5 ms·

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 spe

by Fuxy 8y ago

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 the foot.

knieveltech 8y ago
What is good for the economy (short term) and what is good for people (long term) are frequently not the same things.
- Fuxy 8y ago
  As far as I'm aware tourism is not a short term thing there will always be tourists coming and leaving this is an constant revenue steam in its own right. So I don't get what you mean.
  - galfarragem 8y ago
    He means that locals will be kicked out from their homes - or if they are luckier/smarter - will be living as animals in a zoo. Mass tourism is dystopic. Living in a touristic area is like living in Disneyland: everything is fake. Did you ever wonder why 'experienced' tourists (we like to call ourselves travellers) don't like touristic areas?
  - cr1895 8y ago
    >this is an constant revenue steam in its own right. Indeed. Amsterdam, for example, is enriched by its diverse trinket shops selling "XXX" poof ball hats and crass t-shirts, and the options for stale pizza, cold waffles and Nutella crepes have never been so plentiful.
  - knieveltech 8y ago
    I am saying that using economic activity to gauge positive impact on society is utterly misguided. Consider: we are currently living in an age of robust economic growth and international trade, historic levels of income inequality, and are in the midst of a global mass extinction event with the very real possibility of climate change rendering human civilization in it's current form impossible.
Daishiman 8y ago
So... it's not all about money. You can refuse to accept money from sources which are really not all that cracked up (because the margins in tourism are not great actually) and accept people for humanitarian reasons. If you're not 14 or completely driven by greed you can understand the reasoning behind this.
- Fuxy 8y ago
  Being a humanitarian is admirable but at the end of the day it's a luxury that may or may not pay off in the long run. Just the same way you don't give your money to a beggar on the street when you can barely afford to survives yourself the employment of personal boundaries is important for humans and countries. So given that Italy is not doing so well at the moment I kind of have to question their thinking reducing their revenue stream in favour if immigrants. The assumption that all immigration is good immigration is not true.
  - kranner 8y ago
    Humanitarianism or other altruism doesn’t have to pay off at all. That is not a measure by which to evaluate it.
    - Fuxy 8y ago
      You're right it doesn't but everyone seems to assume it will which is quite baffling.
      - kranner 8y ago
        You seem to be looking at the economic payoff alone, whereas others are talking about the intrinsic payoff, i.e., that it is worthwhile to help refugees even if it's a net economic loss.
        Fuxy 8y ago
        No I'm looking at the big picture and given the amount of refugees allowed in it is a major loss economically and culturally in the short term and quite likely in the long term as well. The US did immigration right before only allowing in people when there was a need for workers and only allow predominantly cultures that would attempt to integrate and get along with the existing population. The current policy allows unregulated areas (no go zones) to exist where the refugees make the laws; police are afraid to go in and they are not required to integrate into society plus their cultural and religious beliefs create a propensity for hostility against the locals/infidels. Honestly it's a powder keg waiting to explode and given the rise of terrorist attacks in Europe it's getting there at a short and steady pace. It will take generations before their views will be moderate enough for them to be able to get along with the local population and the higher the amount of people and the longer they are kept in their echo chamber the longer it will take. In the mean time we will see a rise in draconian Sharia law type laws since they will represent a considerable amount of the voting population just like in the UK. See Lauren Southern held under terrorism act for social experiment [1] Mind you the UK allowed the change to be gradual and their local Muslim population is quite moderate over all yet this is still happening. [1](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GJt7oZSONiU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GJt7oZSONiU) Anybody see the irony of a weak white canadian girl held under a terrorism act for distributing a bunch of fliers with some text on it?
empath75 8y ago
> in favour of some refugees the government will have to spend a large amount of money on https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-018-05507-0 https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-018-05507-0 Stop repeating this lie.
- draven 8y ago
  From the article: "To assess nations’ economic well-being, the researchers measured average incomes over the years by dividing a country’s gross domestic product (GDP) by the size of its population." How will that give you the average income?
bantunes 8y ago
Maybe the citizens find that, if they have to put up with someone, they prefer to put up with people escaping dire living conditions (that will, statistically, go on to strengthen their economy in the long term). What does that tell you about what citizens think of tourists? I can tell you that loud AirBnB hosts or the foreigners using my country as a landfill for their money, pricing people out of the inner cities, are not welcome.
Aunche 8y ago
Tourism dollars do a lot less for the local economy than one might expect. Tourist destinations like the Caribbean and Bali have some of the worst income disparity in the world. Tourism provides utility to the tourists, but nothing in return for the locals. Doctors and electricians get paid more to serve tourists than their home communities. Worst of all is that a lot of children are incentivized to sell things to tourists than to finish school.
- Dirlewanger 8y ago
  Sounds like a great thing for the government to solve, to institute some sort of incentive to families to send their kids to school. Where are those funds coming from? Probably tourism, which makes up a majority of their tax revenue...and now we see how difficult the problem is.
csomar 8y ago
I don't think they mean it literally but it is rather an indirect "You are just as worse as the refugees if not worse".
- cr1895 8y ago
  That is not what "refugees welcome" implies.
thinkingemote 8y ago
To understand it better, there is a similarity in the USA. In San Francisco there are similar signs saying "tech workers out, refugees welcome!"
drb91 8y ago
Adding people to an economy grows the economy.

by Fuxy 8y ago

knieveltech 8y ago

What is good for the economy (short term) and what is good for people (long term) are frequently not the same things.

