20 ms·
I feel like an under-discussed consequence of the current administration is how deeply these choices will harm tourism. Travel is a big part of our economy. A 2
by lordleft 1y ago
I feel like an under-discussed consequence of the current administration is how deeply these choices will harm tourism. Travel is a big part of our economy. A 250 dollar fee is yet another reason to choose Europe or Asia or your own country over the US.
- x86x87 1y agoit's almost like they don't want tourists.
- oceansky 1y agoThen why host the World Cup?
- pjc50 1y agoAgreed under a previous administration. Besides, oligarchs like football, that's why it was hosted in Qatar previously.
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- ebiester 1y agoFIFA is looking at moving our matches to Canada. I don't think this administration was that interested in hosting a global event.
- keyringlight 1y agoAnd the Olympics in 2028
- hobofan 1y ago... from "certain" countries. Many "desirable" countries have visa-waiver programs where I would assume they would be unaffected.
- swat535 1y agoNot just from certain countries but they only want certain people from certain countries.
- koolba 1y agoOr they want to have one more chip to play with when negotiating trade deals.
- ASalazarMX 1y agoLike a child banging their head on the wall because you won't let them use their iPad. At some point people start calling your bluffs.
- red-iron-pine 1y agoT A C O
- jabjq 1y agoI thought the position of HN was that tourism is bad.
- general1726 1y agoIt is for visa, which can't be waived. ESTA is a visa waiver, therefor would not apply.
- mattnewton 1y agoMy read - this administration seems to be betting that behaviors will change slowly enough and America has enough of a draw still that they can extract more concessions, both in the market (with tariffs), and with measures like this in the near term, without a collapse in tourism or middle class consumerism. They must believe that the long term effects will change slowly enough, or the effects will be concentrated on the poorest, and so they can just ignored as they won't be electorally punished for them. I disagree with the policies personally but politically I don't know if their calculation is wrong.
- seanmcdirmid 1y ago> I disagree with the policies personally but politically I don't know if their calculation is wrong. The current administration is really deluded about the prominence and draw it thinks America still has. They had the misconception, for example, that China was much more dependent on trade with the USA rather than the 2% impact that the numbers actually suggested. They are simply making all of their calculations with factually incorrect premises along with bad math.
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- Henchman21 1y agoTheir purpose is to destroy the US. This helps that goal. You must look at every action this admin takes… its the only thing that consistently makes any sense at all.
- voisin 1y agoWhy would they make this their purpose?
- locopati 1y agoRussian assets?
- moribvndvs 1y agoTo break it apart, buy it up cheap, and rebuild it in their image.
- Henchman21 1y agoUse your imagination? Perhaps include the widely publicized idea that Trump is in fact a Russian asset? Does that shed any light on this for you?
- illiac786 1y ago“Use your imagination”? Have facts become that irrelevant for you? Ironically, you are mimicking the one you despise, in that regard.
- Henchman21 1y agoHonestly if, at this point you can’t see it, you’re willfully ignoring it. We have nearly a decade of public pronouncements, hateful rhetoric, and investigations into behavior that neatly skirts legal definitions of treason. So yes, if you can’t see it? Use your fucking imagination. Either that or open your eyes.
- 1y ago
- fuckinpuppers 1y agoThey probably think that if $250 is a showstopper to your travel budget you’re undesirable anyway. They want those $5 million gold card type people. You know the ones who will “create jobs” and “invest” in things that will help the country. (Eye roll)