Tourism In Europe

[betsy]

9 hours ago, dialamah said:

Yes and if people were rational, terrorism would have no effect on tourism because they'd understand that being injured or killed in a terrorist attack is not very likely - they're more likely to die in a non-terror related plane crash on the way to their vacation destination.   You should read the link Bubber posted; it's pretty interesting.  

Irrational fear.  Or, more precisely, politicians pandering to the irrational fear that they've also whipped up.   

We're not talking about rationality, or how people should take it. 

We're talking about the reality of terrorism having its effect on tourism, and the economy!  If you want to discuss philosophy, or psychology, create your own thread!

Edited March 7, 2017 by betsy

[betsy]

You guys who try to put your own spin and psychological assessment on this reality, you're sooooo not on the same page!

 

You can blab about irrationality, over-reaction, and give all the stats of getting killed in a thousand different ways by comparison - you're still not getting it - tourism is down in some hot spots, due to terrorism! 

You're the ones over-reacting with the issue of this thread, and giving irrelevant responses.

 

Why do people "over-react?" when you could die just sitting on your couch, choking on a chip - who knows why.  Maybe, people don't want to be reminded of a news clip they saw on tv as they stroll on the street of Paris. 

Maybe the romantic song "Under the Bridges of Paris" had taken on a new meaning - "how would you like to be, hiding under the bridge with me?"

 

Or,  the song "The Last Time I Saw Paris," evoke this graphic images we saw on tv.

 

 

 

We've got  Under The Bridges of Paris song - and it's a very romantic song.  But when I hear it now, somehow it doesn't sound like it used to.  The time of "innocence" of that song is gone, and it's replaced by stark evil reality. 

 

Even the news report on the video above damage tourism, "St Fritz Cafe - Parisians enjoying their Friday evening were sitting ducks for the terrorists."

 

Ahhh!  These two oldies has to go to the Nostalgia Thread!  Definitely!

Edited March 7, 2017 by betsy

[dialamah]

3 hours ago, betsy said:

We're not talking about rationality, or how people should take it. 

We're talking about the reality of terrorism having its effect on tourism, and the economy!  If you want to discuss philosophy, or psychology, create your own thread!

 

Yup, we are.  People are afraid because of terrorism, so they don't travel to places where they believe terrorism may occur (or if they do, they stay in their hotel room).   This is a real fear they experience, although not really rational.

Yes, this affects the economy of the country due to reduced tourism.   

"I've lived through some terrible things in my life, some of which actually happened" --- attributed to Mark Twain.

[betsy]

8 minutes ago, dialamah said:

Yup, we are.  People are afraid because of terrorism, so they don't travel to places where they believe terrorism may occur (or if they do, they stay in their hotel room).   This is a real fear they experience, although not really rational.

Yes, this affects the economy of the country due to reduced tourism.   

 

Well, good. 

Whether their fear is rational or not, which is irrelevant - and, you can't know unless you talk to these people about their fears - terrorism does affect tourism.  That's the point of this thread.

Edited March 7, 2017 by betsy

[marcus]

5 hours ago, betsy said:

We're not talking about rationality

Yes. You're talking about irrationality, alternative facts and a world where you can nurture your fears and try to legitimize your hate. 

[dialamah]

4 hours ago, betsy said:

Well, good. 

Whether their fear is rational or not, which is irrelevant - and, you can't know unless you talk to these people about their fears - terrorism does affect tourism.  That's the point of this thread.

Irrational fear that makes people behave irrationally is not irrelevant.   If these people were not afraid, tourism would not be reduced. 

[Hal 9000]

Is it irrationality that makes people take their babies/toddlers into the store with them, when leaving them in the vehicle makes so much more sense?

[betsy]

51 minutes ago, dialamah said:

Irrational fear that makes people behave irrationally is not irrelevant.   If these people were not afraid, tourism would not be reduced. 

It is irrelevant.  First of all, you don't know what their fears are all about, second you don't know how they came to the decision to not choose a particular place to vacation.  

By your rationale, I suppose you think Boges "fears" about the USA is more than irrational.  Here's what he said:

Quote

I'm pointing out that completely arbitrary immigration rules (as this story indicates) will make people less likely to visit the US. I won't plan a trip to the US if the border is a Russian Roulette wheel where they deny entry based on completely arbitrary means. The Visa argument is a fallacy because there is no official need for a Canadian with no other issues to get a Visa. 

 

Your opinion on the "irrationality" of travellers  contradict reality.  Your opinion is juvenile in its shallow simplicity.  What's involved to be a tourist?  Why do people take vacation?

