View Full Version : Tourism - Good or Bad?
Santa
12-15-2005, 11:54 PM
To what extent is Tourism good or bad?
On my recent trip to the Canaries, i saw something i had never seen before - cities, villages built up soley for tourists - nothing else. Beaches created out of nothing, sand imported. Purelly for leasure...
fake
http://www.vicsl.com/img/playa_amadores.jpg
Canaries is not designed for growing anything, it is associated with mars - the first people that came there where also tourists from colonised south america - now africans die on the sea in little boats to get there as the gateway to europe. Whilst mega yachts lie in the harbour.
SOUTH OF FRANCE - most of the houses owned there are by people from northern europe. The life in the winter belongs to the locals - in summer to those not from there. - the locals hate this rape of their heritage yet they need it.
AMSTERDAM - the drug culture and its myth of sex pulls in hoards of tourists everyday - it ads to the cosmopolitanism of the city - yet the dutch are are capable of being both outward and inward and regard it as interesting.
NEW YORK - it is difficult to know who is what.
OSLO - only tourists in summer in search of viking heritage which never existed - this town needs it - badly.
PHUKET and all those places - causes thai men to change sex so that they can make money
Easy cheap travel has its effects,
in some cases good maybe even elevating, aiding the economy, in others it overdoses and kills culture and even geography.
Of course you can always avoid the crowd by going away from the easy axessable sites, but as soon as say that this is a beautiful spot to others it will...
The park behind my house is quiet all year round
In the long run i think tourism rapes culture.
yet in some cases it is essential (not only for the ego)
To what extent is Tourism good or bad?
http://img119.imageshack.us/img119/6834/fffff6kg.jpg
Good question.
The objectionable aspects of tourism are almost uniformly capitalist in nature, and devolve from that into the disrespect too often exhibited by the tourist.
There is a moneyed contempt which presents and offends.
The actual desire to see and experience new places and cultures cannot be faulted; it is the poor and boorish behavior of the tourist which begs mending.
The clash of a McDonalds against the backdrop of, say, Angkor Wat would easily serve to condemn the capitalist impulse.
Santa
12-16-2005, 02:08 AM
Brilliant summary J2k4 - yes i kmow this topic is over debated but you got it in one shot.
The actual desire to see and experience new places and cultures cannot be faulted; it is the poor and boorish behavior of the tourist which begs mending.
.
"Experience new places and cultures" - hmmm yes to what level - more like "displays" of "different cultures" on *stage*
i would never dream of going to USA to sea a "real life western" *performed* just as much as i dislike watching any performance for the sake of performance. Wherever it is in the world.
It is the fault of the Naive tourists that kill authenticity.
Business men travell the world every second, yet see 0% of the locallife, yet need reliable sleeping stations.
Should we blame the naive*?http://thegrob.tripod.com/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/ausie0021.jpg
It is capitalism with indiscriminate emphasis on profit and indiscriminate tourism which over-emphasizes convenience.
The "intrepid traveller" is become a relic, and safari-suits are just for looks. ;)
Cheese
12-16-2005, 11:05 AM
We have higher water rates here in Plymouth because of the tourists. I don't pay the bills so I could care less.
Barbarossa
12-16-2005, 11:16 AM
You can make tourism work for you, or it can be a blight in your community.
Look at Dubai. Their goal is to be the #1 tourist destination in the world. They are literally creating a tourist paradise out of the desert and the sea.
Look at Las Vegas. Tourists bring in the money to make it all work.
Other places get messed up. Like Southend.
GepperRankins
12-16-2005, 01:00 PM
i hate tourism and love it :dabs:
hobbes
12-16-2005, 02:07 PM
i hate tourism and love it :dabs:
I both am offended by and admire you for your stance on this weighty subject.:frusty:
I agree with Barby, nee colinmacaroniandcheese, that if life gives you lemons, make lemonade.
There are people who tell you why something cannot be achieved, and there are those who achieve it anyway.
The downside is perhaps the cheapening of something of real historic importance. As inappropriate as Jerry Springer quoting Shakespeare, would be the conversion of Stonehenge into a minature golf course.
MagicNakor
12-16-2005, 04:04 PM
I dislike it. j2 summarized it fairly well.
