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

The backlash against overtourism

economist.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 311 posts

Re: The backlash against overtourism

#241

Post by kweks »

pyrale wrote: post #168
totalperspectiv wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I struggle with this every time I travel! I think that part of the... guilt? ... can be assuaged by intent. As in, you are there to learn and absorb a culture and broaden your horizons, as opposed to being there for the entertainment of seeing crazy things and getting the Instagram shot. But maybe that's just a pretense I make up for myself.

It doesn't really matter whether your visit is motivated by self-enlightment or selfie-taking. The plane you use consumes just as much, the effect you have on local life is just as dire. People have found other ways to broaden their horizon in the past.

Counter: the tourist that has made the effort to seek out non standard sights, or has made an attempt to learn the absolute basics of the local language will be welcomed so much better than the selfie-obsessed flock-travelling ignoramus that simply imposes their standard habits on a new environment.

Re: The backlash against overtourism

#242

Post by fiblye »

amanaplanacanal wrote: post #109
TangoTrotFox wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On the other hand, you also have to understand that humanitarianism must have limits. The resources of nations are not infinite and individuals that are unable to provide for themselves are a tremendous burden on society. And when you accept people that fail to integrate you risk imperiling the very policies that you hold to be worthwhile. For instance, Sweden will be a phenomenal test case. The Globe and Mail ran an…

Just pointing out that 'piece' is an editorial, not a news article. The US has had multiple waves of immigration from most of the world, over the last few centuries. And there has been similar pushback from nativists over and over again. If that long history is any indication, Sweden will be fine.

The US was also in a different hemisphere while the rest of the world was ravaged by 2 massive wars that destroyed everything they had, letting the US take the reigns of the world economy for a very long time. Without WW1 and WW2 helping to make the US economy an absolute beast unlike anything the world has ever seen, things would be quite different.

Re: The backlash against overtourism

#243

Post by drb91 »

alistairSH wrote: post #158
senorjazz wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

so only the richest should be able to visit such places? Probably from far away countries, whilst people from neighbouring countries are not able to see?

Peru does this on the Inca Trail trips. There is a daily cap on the number of people allowed on trail (tourist + guides + porters/cooks), plus guides are required. While it certainly isn't cheap, it wasn't prohibitively expensive (i.e., if you can afford the airfare and hotels in a city, you can likely afford to hike the Inca Trail). Having recently visited Iceland, I could see that the Reykjavik-area was near its li…

> As was the airport (gate areas were overcrowded throughout the terminal)

It's also a popular layover destination, right?

Re: The backlash against overtourism

#244

Post by drb91 »

Fuxy wrote: post #14

I found the quote “tourists go home, refugees welcome” quite funny. So what their basically saying is they would rather kick out tourists that bring in and spend quite a lot of money effectively boosting the economy in favour of some refugees the government will have to spend a large amount of money on... and you wonder why the contry's economy is in such a bad shape when the citizens advocate shooting themselves in…

Adding people to an economy grows the economy.

Re: The backlash against overtourism

#245

Post by stale2002 »

bobthepanda wrote: post #234
pmiller2 wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, you just need to get AirBnB or AirBnB hosts to start paying their share of hotel tax, like they do in some other locales.

That solves one market problem (AirBnB has no level playing field with existing hotels.) That does not solve the other large problem; most residents do not want to live in a hotel district with other tourists, and especially not as hallway or floor mates. And residents do not want new hotel builds or conversions competing with apartments. With traditional hotels this is solved with permits and zoning, but AirBnB is u…

Seems like we don't have enough hotels then. Let's build more. It'd make a lot of money for the government.

Re: The backlash against overtourism

#246

Post by Chathamization »

graeme wrote: post #232
Chathamization wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One mistake people make is pretending that every choice we make is a hard one with no good answers. Sometimes there are good decisions and bad ones, and we end up making bad ones even when the good ones are obvious. We often see this happen with individuals, it shouldn't be too surprising that this happens with societies as well. A few years back when I looked at solutions to "cooking this planet" that didn't involve…

Could you elaborate? Not cooking the planet requires moving to zero emissions AND taking them negative by a large margin beyond what simply planting forests would do. How csn we do this easily?

Here's a decent breakdown:

https://thinkprogress.org/the-full-global-warming-solution-h...

Re: The backlash against overtourism

#247

Post by hh3k0 »

robben1234 wrote: post #42

I won't argue about off topic issues, but I don't think mass tourism is killing any sights. Ignorance kills natural sights, over advertisement kills human created sights. Nearby Venice there's so much interesting stuff and small cities, a bit further are big cities. None of them really struggles with tourists as much as Venice. Maybe you'll see a huge line for Firenze Duomo but that's it, streets and other sights are…

> I won't argue about off topic issues, but I don't think mass tourism is killing any sights.

One could argue that, by accounting for eight per cent of the world’s carbon emissions, tourism is killing the sights along with the planet.

Re: The backlash against overtourism

#248

Post by BadassFractal »

robben1234 wrote: post #42

I won't argue about off topic issues, but I don't think mass tourism is killing any sights. Ignorance kills natural sights, over advertisement kills human created sights. Nearby Venice there's so much interesting stuff and small cities, a bit further are big cities. None of them really struggles with tourists as much as Venice. Maybe you'll see a huge line for Firenze Duomo but that's it, streets and other sights are…

I wonder how much of tourism is social prestige signaling. As in: "I've been to place X, have you been to place x?". It's sort of like going to TED conferences, it makes middle class people feel good about themselves and show prestige with their peers.

Re: The backlash against overtourism

#249

Post by BadassFractal »

paganel wrote: post #235
CaptainZapp wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One of the greatest cities in northern Italy is Torino. While medieval and in a certain shabby way as attractive as Firenze they only get a small percentage of the tourists.

I'd add Trieste to the list, an unique combination of Austro-Hungarian architecture and Italian feeling.

Trieste is rather underrated. I agree it's an incredible spot, with barely any tourists, especially during the colder months.

Re: The backlash against overtourism

#250

Post by thatfrenchguy »

csomar wrote: post #120

Couldn't this be a failure from the European cities in question? While European countries are on the top of the list, the cities? Not that much. The first one is Bangkok. With around 22 million tourists. Paris is third with 18 million. Interestingly, Paris has more things to see, a more extensive metro system (actually waaa..y more extensive). Yet, I seem to be more bothered by tourists in Paris than in Bangkok. In B…

Paris's actually fine if you don't go to the tourist areas (and that's amazing). I never see any tourists when I'm there (thank you for not ruining the other neighbourhoods)
Post reply on HN