If there's nothing to be seriously concerned about, there wouldn't be any need for all security measures that were put in place due to terrorist acts. 

Edited March 7, 2017 by betsy

[?Impact]

5 minutes ago, Hal 9000 said:

Is it irrationality that makes people take their babies/toddlers into the store with them, when leaving them in the vehicle makes so much more sense?

Isn't that why God invented the drive thru? 

[Hal 9000]

1 minute ago, ?Impact said:

Isn't that why God invented the drive thru? 

But, you would agree that it's irrational to feel the need to take your toddlers with you into a store, right?

[?Impact]

2 minutes ago, Hal 9000 said:

But, you would agree that it's irrational to feel the need to take your toddlers with you into a store, right?

I would say it is irrational to make generic evaluations based on so little context.

[Hal 9000]

Just now, ?Impact said:

I would say it is irrational to make generic evaluations based on so little context.

What context do you need?  If you leave your baby in a car and go shopping or to the bar, chances are, the baby will still be there and alive when you get back - so, why all the fuss?  Why do people call the police and social services when the chance of your baby being murdered is so much less than falling in a bathtub (or whatever lame comparison is in fashion).  

[?Impact]

17 minutes ago, Hal 9000 said:

What context do you need?  If you leave your baby in a car and go shopping or to the bar, chances are, the baby will still be there and alive when you get back - so, why all the fuss?  Why do people call the police and social services when the chance of your baby being murdered is so much less than falling in a bathtub (or whatever lame comparison is in fashion).  

You are right, there is little chance a baby will drown in the bathtub so let them bathe themselves. That should really affect the tourism in Paris.

[betsy]

 

Quote

 

1 hour ago, Hal 9000 said:

 Why do people call the police and social services when the chance of your baby being murdered is so much less than falling in a bathtub (or whatever lame comparison is in fashion).  

 

 

57 minutes ago, ?Impact said:

You are right, there is little chance a baby will drown in the bathtub so let them bathe themselves.

 

There.  Repeat that to Dialamah.  There is little chance of a baby being murdered, so to be fearful about a child to go missing,  is irrational.  Thank you.

And tell that too, to all those who say that you're likely to die in other ways, so avoiding terrorist hot spot is irrational.

[dialamah]

It used to be common to leave kids in cars, windows down in summer, motors and heaters on in winter (the latter not for long usually).   Kids used to be able to roam the streets alone, even after dark sometimes.

But as news of kidnappings spread, people became fearful. I remember reading articles about how the chances of any particular kid going missing were very small, but still fear of the unlikely has gradually reduced kid's freedoms to almost nothing.   Kids are still kidnapped at about the same rate, so all the extra care and lack of freedom didn't help.   There is now evidence that kids can suffer psychological damage because they have so little opportunity to explore and learn the world on their own.

Terrorism and fear of it (and Muslims) seems to be growing and with that our freedoms are gradually decreasing, whether imposed by our own fear or a government that wants to increase their control over their citizenry.

Its a tragedy when a kid is kidnapped or otherwise harmed when out of their parents' direct sight.   Its a tragedy when people are killed in a terrorist attack.

Its also a tragedy when an entire generation of kids can't play outside after school or on weekends, when people won't explore their world and when nations close their borders because of the fear that the most unlikely event will actually happen.

 

[betsy]

13 hours ago, dialamah said:

Terrorism and fear of it (and Muslims) seems to be growing and with that our freedoms are gradually decreasing, whether imposed by our own fear or a government that wants to increase their control over their citizenry.

There have been security measures taken in other times, due to terrorism done, not by Islamic radicals.  When did simple bag searches start?   What we're seeing are consequences.  It's how it goes, unfortunately. 

I think, where Europe failed was in its borders. 

 

[marcus]

21 hours ago, Hal 9000 said:

Is it irrationality that makes people take their babies/toddlers into the store with them, when leaving them in the vehicle makes so much more sense?

That's not a good comparison. In fact, it's a terrible comparison.

A better comparison would be for someone to stay home and not drive, because they might get in a car accident. There is a much bigger risk in getting in a car accident or getting in a car accident and dying, than experiencing a terrorist attack. This is why it's completely irrational.

Of course, that's in Europe and North America.

I'm sure things are much different in Syria where there is a higher risk of experiencing a terrorist attack by the Asad regime, U.S. planes, Russian planes or the Saudi backed terrorist groups like ISIS and Al Qaeda.

[marcus]

6 hours ago, betsy said:

 What we're seeing are consequences.  It's how it goes, unfortunately. 

Consequences from the West's foreign policy.