Additionally, the area in which I live is (roughly) 80% tourism-based. The unemployment rate here skyrockets after the tourists leave, as there's no feasible way to keep people working. As a result, many are either unemployed or underemployed for aproximately 6 months of the year. Many decisions are made that are for the tourists, yet the locals that are forced to remain yearround are completely neglected. Two examples that come easily to my mind are the "no free parking" decision and the "total lack of affordable housing but we'll build condos, cabanas, and summer homes" decision.
:shuriken:
This whole subject takes me back to the question I asked way-back-when about how different the world would be if WWII had never happened.
How the realization of what is technically possible affects what actually happens; the way it skews what is considered practical.
For example, the overwhelming capacity for pure production that has gone begging in search of markets, and the creation of other-than-natural travel destinations.
I'm blathering. :huh:
yonki
02-02-2006, 01:18 AM
To what extent is Tourism good or bad?
On my recent trip to the Canaries, i saw something i had never seen before - cities, villages built up soley for tourists - nothing else. Beaches created out of nothing, sand imported. Purelly for leasure...
fake
http://www.vicsl.com/img/playa_amadores.jpg
Canaries is not designed for growing anything, it is associated with mars - the first people that came there where also tourists from colonised south america - now africans die on the sea in little boats to get there as the gateway to europe. Whilst mega yachts lie in the harbour.
What are you talking about?Dont believe everything you see on TV.
JPaul
02-02-2006, 08:50 AM
The downside is perhaps the cheapening of something of real historic importance. As inappropriate as Jerry Springer quoting Shakespeare, would be the conversion of Stonehenge into a minature golf course.
Before anyone panics, hobbes made that up. Stonehenge has not become a miniature golf course (or even a minature one).
The sentiments expressed by j2 and others, whilst laudable, are the sentiments of (sophisticated) tourists. It would possibly be better to ask local residents of an area something like "Would you prefer to have your coastline left unspoiled, or feed your family".
The fact of the matter is, as j2 correctly points out, that the driving force behind this is economics. They need the tourist industry (I was going to say tourist dollar, but let's be honest most Americans spend their dollars in the USA) in order to provide income for other things.
I am quite sure that the locals do not want their heritage destroyed, any more than anyone else does. However they also want a decent standard of living. Given the choice I think most people would put their family's wellbeing above the shape of a nearby hill.
The downside is perhaps the cheapening of something of real historic importance. As inappropriate as Jerry Springer quoting Shakespeare, would be the conversion of Stonehenge into a minature golf course.
Before anyone panics, hobbes made that up. Stonehenge has not become a miniature golf course (or even a minature one).
The sentiments expressed by j2 and others, whilst laudable, are the sentiments of (sophisticated) tourists. It would possibly be better to ask local residents of an area something like "Would you prefer to have your coastline left unspoiled, or feed your family".
The fact of the matter is, as j2 correctly points out, that the driving force behind this is economics. They need the tourist industry (I was going to say tourist dollar, but let's be honest most Americans spend their dollars in the USA) in order to provide income for other things.
I am quite sure that the locals do not want their heritage destroyed, any more than anyone else does. However they also want a decent standard of living. Given the choice I think most people would put their family's wellbeing above the shape of a nearby hill.
'Tis a rather tight circle, and vicious, too.
JPaul
02-02-2006, 12:37 PM
Before anyone panics, hobbes made that up. Stonehenge has not become a miniature golf course (or even a minature one).
The sentiments expressed by j2 and others, whilst laudable, are the sentiments of (sophisticated) tourists. It would possibly be better to ask local residents of an area something like "Would you prefer to have your coastline left unspoiled, or feed your family".
The fact of the matter is, as j2 correctly points out, that the driving force behind this is economics. They need the tourist industry (I was going to say tourist dollar, but let's be honest most Americans spend their dollars in the USA) in order to provide income for other things.
I am quite sure that the locals do not want their heritage destroyed, any more than anyone else does. However they also want a decent standard of living. Given the choice I think most people would put their family's wellbeing above the shape of a nearby hill.
'Tis a rather tight circle, and vicious, too.
Stonehenge isn't vicious, it's a calendar ffs.
It's also not tight.
'Tis a rather tight circle, and vicious, too.
Stonehenge isn't vicious, it's a calendar ffs.
It's also not tight.
Tight enough, and vicious is in the eye of the the...um...tourist.
