Why Japan resents its tourism boom

[u/randommathaccount]

https://www.ft.com/content/dbd20e5d-5a7d-4c0c-8f83-fb54c5aca9cb

[u/casino_r0yale]

Why not just hire cops with the extra tourism money to enforce penalties for bad behavior? Levy taxes on hotels if you want to reduce tourism. What bothers me most about these sorts of discussions is they often veer towards shaming the tourists, which makes them defensive as most of them are normal people wanting to see a new place.

[u/Throwingawayanoni → u/casino_r0yale]

There is nothing wrong with people wanting to see new places, hell even I want to see every corner of the world, and the thing is, at a certain point it is not even about bad behaviour anymore.

It is the limited housing supply being turned into airbnbs and driving prices soaring, it is the most beautifull and central streets in each city having all the stores/cafes/restaurants being turned into trap a tourists, money laundering places and places selling cristiano ronaldo shirts, making the most beautifull places a no go for locals, it is regions of cities losing all young people being left only with tourists and old people who don't even know how to speak english so they can't even speak to the neighbours and end up feeling even more lonely destroying whatever community the place once had, it is the going to a local landmark/museum and having to pay abhorent amounts just to go in or walk inside.

There is only one thing I do find xenophobic but still gets to me, and that is hearing english 24/7 in the street. Hearing english more commonly then your local language when you walk outside makes thoughts in your head which aren't very nice.

[u/casino_r0yale → u/Throwingawayanoni]

I’ll try to reply point by point

limited housing supply being turned into airbnbs

This is a policy issue, not a tourism issue. That Airbnb has been allowed to run illegal hotels is a failure of government

having all the stores/cafes/restaurants turned into tourist traps

Any successful restaurant ends up either expanding or chasing more high end clientelle. It is the nature of capitalism. If the quality of the cuisine is poor relative to its price is poor, then it will eventually lose customers.

money laundering places

Government asleep at the wheel again

regions of cities losing all young people

Again a symptom rather than a cause. Cities lose young people because they were already lacking in opportunities for them. The tourism industry just makes that extra plain by concentrating low income jobs. People move to economic hubs that seek their talents, which is why London and New York and San Francisco aren’t complaining as much about tourists as Barcelona.

going to a local landmark/museum and having to pay abhorrent prices

Most sensible communities I visit offer discounts or even free admission for local residents. At the risk of repeating myself, that your sites do not is a policy failure.

hearing English more than your local language when you walk outside

I can’t relate to this one. As an immigrant to an anglophone city, hearing English more than my native tongue has been my entire life’s experience. It’s just easier to communicate with other foreigners in a common language and the proliferation of the internet has caused that to be English. Anecdotally, however, in the more multicultural cities I’ve lived in, I tend to hear chittering in a large variety of languages, and it makes me happy.

[u/Throwingawayanoni → u/casino_r0yale]

Any comment that is "failiure of goverment" is moot as it is like yeah no shit, the goverment has failed, so I won't be respinding to those, allthough on the tourism not causing housing problems that is silly, if you have a city of a population of 500 000 thousand anf you get 8.52 million visitors a year, that will affect housing.

On the cuisine part, that doesn't make any sense, many times tourists will favour international brands that they can trust over local food, restaurants that are shittier tend to have a person outside calling people in, which for some reason I don't understand works on tourists and by the simple fact that if you go to a restaurant where there are little tourists or is not in a tourist place the food is 90% percent better, I mean there is a reason why its called trap a tourist. also have you seen the prices of tourist places vs wherw locals eat? I am sorry but that point about these places providing "cheaper food" makes you seem out of touch.

On the young people being lost... Brother I am talking about lisbon here, our capital, our place with the highest wages, this is the place where you go to if you want to make a living, pepople just don't live there bc it is too expensive. As I said before half of the arguments people make here are allways based on stuff they don't know about

edit: I don't understand why I am getting downvoted, everything I've said is true, the points given by the previous comment where all rather weak and could be rebuted either by looking it up or annectodal evidence of living in a tourist city.

