You're viewing a single thread.
Some of these are legit, but the money ones are bullshit. Especially entrance fees to national monuments. I think of it not as an extra charge for tourists, but as a discount for locals.
I live in the US, but was able to travel to India 25 years ago. It was an unforgettable experience for me, and I would love to return someday. I must say however, that my wife is less excited by the prospect. I would like to think that India's reputation along these lines is both exaggerated and improving.
Indeed, I think that people in a country should be able to see their national monuments/treasures at a reduced cost. It's pretty likely that at some point their taxes paid for some of it, and making such things only for tourists is lame.
During Covid here (Canada), locals were given free access to national park, and the restricted tourist traffic meant that people were actually able to find camping spots (many of them get gobbled up and pre-booked by tourism agencies/bots). A lot of people realized there was a lot of the country that they had been missing simply because the industry prioritized tourists over locals. If you're going to a country as a tourist, budget and plan to pay as a tourist!
The money one would be perfectly fine if it was an explicitly stated official policy where Indians get cheaper access to their own tourist attractions and cultural sites. I think it probably starts to get annoying if everything you pay for is marked up by some amount on the spot by chancers who are taking advantage of your naivety. I haven't been to India so I don't know if this is a big problem or a rare occurrence, but I have heard of it happening before, typically in poorer countries.
Lifting people out of poverty by giving them honest jobs with livable wages is probably the only way to fix this, because poverty creates desperation and desperation can lead some people to petty theft, or a host of other personal and social problems.
I guess I just don't care that much. Nobody forced you to go visit the country, and buy trinkets or visit landmarks. If the price is too high, either negotiate or don't pay it. I've seen so many people getting upset about whether they are being 'screwed' out of what amounts to a dollar or two.
Well yeah, nobody is forcing you to visit any country.
But if I voluntarily travel somewhere and feel like I'm constantly battling against the risk-reward schemes of dishonest merchants (who aren't just selling trinkets or tickets to toueist attractions, but also potentially inflating the price of basic things like food, drinks and transportation at every opportunity), I'm personally far less likely to have a good time or return for a second visit. The amount of money isn't even the problem, it's the feeling of being taken advantage of or needing to haggle over a bottle of water.
(Again, I haven't been to India so I have no clue to what degree this is or isn't a problem.)
If you don't care then that's fine, but I'd rather spend 10x the money traveling to a place where I have friendly and honest interactions than save money by visiting a place where everybody is looking at me like a potential mark or some kind of loot goblin. That's all I'm saying.
This is more about how you feel. How would you know if you're being overcharged? If you can't overcome that feeling that people are constantly out to take advantage of you, then you're gonna have a bad time. Like I said, the best way to approach transactions in unfamiliar settings is to ask yourself "is this worth it to me", rather than asking yourself "would locals pay this much?". You can always walk away. If the vendor wants the sale, they'll let you know.
Wow your argument is not great.
Put yourself in the USA, a person in front of you gets charged $5 for a coke, you see this transaction happen.
Then you get to the stand and he says $10 for a coke... how would you feel?
I mean, I live here. It would be weird, and I'd probably ask why it's a different price. Depending on the answer, I might or might not buy the coke.
I do not understand your argumentation.
The quora question is about how to attract more international tourists. People stated why they avoid visiting, you said "if you don't like it don't come".
I will flip it back to you. If you don't like the complaints then don't ask for international tourists to come.
This is one person's answer to that question. Obviously, there are a lot of people who share similar opinions. I do think it is worth exploring or expanding the question itself though. Some examples of relevant questions:
-What kind of tourist are you trying to attract?
-How to ensure that the benefits of tourism are enjoyed by those who live and work in popular tourist areas?
The question as asked, invites any number of terrible answers. If your goal is simply to increase the number of foreigners, you might, for example, subsidize international flights. Fly to India for $250!
That's just semantics, like businesses being banned from giving a surcharge for using a credit card, but they can give a discount for cash. It amounts to the same thing.
I guess. But either is fine with me. Credit cards have leverage over small businesses who often have tight margins. As for up-charging tourists who visit places in foreign countries, I think of it as a subsidy. If they normalized the entrance fees so that all paid the same, and the total maintenance costs were met-- this may well 'price out' poorer locals. A nicer solution might be income-based, but how would you verify such information at a park entrance?
I also want to add that where I live in California, there are some local attractions that offer discounts to local residents. I really can't understand the fuss.
A lot of places even in the US give discounts to locals. And locals often pay taxes that help support these places. So really it makes sense that locals get a discount, or tourist get a surcharge. However you wanna call it.
Ok, but if they were being even kind of accurate, the numbers aren't akin to a discount. One is equivalent to about one quarter dollar, vs the other being the equivalent of nine dollars. That's gouging, not a locals discount.
It's an apples to oranges comparison, though, since in India there is a much lower local median income than tourist median income. In the US, tourists and locals are likely to have near parity in income. And it's worth putting some perspective on it, that it's US$9 to visit a stunning world famous jewel of India. If someone pays to travel all that way and is complaining about coughing up US$9 then I don't know what to say.
I think of it not as an extra charge for tourists, but as a discount for locals.
Of course the tourist who can obviously afford to spend hundreds if not thousands of dollars on a vacation doesn't want to be asked to spend 5 more fucking dollars on something and would rather shift the responsibility on to the locals. But why? When locals probably hardly ever go, and tourists are the one they not only depend on for income, but who are the ones putting the added strain on the local infrastructure?
Because you're a cheap selfish privileged yet oblivious individual who is there because you can get a lot more for a lot less money, and some just don't care why or how or who is really paying the price, that's why.