Live data from Hacker News

The Case Against Travel

newyorker.com

131–140 of 161 posts

Re: The Case Against Travel

#131
This is such a bad take. People travel for entertainment, they don’t need to become a different person after coming back from Las Vegas.

Some people watch a movie, others go to a museum in a different city.

Additionally, the premise that all travel is meaningless discards what you could experience by spending 5 days in rural Bangladesh after living your whole life in New York. Talk about eye-opening.

Re: The Case Against Travel

#132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think in the US at least, travel has an even deeper aspect of ritualized behavior or religiosity in the positive sense of those concepts. A pilgrimage for people who don't believe in anything. Even someone who takes a 20 hour flight to take photos for Instagram is having a unique life experience. They are going to have experiences worth telling stories about. Certainly more than the person who doesn't leave the hou…

[flagged]

I quite enjoy traveling and fly about 50,000 miles per year. I take offense to your sentiment. I have as much right to travel as anyone else. We need to live and let live.

Re: The Case Against Travel

#133
Travel is great. If the author doesn’t want to, our ticket prices are reduced.

One annoying travel thing: people who count numbers of countries they’ve been to. You can hop around so many European countries in a week. But driving around US, you’d see slightly more of the world but only can add one to your count. Needlessly arbitrary.

Most people here should consider themselves lucky how powerful our passports are. Do you know how difficult it is for most of the world to get tourist visas? It’s still in-person at the embassy experience and denials are expensive.

I feel a little pressure to travel sooner these days because the a380 is going to be phased out starting in the 2030s. There’s no drop in replacement for capacity available. Airports aren’t being built. And many people in Asia are joining the international travel economy. They’ll get past that visa hurdle. I think we are headed towards a point where international travel is going to skyrocket in price in the next decade due to capacity hurdles.

Re: The Case Against Travel

#134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A sustainable level of CO2 emissions per person is 2.3 tonnes per year. This includes food, housing, clothing and transportation. A 20 hour flight produces ~3 tonnes of CO2. This is ON TOP of the CO2 used up for living.

You haven't given the number of how much CO2 people use to live, only what the sustainable number is, so there isn't enough information to make any conclusion.

The current average in the US is ~16 tonnes per year, so around.

Re: The Case Against Travel

#135
post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

I quite enjoy traveling and fly about 50,000 miles per year. I take offense to your sentiment. I have as much right to travel as anyone else. We need to live and let live.

> I take offense to your sentiment.

I’m sorry I offended you. Do you have a better term for someone using several hundred percent more than their allotment of a resource?

Re: The Case Against Travel

#136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You haven't given the number of how much CO2 people use to live, only what the sustainable number is, so there isn't enough information to make any conclusion.

The current average in the US is ~16 tonnes per year, so around.

Sounds like that number just takes the CO2 that the us produces and divides by population. It would be agreeable if the wealth that came from that CO2 production did also was similarly distributed, but since it's not, that's not really how much your every day joe produces to live. It's what is produced to put another billion dollars onto a company's books.

Re: The Case Against Travel

#137
post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you really need to travel to China to get an appreciation for Chinese food? That’s kinda the point the author makes.

I’ve eaten a lot of Japanese food in London, but I just came back from Japan and the food was /not/ the same - it was so much better.

This sentiment is the "the book was better than the movie" of the travel world :)

Re: The Case Against Travel

#138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The current average in the US is ~16 tonnes per year, so around.

Sounds like that number just takes the CO2 that the us produces and divides by population. It would be agreeable if the wealth that came from that CO2 production did also was similarly distributed, but since it's not, that's not really how much your every day joe produces to live. It's what is produced to put another billion dollars onto a company's books.

Still, it’s produced and it’s produced because there’s demand.

But yes, I agree, the vast majority of CO2 is produced by corporations who don’t pay for the externalities they create.

Re: The Case Against Travel

#139

Travel is great. If the author doesn’t want to, our ticket prices are reduced. One annoying travel thing: people who count numbers of countries they’ve been to. You can hop around so many European countries in a week. But driving around US, you’d see slightly more of the world but only can add one to your count. Needlessly arbitrary. Most people here should consider themselves lucky how powerful our passports are. Do…

I wouldn't worry about the price of international travel from the perspective of per plane capacity. A380 is dying because nobody wants it anymore. Slightly smaller planes are already more attractive to both airlines and passengers. Most don't want to go to a hub then fly out with 500 others at a big bang time they want to go more directly in smaller groups and/or at better times. It's not necessarily more expensive to do so depending on the plane, regional demand, and if you can drop that connecting flight. Similarly the demand for more international flights means more orders for planes not a need for more seats in each plane, and there is no reason to expect we'll suddenly stop being able to increase plane production for a decade and then be in trouble just because the market shifted towards not making mega planes anymore.

Re: The Case Against Travel

#140
I hate being a "tourist". What I do love to do, though, is to be an expat. To actually go live in a city, for several months at least. Long enough to really know a few places and even already have some "favorite" ones. Long enough to have an actual keychain with car keys / apartment/house keys etc. and not just a card to swipe to enter the hotel room.

I lived in Poland (Krakow), Croatia (Zagreb), Japan (Tokyo), the USA (L.A. and then a bit more south, Orange County), Spain (Valencia), Belgium (my native country), France (french riviera), nearly settled in Andorra (wonderful tiny country hidden in the mountains) then I now live in Luxemburg. I'll probably move again in a few years.

I've never been a tourist in any of these places. I've always been renting or buying actual places (i.e not an AirBnB).

I do join expat meetups and get to meet like-minded people. They're not tourists.

And tourism in countries where tourism represent too big of a percentage of the GDP is an issue. France is now rethinking its approach to tourism for example: too many people all coming at mostly the same times of the year at the same spot.

You don't get to see a country when you're a tourist: you get to see mostly other tourists (at the hotel, in the streets where the hotels are, in museums, in restaurants for you'll invariably end up on the restaurants where tourists go and not the ones where the locals do go). I don't see the point.

Post reply on HN