Fuxy 8y ago
As far as I'm aware tourism is not a short term thing there will always be tourists coming and leaving this is an constant revenue steam in its own right. So I don't get what you mean.
- galfarragem 8y ago
  He means that locals will be kicked out from their homes - or if they are luckier/smarter - will be living as animals in a zoo. Mass tourism is dystopic. Living in a touristic area is like living in Disneyland: everything is fake. Did you ever wonder why 'experienced' tourists (we like to call ourselves travellers) don't like touristic areas?
- cr1895 8y ago
  >this is an constant revenue steam in its own right. Indeed. Amsterdam, for example, is enriched by its diverse trinket shops selling "XXX" poof ball hats and crass t-shirts, and the options for stale pizza, cold waffles and Nutella crepes have never been so plentiful.
- knieveltech 8y ago
  I am saying that using economic activity to gauge positive impact on society is utterly misguided. Consider: we are currently living in an age of robust economic growth and international trade, historic levels of income inequality, and are in the midst of a global mass extinction event with the very real possibility of climate change rendering human civilization in it's current form impossible.

Daishiman 8y ago

So... it's not all about money. You can refuse to accept money from sources which are really not all that cracked up (because the margins in tourism are not great actually) and accept people for humanitarian reasons. If you're not 14 or completely driven by greed you can understand the reasoning behind this.

Fuxy 8y ago
Being a humanitarian is admirable but at the end of the day it's a luxury that may or may not pay off in the long run. Just the same way you don't give your money to a beggar on the street when you can barely afford to survives yourself the employment of personal boundaries is important for humans and countries. So given that Italy is not doing so well at the moment I kind of have to question their thinking reducing their revenue stream in favour if immigrants. The assumption that all immigration is good immigration is not true.
- kranner 8y ago
  Humanitarianism or other altruism doesn’t have to pay off at all. That is not a measure by which to evaluate it.
  - Fuxy 8y ago
    You're right it doesn't but everyone seems to assume it will which is quite baffling.
    - kranner 8y ago
      You seem to be looking at the economic payoff alone, whereas others are talking about the intrinsic payoff, i.e., that it is worthwhile to help refugees even if it's a net economic loss.
      - Fuxy 8y ago
        No I'm looking at the big picture and given the amount of refugees allowed in it is a major loss economically and culturally in the short term and quite likely in the long term as well. The US did immigration right before only allowing in people when there was a need for workers and only allow predominantly cultures that would attempt to integrate and get along with the existing population. The current policy allows unregulated areas (no go zones) to exist where the refugees make the laws; police are afraid to go in and they are not required to integrate into society plus their cultural and religious beliefs create a propensity for hostility against the locals/infidels. Honestly it's a powder keg waiting to explode and given the rise of terrorist attacks in Europe it's getting there at a short and steady pace. It will take generations before their views will be moderate enough for them to be able to get along with the local population and the higher the amount of people and the longer they are kept in their echo chamber the longer it will take. In the mean time we will see a rise in draconian Sharia law type laws since they will represent a considerable amount of the voting population just like in the UK. See Lauren Southern held under terrorism act for social experiment [1] Mind you the UK allowed the change to be gradual and their local Muslim population is quite moderate over all yet this is still happening. [1](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GJt7oZSONiU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GJt7oZSONiU) Anybody see the irony of a weak white canadian girl held under a terrorism act for distributing a bunch of fliers with some text on it?

empath75 8y ago

> in favour of some refugees the government will have to spend a large amount of money on https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-018-05507-0 https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-018-05507-0 Stop repeating this lie.

draven 8y ago
From the article: "To assess nations’ economic well-being, the researchers measured average incomes over the years by dividing a country’s gross domestic product (GDP) by the size of its population." How will that give you the average income?

bantunes 8y ago

Maybe the citizens find that, if they have to put up with someone, they prefer to put up with people escaping dire living conditions (that will, statistically, go on to strengthen their economy in the long term). What does that tell you about what citizens think of tourists? I can tell you that loud AirBnB hosts or the foreigners using my country as a landfill for their money, pricing people out of the inner cities, are not welcome.

Aunche 8y ago

Tourism dollars do a lot less for the local economy than one might expect. Tourist destinations like the Caribbean and Bali have some of the worst income disparity in the world. Tourism provides utility to the tourists, but nothing in return for the locals. Doctors and electricians get paid more to serve tourists than their home communities. Worst of all is that a lot of children are incentivized to sell things to tourists than to finish school.

Dirlewanger 8y ago
Sounds like a great thing for the government to solve, to institute some sort of incentive to families to send their kids to school. Where are those funds coming from? Probably tourism, which makes up a majority of their tax revenue...and now we see how difficult the problem is.

csomar 8y ago

I don't think they mean it literally but it is rather an indirect "You are just as worse as the refugees if not worse".

cr1895 8y ago
That is not what "refugees welcome" implies.

thinkingemote 8y ago

To understand it better, there is a similarity in the USA. In San Francisco there are similar signs saying "tech workers out, refugees welcome!"

drb91 8y ago

Adding people to an economy grows the economy.