3 ms·

Gross. Gross gross gross. Tourists already get taxed. Hotel taxes are huge. It sucks. Traveling for conferences to meet new people and learn new things is sooo

Gross. Gross gross gross. Tourists already get taxed. Hotel taxes are huge. It sucks. Traveling for conferences to meet new people and learn new things is soooo expensive and tourist taxes are a big part of why. Tourist taxes are how you destroy diversity and trap people into the tiny bubble in which they were born. We should be striving for the opposite.

viraptor 8y ago
A good solution here seems to be - don't organise conferences in places which are full of tourists already. You want to meet new people and learn? Great - book a country hotel and transport from the airport, or maybe a place in some town with reasonable plane connections. You want to also see the city? You're a tourist.
- forrestthewoods 8y ago
  I could not possibly disagree more. Conferences are almost always a split of local and non-local attendees. Forcing conferences to be exclusively non-local attendees makes zero sense. It would be even more expensive, in absolute dollars and environmental cost, to have everyone travel to the middle of Nebraska. I know it's not your intent, but your stance here reeks of elistism, xenophobia, and othering. Extrapolating your worldview I don't know why a country hotel would, or even should, be accommodating. > don't organise conferences in places which are full of tourists already. This is absurd. Conferences are about people. Places with a lot of people will naturally have those people come together for events. Things that make a place attractive to live can also make it an attractive place to visit. Travel is so expensive it's almost crazy NOT to make the most out of your trip. Adding a day or two of tourism to a multi-day work or education trip is more than reasonable.
  - jaggederest 8y ago
    It's funny, because I've actually been contemplating the total costs of having conferences in areas outside the SF bay, and it's probably net cheaper to have people fly to the middle of nowhere AND rent a hotel PLUS conference space, than it is to simply rent the conference space in SF. Cost of living has grown so large that it's almost cheaper to fly into SFO every day from a regional airport instead of renting a hotel room.
  - viraptor 8y ago
    It's not a recipe for all conferences and it will not work for all of them. It's a response to a specific issue - conferences in tourist cities are expensive. Really large conferences are almost entirely non-local anyway. If you want to do work+fun trip, then a tourist destination could be great - but you have to be prepared to pay for it. (Or go to a nearby tourist place) If you want conferences for locals, they will always happen anyway. The rest of your accusations don't make sense to me. How can something for mostly non-locals be xenophobic? How is an expensive conference in a big city less elitist (who can afford to live there?) than one outside of it?
  - isostatic 8y ago
    > Travel is so expensive it's almost crazy NOT to make the most out of your trip. And you’re worried about an extra $5 a night to pay for tourist infrastructure?
longerthoughts 8y ago
Who is avoiding travel because of tourist taxes? The relative cost of pre-tax airfare, lodging, etc. is exceptionally high relative to the typical hotel tax, for example. When did you last decide not to attend a conference because the destination’s tourist taxes were prohibitively high?
- forrestthewoods 8y ago
  Who is avoiding travel because of costs? Almost everyone. How much would a trip's cost be reduced with the elimination of tourist taxes? Totally depends. It's not the biggest cost. But it ain't zero either. They call it nickel-and-dime for a reason.
  - azahk 8y ago
    >Who is avoiding travel because of costs? Almost everyone. Nice dodge there, Neo
  - longerthoughts 8y ago
    I very clearly did not ask who avoids travel because of total costs. The question is in what case does somebody avoid booking a trip that they otherwise would’ve taken because they just can’t stomach the tourist taxes once they’re already paying hundreds for flights and lodging?
    - forrestthewoods 8y ago
      Most people don't even know how much they're paying in tourist taxes. I certainly don't. It's a hard-to-see line item on lodging, attractions, event space, etc. What's the total cost? I don't know. Probably more than 1 percent and less than 5? How many more people would travel if costs were reduced by 5 percent? More than zero, less than a lot. I was responding to a post arguing for MORE tourist taxes. I think we should we have less. https://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/07/business/07taxes.html https://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/07/business/07taxes.html
      - 8y ago
isostatic 8y ago
What city has a high tourist tax that’s even 30% of the total cost of a typical hotel. I just checked in Rome. I can get a room for €88 for two, €8, or 9%, of which is the city tax.