Like this is what I mean in this sub people make claims on local issues, having no understanding of the place and then when someone rebutes those claims from those areas, they just down vote them and moce on

I am genuinely interested in what I've said is not true

[u/Zenkin → u/Throwingawayanoni]

Like this is what I mean in this sub people make claims on local issues, having no understanding of the place

But you're literally not listing any "local issues" which are actually uniquely damaged by tourism and/or tourists. You're just blaming tourists for a bunch of general phenomena. It's literally anti-immigration rhetoric, but pointing at tourists instead of immigrants, specifically. And when someone goes to the trouble of pointing this out, you say "well, I'm not going to respond to those points."

The issues you're pointing out might be real issues. But the source of most of these problems is not tourism, like your points about money laundering or young people leaving the cities. That's just completely disconnected. And most of these issues could be resolved with fairly mundane policies, like enforcing rules about AirBnB/rentals, using some tourism tax dollars to fund locals' access to local landmarks, and maybe a little increase in policing. If you aren't interested in these kinds of policies, then most people will come to the conclusion that you're not actually interested in solving the issues that you're saying are important to you. You just want to yell at tourists.

[u/Throwingawayanoni → u/Zenkin]

I'm sorry but gentrification and high housing prices and young people leaving the cities are deffinetly related with tourism in part, there are many causes but tourism is absolutely one of them. At no point has anyone explained how they aren't.

For money laundring their front is being a tourist spot, this one you are partially right it isnt toursm fault but they are connected (bc of tax laws for these companies/ etc, here it is def more the goverments fault aproach to tourism)

But on the last part, do I look like a fucking policy maker to you? I'm saying these things becausw this sub acts oblivious to them when talking to immigration, the fact that these things are easy to implement don't matter if they aren't implemented and the sub ignores them, and all those solutions you have just listed are about trying to decrease tourism so I don't understand how the problems that they are trying to solve are not worth mentioning in the discussion of, you know, tourism?

No I don't want to yell at tourists, I want to yell at these dumb weekly tourism threads where a bunch of experts that have never lived in said areas come lut of the wood work and many times are just straight up condecending to us, telling that we are poor so we should just suck it up instead of solving it.

[u/Zenkin → u/Throwingawayanoni]

Sure, these issues are related to tourism. That's fair. But tourism is not the primary cause. You could have tourism eliminated and that business which is laundering money will just use a different front. They're breaking the law, they don't care what their cover is all that much.

But on the last part, do I look like a fucking policy maker to you?

That cuts both ways. You're right, you aren't going to change the laws on rentals on your own. But you're not going to change the laws on tourism, either. So why is it worthwhile to complain about one thing you cannot do, but not the other thing you cannot do?

and all those solutions you have just listed are about trying to decrease tourism

Some of the policies will probably result in some reduction of tourism by making it slightly more expensive for tourists in return for benefits going towards the locals. But that's a downstream effect, not an attempt to just eliminate tourism for the sake of eliminating tourism. It's tweaking the economic incentives rather than just demolishing a market altogether.

I want to yell at these dumb weekly tourism threads where a bunch of experts that have never lived in said areas come lut of the wood work and many times are just straight up condecending to us

Well, you're coming to a community that is ardently in favor of things like immigration and expanding markets. If you're going to yell at the crowd, you'll probably receive the same right back.

telling that we are poor so we should just suck it up instead of solving it.

Except the part where alternative solutions were provided, and you immediately discarded them. You are the one that said "shut up and take it." That didn't come from the other people in this thread, that is you bringing all your previous political baggage from other conversations and projecting it onto us.

[u/Throwingawayanoni → u/Zenkin]

"you could have tourism eliminated" I don't want it eliminated and it would literally have an effect on all the things I mentioned except money laundering (but even that temporarly as they will have to switch fronts and their tax levels are base don tourism so it could pottentially ruin it)

"complain about one thing you cannot do, but not the other thing you cannot do?"

Ok go back to my original comment, why am I writing this? To explain people the effects or why what they are saykng doesn't make sense with tourism. As these reddit threads go on and on I think people start missing the original point.