Everything from invading Iraq and creating a vacuum where terrorist groups could rise, to supporting dictators in Saudi, Iraq (at one point), Egypt, to allowing rogue states like Israel to continue their international and human rights violations against the Palestinians.

Yes, you're right. We're seeing consequences.

[Hal 9000]

40 minutes ago, marcus said:

That's not a good comparison. In fact, it's a terrible comparison.

A better comparison would be for someone to stay home and not drive, because they might get in a car accident. There is a much bigger risk in getting in a car accident or getting in a car accident and dying, than experiencing a terrorist attack. This is why it's completely irrational.

Of course, that's in Europe and North America.

I'm sure things are much different in Syria where there is a higher risk of experiencing a terrorist attack by the Asad regime, U.S. planes, Russian planes or the Saudi backed terrorist groups like ISIS and Al Qaeda.

What are the chances of having your child abducted?  Pretty minuscule actually.  So again, using Dialamah's risk chart, it's pretty irrational to be worried about a baby left alone in a car parking lot.

[overthere]

On 3/4/2017 at 6:18 PM, betsy said:

Tourism is greatly affected due to the spate of terror attacks in some European countries.

A friend had to go to Paris for an unavoidable business meeting - and he stayed mostly in his hotel.  His wife who stayed behind in Canada, was quite worried the whole time he was in Paris.  The same concern is felt by others.

 

 

http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/755963/Paris-violent-crime-terror-Chinese-tourists-number-down

 

http://www.voanews.com/a/belgian-tourism-industry-down-terror-attacks/3488730.html

 

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/30/business/international/europe-economy-gdp-terrorism.html

 

Imagine how this affect their economy?  How this must hurt, especially when you're relying on tourism for the economy.

I was in Paris and London last summer.  Both cities were bursting at the seams with tourists- as usual.

 

London was particularly crazy, never seen it like that, and in the middle of a heat wave too.  Part of that was due to the low cost of the British pound- many Euros visited the UK as a result, and fewer Brits went abroad.

 

The concerns of your friends are certainly not shared by most people.

[marcus]

On 3/8/2017 at 3:05 AM, betsy said:

There have been security measures taken in other times, due to terrorism done, not by Islamic radicals.  When did simple bag searches start?   What we're seeing are consequences.  It's how it goes, unfortunately. 

I think, where Europe failed was in its borders. 

 

Europe experienced terrorism at a higher level in the past. Majority were committed by internal groups. Even now, majority of the attacks, which are small comparatively to the past are done by citizens. 

The hysterical reaction fed by exaggerating the issue, ignorance of the source of the problems and the ignorance and hate of immigrants (especially if they're known as Muslim - I mean, did you see the hateful, disgusting comments by Hal 9000 in this thread before they were removed?) is a problem. Not wanting people to escape hell holes, especially when we, the West have directly contributed in creating many of the hell holes is a problem.

[betsy]

2 hours ago, overthere said:

I was in Paris and London last summer.  Both cities were bursting at the seams with tourists- as usual.

 

London was particularly crazy, never seen it like that, and in the middle of a heat wave too.  Part of that was due to the low cost of the British pound- many Euros visited the UK as a result, and fewer Brits went abroad.

 

The concerns of your friends are certainly not shared by most people.

 

I don't care whether they're bursting to the seams.  I go by the stats that was given.  I don't think London was mentioned.

Edited March 9, 2017 by betsy

[betsy]

21 minutes ago, marcus said:

Europe experienced terrorism at a higher level in the past. Majority were committed by internal groups. Even now, majority of the attacks, which are small comparatively to the past are done by citizens. 

The hysterical reaction fed by exaggerating the issue, ignorance of the source of the problems and the ignorance and hate of immigrants (especially if they're known as Muslim - I mean, did you see the hateful, disgusting comments by Hal 9000 in this thread before they were removed?) is a problem. Not wanting people to escape hell holes, especially when we, the West have directly contributed in creating many of the hell holes is a problem.

Call it hysterical, or over-reaction - the reality remains the same. 

Tourism is down in those hot spots!

 

You're the one being hysterical when you start bringing up "hell holes" we created.  We're not talking about hell holes we created (or not).  TAKE A DEEP BREATH , AND GET A GRIP!  For goodness sakes.  If this were a disaster movie, this is the part where you get slapped for being so hysterical. 

Edited March 9, 2017 by betsy

[-TSS-]

Europe is still safe compared to places like gangland-Chicago or similar neighbourhoods in Detroit. Please come and visit our continent! We need your money!

[?Impact]

It will be interesting to see real stats on France. Most of the official comparative ones are up to 2014 which show growth. There are certainly a lot of stories about more recent, but no official stats that I can find.