…

I never got it but I also never went on a cruise ship. But, for the life of me, I can't figure out the attraction of the cruise ship. You are siting in this big hotel complex, you are not enjoying much of the scenery, cities, or anything. You are just in a hotel and they even have pools? What's the point of being in the ocean anyway if you are staying inside?

> I never got it but I also never went on a cruise ship.

Well I have been on one. A friend thought it would be a good idea to hold his 60th birthday on a cruise ship.

It is exactly as you say - a hotel, laid sideways. But unlike a hotel there no way to out, and in my case no internet worth using.

The primary ways people seemed to keep themselves occupied were drinking alcohol, eating food and watching other people in various ways. None of those thinks work for me. Exercise consisted doing the same brisk walk around and around the ship every day. There were other options, but you had to pay for them.

Re: Don’t bail out the cruise industry

#189

Post by anewvillager »

kolleykibber wrote: post #112
edejong wrote: post #14

The cruise industry is one of the most polluting and damaging industries in the world. It ruins cities worldwide. Their ships are petri-dishes for disease, spreading it directly into our vital cities. They are blocking perfect vistas of the sea. They are ruining local sea life and are spreading non-native species. Their exhaust fumes are extremely detrimental to local air quality in cities. The swarms of tourists are…

To list a few positives. Europe maybe not, but places like Honduras would be worse off without them. The industry and shipyards are advancing technology in ways that other industries do not. New ships use LNG, batteries and renewables. A carbon neutral cruise ship is not too far away. The intensive childcare offered allows parents who cannot otherwise get such services to relax. Pixar's Wall-e was prescient in that m…

Then maybe Honduras should bail out them?

Re: Don’t bail out the cruise industry

#190

Post by joshvm »

manigandham wrote: post #181
joshvm wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, it's the opposite. Places which are already at capacity (like Venice, Mallorca, Santorini, etc) then receive multiple cruise ships a day which dump thousands more people into the system. There are cruises which are "just looking" but the ones which visit heavily touristic areas tend to stop and let passengers off. Also these ships are enormous , loud and polluting. I think most locals would prefer hotels which at…

How much tourism would there be contributing to the economy without those cruise ships bringing the tourists in the first place?

If you ever get the chance to visit Venice - a city which is relatively well designed for tourists (you walk in a one way loop) - they're not struggling for customers. On a hot day even in spring it's absolutely heaving and full of places to rip you off. Also plenty of places to eat reasonably, I should add.

Most tourists are not coming by cruise. They're Italians (train to Rome is cheap and takes three hours), Europeans (dirt cheap flights) and other airborne visitors. Since it's easy to get to, lots of people go to Rome and then do a day or a night in Venice.

Santorini is tiny. It's set up as a luxury island for couples (and it's beautiful, so you see why). I guess cruising there is cheaper than ferry and hotel.

Mallorca is somewhere in the middle. Relatively cheap to fly there, cheap to stay and cheap to eat. But again, not designed for a thousand person instantaneous load who thunder through, buy trinkets and leave.

Remember you get a bed, breakfast and dinner onboard so why waste money on land if you only have say six hours to visit? (unless the ship docks overnight)

Post reply on HN