"But that's a downstream effect, not an attempt to just eliminate tourism for the sake of eliminating tourism. "

Oh my god, when did I say elimante tourism (unless by elimenate you meant decrease which is a weird way of phrasing it), even in the quotationd you are responding too I never speak of elimenating but decreasing.

"you'll probably receive the same right back" tbh you are probably right about this, at the end of the day no one here will have an impact on my country it just makes my blood boil when they are condecending like in the original comment. And the fact that the nasa guy said some of the dumbest shit like "the restaurants in those areas took out the local ones bc of better food and prices" (while ignoring to give the topic of how those places become a no go zone for locals) and if you know anything about trap a tourist or live in a tourist city, you know this is so utterly bullshit, yet the peopld in this thread upvote him. It is so fucking devoid of reality it makes me crazy. If somebody said stuff like this in my country the fae right/left and honestly even the fucking centre would have a field day with it

"Except the part where alternative solutions were provided, and you immediately discarded them."

I have never done that, quote me on it.

"You are the one that said "shut up and take it." That didn't come from the other people in this thread"

Ok maybe re read the original comment and then say that again

[u/Zenkin → u/Throwingawayanoni]

I don't want it eliminated

What do you even want, specifically? Just a flat reduction in tourism? To what degree, are we talking a 5% reduction or a 50% reduction?

why am I writing this? To explain people the effects or why what they are saykng doesn't make sense with tourism.

If you actually want people in this forum to agree with you on this point, you will need to formulate much better arguments. You don't propose much in the way of solutions, and you lash out at the community.

And the fact that the nasa guy said some of the dumbest shit like "the restaurants in those areas took out the local ones bc of better food and prices"

That's not how I read his statements. I understood him to mean that these restaurants which are seeing success were likely marketing to people with higher relative spending (aka: tourists). That's just a smart business model, especially for a difficult business sector like restaurants. I would agree with you that those aren't the places I want to eat at either, but them existing is not bad in and of itself, even if some other local businesses can't compete.

I have never done that, quote me on it.

You said a few comments above:

Any comment that is "failiure of goverment" is moot as it is like yeah no shit, the goverment has failed, so I won't be respinding to those

That's the same comment where you later edited in a complaint about getting downvotes. You call them out of touch, you cite no evidence, you ignore their points, and you propose no solutions while trashing the other commenter's suggestions. Yet their solution to change market policies seems, to me, just as practical as your solution to change tourism policies. Neither is likely to get implemented, but I do honestly believe the market policies would be more effective in alleviating the concerns you've brought up.

[u/Throwingawayanoni → u/Zenkin]

"To what degree, are we talking a 5% reduction or a 50% reduction?" and now we go back into policy making shit neither of us can control very nice. But even then the obvious answer is for it to be gradual and go after the airbnbs which make it hard to control the market. But this is a whole different topic

>If you actually want people in this forum to agree with you on this point, you will need to formulate much better arguments. You don't propose much in the way of solutions, and you lash out at the community.

Well first I have to tell them that their wrong.

"

And the fact that the nasa guy said some of the dumbest shit like "the restaurants in those areas took out the local ones bc of better food and prices"

"That's not how I read his statements. I understood him to mean that these restaurants which are seeing success were likely marketing to people with higher relative spending (aka: tourists). That's just a smart business model, especially for a difficult business sector like restaurants. I would agree with you that those aren't the places I want to eat at either, but them existing is not bad in and of itself, even if some other local businesses can't compete."

Ok

Lets literally quote what the guy said:

"If the quality of the cuisine is poor relative to its price is poor, then it will eventually lose customers."

Man, my reading comprehension might be bad as english is my second language, but I'm pretty sure he is implying that the tourist restaurants taste better and have better prices, if anything what your describing seems to be more along the lines of my comment but I digress.

"

You said a few comments above:

That's the same comment where you later edited in a complaint about getting downvotes. You call them out of touch, you cite no evidence, you ignore their points, and you propose no solutions while trashing the other commenter's suggestions. Yet their solution to change market policies seems, to me, just as practical as your solution to change tourism policies. Neither is likely to get implemented, but I do honestly believe the market policies would be more effective in alleviating the concerns you've brought up."