viraptor 8y ago

A good solution here seems to be - don't organise conferences in places which are full of tourists already. You want to meet new people and learn? Great - book a country hotel and transport from the airport, or maybe a place in some town with reasonable plane connections. You want to also see the city? You're a tourist.

forrestthewoods 8y ago
I could not possibly disagree more. Conferences are almost always a split of local and non-local attendees. Forcing conferences to be exclusively non-local attendees makes zero sense. It would be even more expensive, in absolute dollars and environmental cost, to have everyone travel to the middle of Nebraska. I know it's not your intent, but your stance here reeks of elistism, xenophobia, and othering. Extrapolating your worldview I don't know why a country hotel would, or even should, be accommodating. > don't organise conferences in places which are full of tourists already. This is absurd. Conferences are about people. Places with a lot of people will naturally have those people come together for events. Things that make a place attractive to live can also make it an attractive place to visit. Travel is so expensive it's almost crazy NOT to make the most out of your trip. Adding a day or two of tourism to a multi-day work or education trip is more than reasonable.
- jaggederest 8y ago
  It's funny, because I've actually been contemplating the total costs of having conferences in areas outside the SF bay, and it's probably net cheaper to have people fly to the middle of nowhere AND rent a hotel PLUS conference space, than it is to simply rent the conference space in SF. Cost of living has grown so large that it's almost cheaper to fly into SFO every day from a regional airport instead of renting a hotel room.
- viraptor 8y ago
  It's not a recipe for all conferences and it will not work for all of them. It's a response to a specific issue - conferences in tourist cities are expensive. Really large conferences are almost entirely non-local anyway. If you want to do work+fun trip, then a tourist destination could be great - but you have to be prepared to pay for it. (Or go to a nearby tourist place) If you want conferences for locals, they will always happen anyway. The rest of your accusations don't make sense to me. How can something for mostly non-locals be xenophobic? How is an expensive conference in a big city less elitist (who can afford to live there?) than one outside of it?
- isostatic 8y ago
  > Travel is so expensive it's almost crazy NOT to make the most out of your trip. And you’re worried about an extra $5 a night to pay for tourist infrastructure?

longerthoughts 8y ago

Who is avoiding travel because of tourist taxes? The relative cost of pre-tax airfare, lodging, etc. is exceptionally high relative to the typical hotel tax, for example. When did you last decide not to attend a conference because the destination’s tourist taxes were prohibitively high?

forrestthewoods 8y ago
Who is avoiding travel because of costs? Almost everyone. How much would a trip's cost be reduced with the elimination of tourist taxes? Totally depends. It's not the biggest cost. But it ain't zero either. They call it nickel-and-dime for a reason.
- azahk 8y ago
  >Who is avoiding travel because of costs? Almost everyone. Nice dodge there, Neo
- longerthoughts 8y ago
  I very clearly did not ask who avoids travel because of total costs. The question is in what case does somebody avoid booking a trip that they otherwise would’ve taken because they just can’t stomach the tourist taxes once they’re already paying hundreds for flights and lodging?
  - forrestthewoods 8y ago
    Most people don't even know how much they're paying in tourist taxes. I certainly don't. It's a hard-to-see line item on lodging, attractions, event space, etc. What's the total cost? I don't know. Probably more than 1 percent and less than 5? How many more people would travel if costs were reduced by 5 percent? More than zero, less than a lot. I was responding to a post arguing for MORE tourist taxes. I think we should we have less. https://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/07/business/07taxes.html https://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/07/business/07taxes.html
    - 8y ago

isostatic 8y ago

What city has a high tourist tax that’s even 30% of the total cost of a typical hotel. I just checked in Rome. I can get a room for €88 for two, €8, or 9%, of which is the city tax.