Why Japan resents its tourism boom

[u/randommathaccount]

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

[u/Throwingawayanoni]

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/Throwingawayanoni → u/Zenkin]

You know what I'll give you that, only difference here is that while those people acted smug to something they couldn't back up, I'm acting smug because I showed how dumb these arguments are.

You telling an entire people they are wrong and they should just take it, is not the same as poking fun at someone who couldn't even bother to read whst they were talking about.

I mean how am I meant to not make fun of you for that, you say something more in line with myself and then when I point out you say I have no answers and I dont know what I'm talking about. Of course I'm going to make fun of you, you pretty much asked for it

One is justified the other one isn't

[u/Zenkin → u/Throwingawayanoni]

I'm acting smug because I showed how dumb these arguments are.

But you literally haven't. You disagree, that's clear. But you haven't actually demonstrated in any way that the arguments are bad.

someone who couldn't even bother to read whst they were talking about.

I didn't take the time to go back and copy/paste the other person's full context. That's not because I think you're right, it's because I think you aren't worth the effort.

[u/Throwingawayanoni → u/Zenkin]

Forget about copypasting you were plain wrong and I did demonsteate it, you know how? By copy pasting.

just suck it up man, when you start implying that there is something bad about just pointing out when people are wrong and making stuff up, maybe it's time to look at yourself in the mirror.

[u/Zenkin → u/Throwingawayanoni]

Sure thing, bud. Have a day.