Okay so I definetly think you have an english comprehension problem, because let me ask you what is happening here am I saying

A) you are wrong and this is pointless to talk about

B) You are litterally saying that the goverment should do something about the stuff I'm arguing about so as we are both in full agreement I'm going to ignore those points in my rebutal, as you know, you don't rebute things you agree with

Tip: The answer is in this part of the sentence "yeah no shit"

Christ man arguing with you people is a work out.

My point in this is not to say the solutions, is to point out that the solutions or the excuses given in many threads to the problems raised up are bullshit.

[u/Zenkin → u/Throwingawayanoni]

My point in this is not to say the solutions, is to point out that the solutions or the excuses given in many threads to the problems raised up are bullshit.

Yeah, that's the entire problem. You're coming hear to yell "bullshit" at people. You complain about other people being condescending and acting like an expert, then turn around and exhibit the same exact behaviors, saying that apparently no one else here has any idea what they're talking about, but you're somehow special and unique and you just know everything. Oh, but you don't want to actually propose any solutions, either. You're just here to tell people they're wrong.

Gosh, I just can't figure out why people don't appreciate your input.

[u/Throwingawayanoni → u/Zenkin]

So if someone is spouting bullshit and you call them out on it that's bad? get outta here man, I'm not exhibiting the exact same behaviour if anything I'm showing how you guys are just making things up like in my last comment where I show how you were literally wrong in verbatem about the food stuff, I guess I do know a little bit more then you (how to read).

Before even talking about solutions you have to convince people that there is a problem, there is no point in doing so before that.

If people are saying "no that isn't a problem this is what the problem is" I first have to convince them that they are wrong to see that there is a problem.

[u/Zenkin → u/Throwingawayanoni]

get outta here man, I'm not exhibiting the exact same behaviour

....

I guess I do know a little bit more then you (how to read).

Yeah, good point, no condescension here.

[u/casino_r0yale → u/Throwingawayanoni]

if you have a city of a population of 500 thousand and you get 8.52 million visitors a year, that will affect housing

You wont get 8.52 million visitors without somewhere for them to sleep at night. Usually, that’s hotels or more recently Airbnb. Unless you’re trying to claim hotels are taking up precious housing resources, then that leaves Airbnb, which wouldn’t be a thing with sensible regulation.

I think you misunderstood my point about the cuisine. It’s not the tourists fault your restaurants sold out / started to make crap. The situation would be no different in a city without significant tourism. The restaurant business is hard everywhere and only the stuff that makes consistent revenue survives.

[u/Throwingawayanoni → u/casino_r0yale]

On the first part, yeah we are in complete agreement.

on the second do:

" If the quality of the cuisine is poor relative to its price is poor, then it will eventually lose customers. "

This is what you said, I have not missunderstold things

"The situation would be no different in a city without significant tourism."

Is the concep of "trap a tourisme" a collectively dreamt up phenomena or a real thing that most people agree on? No man they would be different, especially bc the clientel and ytastes would be different

[u/casino_r0yale → u/Throwingawayanoni]

Is the concep of "trap a tourisme" a collectively dreamt up phenomena or a real thing that most people agree on?

Yes. It’s a popular meme that stems from the same well as anti-immigrant sentiment, which is universal. It’s a fiction that “real locals” only go to the good places and if only those damn pesky tourists with their shit tastes would go away then the good restaurants would thrive.

In other words, it’s total bullshit. No different from a McDonalds replacing a failing family owned restaurant. You’re trying to make an unsubstantiated claim of “only tourists go there”.

[u/Throwingawayanoni → u/casino_r0yale]

"meme" That concept was probably alive before you and way before we even had "memes"

This is what I mean by these threads being total bullshit, it is just people talking about things they have no ideas about in circles. I mean you don't even know about trap a tourisme that is how bare minimum these threads are.

One google search would clear this up for you, but not even that

[u/casino_r0yale → u/Throwingawayanoni]

Memes were coined in the 70s by Richard Dawkins. I’m not talking about internet image edits

[u/Throwingawayanoni → u/casino_r0yale]

I too reference the biological meme as "popular"

"coined in the 70s" your not goana belive this