4 ms·
It's a different equilibrium though, where tourists are paying daily rates instead of locals paying monthly
by tribune 8y ago
It's a different equilibrium though, where tourists are paying daily rates instead of locals paying monthly
- quotemstr 8y agoSo? Are tourist utility-hours somehow different from resident utility-hours?
- bobthepanda 8y agoResidents provide stability to a polity's long term tax base, and are also the source of votes that politicians of said polity need to get re-elected. So, unless you want wild, cyclical swings in your polity's finances, long-term is generally a better bet.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- devrelm 8y agoUh, yes? Clearly? If I'm on vacation, I'm not looking to save every single dime because I know that it's a one-off expense. If I'm looking for an apartment, I'll actively research to find the best deal because it's a long term commitment that could have huge ramifications on my finances years in the future. Case in point: I'd gladly pay $250 a night in a Manhattan hotel, because fuck it, I'm going on vacation, will only be there a few days, and don't want to spend an hour each day on the train getting to/from Newark just to save a couple hundred bucks. But I would have to be crazy to pay $250 a night for an equivalent (i.e. studio) apartment in Manhattan, regardless of how much time it cuts off of my commute.