But I digress...:P
JPaul
02-02-2006, 09:57 PM
Stonehenge isn't vicious, it's a calendar ffs.
It's also not tight.
Tight enough, and vicious is in the eye of the the...um...tourist.
But I digress...:P
We don't even let tourists get within a brazillion yards of it now.
There's a wee rope, about 18inches off the ground, all the way round. That stops people getting in and .... looking at it close up.
hobbes
02-04-2006, 05:01 AM
Tight enough, and vicious is in the eye of the the...um...tourist.
But I digress...:P
We don't even let tourists get within a brazillion yards of it now.
There's a wee rope, about 18inches off the ground, all the way round. That stops people getting in and .... looking at it close up.
Was this after Clark W. Griswald made a wee miscalculation with his auto and made the stones tumble like a series of dominoes.
That is fact. I even saw the documentary.
http://www.geocities.com/danahillremembered/lampoonfam.jpg
Busyman
02-04-2006, 06:50 AM
It shouldn't be whether tourism is good or bad.
It's whether gentrification is good or bad.
Tourism can be just a small part of gentrification.
If I take an area of D.C. row houses and fix them up and a developer adds a Saks Fifth Avenue and somore upscale stores in the same area, I'm bound to attract higher income residents with tourism having squat to do with it. Property values get raised and lower income residents near that area get squeezed out.
Furthermore our esteemed Supreme Court says that if said developer wants to take my land and put higher priced dwellings on it, I have to GTFO. :dry:
JPaul
02-04-2006, 10:00 AM
We don't even let tourists get within a brazillion yards of it now.
There's a wee rope, about 18inches off the ground, all the way round. That stops people getting in and .... looking at it close up.
Was this after Clark W. Griswald made a wee miscalculation with his auto and made the stones tumble like a series of dominoes.
That is fact. I even saw the documentary.
http://www.geocities.com/danahillremembered/lampoonfam.jpg
Indeed.
It took an age to put back in place. Given that we stayed with the original spirit and used druids, sans modern machinery, to carry out the contract.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/84/Druids,_in_the_early_morning_glow_of_the_sun.jpg/250px-Druids,_in_the_early_morning_glow_of_the_sun.jpg
They also installed the vital wee rope, to prevent similar accidental damage re-occuring.
They also installed the vital wee rope, to prevent similar accidental damage re-occuring.I think you've missed the true purpose of the said rope. It's actually a very cunning anti-theft device.
JPaul
02-04-2006, 04:44 PM
They also installed the vital wee rope, to prevent similar accidental damage re-occuring.I think you've missed the true purpose of the said rope. It's actually a very cunning anti-theft device.
:O cunning indeed.
It works too, there is no record of Stonehenge ever having been stolen.
I think you've missed the true purpose of the said rope. It's actually a very cunning anti-theft device.
:O cunning indeed.
It works too, there is no record of Stonehenge ever having been stolen.
Hmmm.
How does Olde Druid Security, LTD, sound?
Could be my branch in the U.K. ...:)
JPaul
02-04-2006, 06:42 PM
:O cunning indeed.
It works too, there is no record of Stonehenge ever having been stolen.
Hmmm.
How does Olde Druid Security, LTD, sound?
Could be my branch in the U.K. ...:)
Nah, we've got it covered with the wee rope 18 inches of the ground, mate.
Thanks for the tender thoughts tho'.
Hmmm.
How does Olde Druid Security, LTD, sound?
Could be my branch in the U.K. ...:)
Nah, we've got it covered with the wee rope 18 inches of the ground, mate.
The rope would be accentuated rather nicely by commensurate vertically-challenged Druid accoutrement, I think. :huh:
Ah, but you need to remember that the rope stops elephants. ;)
Ah, but you need to remember that the rope stops elephants. ;)
Such abundant wildlife you have over there.
In any case, I gotta get some of that rope; I could replace a few employees.
JPaul
02-04-2006, 09:13 PM
Ah, but you need to remember that the rope stops elephants. ;)
Such abundant wildlife you have over there.
In any case, I gotta get some of that rope; I could replace a few employees.
You could lynx them :blink:
Such abundant wildlife you have over there.
In any case, I gotta get some of that rope; I could replace a few employees.
You could lynx them :blink:
Not my style, sir.
I prefer to burn them at the stake, in order to satiate my urge to inflict pain, which I would videotape and share with you all. :devil:
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.