America is wooing foreign tourists for the first time

http://www.economist.com/node/21557782

by tokenadult • 14 years ago

42 51 14 years ago

cstross• 14 years ago

It would really help encourage tourism into the USA if the USA didn't levy a freaking tax on entering the USA to subsidize the ailing Florida tourism industry. (Source: http://www.eubusiness.com/news-eu/us-tourism-security.5tl/ ) Which is ailing because the process of entering the USA today, if you're a foreigner (like me) is marginally less friendly than entering the USSR in the mid-1980s.

(This is not a knock on the USA, it's a knock on the immigration/border control process. Which sucks. Horribly.)

nohat• 14 years ago

Charging a fee for entry is definitely not conducive for tourism, but how is it a subsidy to Florida? The article I read says it will be used to advertise, and pay for administrative costs.

rocky11382• 14 years ago

I don't have a problem charging a menial fee to tourists, so long as it's completely transparent where that money is going. The last thing a country should wish on its image is the tourist money going to military invasions and the like.

yequalsx2• 14 years ago

I think the only way the TSA and ICE become more humane organizations is if people stop visiting the U.S. Please don't come here! There are many other nice places to visit that don't treat visitors with the disdain that visitors here frequently encounter.

yequalsx2• 14 years ago

I'm curious why this is being down voted. It seems obvious to me that if international tourism to the U.S. declined sufficiently then industry would put great pressure on the government to make the process much more inviting. I think there is near universal disgust with the TSA and ICE.

anigbrowl• 14 years ago

I quite agree about the fee, but also fail to see what it has to do with Florida. The fee exists because Congress has never got around to funding a proper entry-exit database for tourists, with the result that prior to 2007 (IIRC) there's basically no record of whether or not someone left the US after the 90-day period of admission for visa-free entry.

MiguelHudnandez• 14 years ago

The ESTA fees don't go to Florida in particular, but in part to Brand USA. I think the rest goes to the TSA to offset the cost of operations. Brand USA gets up to $200,000,000 from ESTA fees based on tourism industry support.

All states' tourism situations have been ailing, starting with the reaction to 9/11. The ESTA fees are unpleasant but given that there is now a recipient of those fees with a vested interest in increasing visitation, there may be tangible benefits for future visitors.

The $10 fee transforms visitors from a drain of security resources into profit-generating customers, which obviously can lead to a sea change in the way visitors are treated and the processes they are subjected to by the TSA. It will take time for that to occur, though.

Disclosure: I work for what could be considered a state-level analogue of Brand USA.

Variance2• 14 years ago

There's potential truth in what you're saying, but that doesn't mean that a tourism tax is far from ideal. The economics of governments and their agencies are very different from those of companies.

Most importantly, while private companies have a market incentive to treat customers better when they pay more, governments don't. This is because governments both have a monopoly and so don't face outside competition, and because they don't face bankruptcy if they don't draw in the $200M in funds that you mentioned.

Instead, all that the federal government is saying to the TSA/other ESTA recipients is that "we made a tax which generates $200M, so we expect you to step up your services with the funding". It works only partially, because the only motivation that ESTA recipients (especially the TSA) have to improve is the word of god, and not any meaningful amounts of hard cash profit. The TSA is the worst of all with this, because unlike state marketing authorities, the TSA has no theoretical benefit from increased tourism. The smaller and more local the agencies you are analyzing get, the more like businesses they are, and so the more effective an ESTA would be.

So having an ESTA to make the TSA better is essentially just the same as increasing the TSA's funding from tax dollars and telling it to be better. Then you might as well do the latter, so as not to discourage tourists since tourists are much more likely to stop coming to the country than US citizens are to stop paying taxes because the income tax went up 0.01% to fund the $200M.

And even increasing taxes isn't ideal, because theoretically, if the TSA experience being better is worth the money, tourism will increase proportionately, and tourism's benefit to the economy will drive up tax revenues automatically without a tax.

Most ideal of all would be to find a way to privatize the TSA in a way that's safe and efficient, because then the new TSA corporation(s) would snap to market equilibrium.

Variance2• 14 years ago

I just took a trip out of the US down to Brazil and back a few weeks ago, and dear god, coming back into the country at the airport in Atlanta...

The tourists probably had about 20-30 minutes before getting out of the terminal, which is bad enough, but the US citizens were in a Disney World-esque line that was long enough that I missed a connecting flight scheduled an hour and a half after we arrived from Brazil.

That was bad enough that I sure won't be flying out of the country for anything less than at least a couple days worth of stuff. I feel bad for anyone coming through who isn't a citizen or can't speak perfect English. The immigration building had these massive screens overhead showing serene farmland scenes and images from across the country, while two or three thousand passengers are stuck in a line desperately waiting to get home or to their hotels at 1 AM. It's all very dystopian.

tesseract• 14 years ago

Yeah, in addition to being frustrated by the wait I always feel so incredibly _embarrassed_ when I'm returning to the US, like I should be apologizing to the people in the visitors line for how horrible and frustrating it is. And that video is definitely over the top.

Getting in and out of China (to pick one example out of the places I've visited) as a visitor was way less of a hassle than getting back into the US as a citizen. It's ridiculous.

pbz2• 14 years ago

It's usually the other way around; meaning foreigners have to wait way more than citizens. And that's just the tip of the iceberg. If you ever had the pleasure of going through the US Embassy for a trip to the US you'd think people who end up still coming here are masochists.

rdl3• 14 years ago

Atlanta is a particularly bad airport for entering the US. I far prefer to do SFO, IAD, JFK, etc. By far my favorite is SEA, although IAD on flights from the middle east (where ~90% of the US Citizen passengers are government employees or contractors) are treated exceptionally well.

MIA, ATL, BWI are the worst.

sehugg• 14 years ago

Tourism to Florida is down relative to other U.S. destinations (Source: http://tinet.ita.doc.gov/outreachpages/download_data_table/2...) so there may be some truth to this. Maybe we can look over the meeting notes (http://www.thebrandusa.com/meeting-records/) and find out?

cletus• 14 years ago

America is currently the center of the tech world. This is largely due to two things:

1. The internet is cheaper here than anywhere else in part because everyone else pays to connect to the US; and

2. The university endowment system combined with some of the greatest research institutions on the planet created the tech VC system that fuelled the growth of Silicon Valley.

Manufacturing has already left the US (and most of the developed world). While the barriers are higher for skilled labour, it's not impossible. Many countries have a sufficiently stable political system and sufficient infrastructure to create tech businesses.

My point is that the US is outright hostile to those seeking to enter the United States, be they as tourists, residents or temporary workers, and to those who choose to come here and put up with a level of invasiveness that rivals third-world dictatorships and the old Iron Curtain countries.

Now some of the post-9/11 measures I don't have a problem with. I see no issue with fingerprinting those entering the United States.

On the other hand, as a foreign worker I need to report every foreign bank account I own (separately or jointly), have a financial interest in or signatory authority over whether or not that money was ever earned in or otherwise entered the United States. This includes retirement accounts. Or does it? No one can really say because the rules aren't clear.

Failure to comply can result in civil penalties as high as 300% of the balance of that account and criminal penalties including years in jail.

When it comes time to renew my visa I have to leave the country to do it.

Should I want to leave my job and start a business here I don't believe I have any legal recourse to reside lawfully in the United States so I have to go somewhere else.

I'm actually encouraged by stories like this one just because I'm optimistic that the US is finally figuring out that it needs tourists. Maybe someday soon it'll figure out it needs foreign workers and entrepreneurs too. Hopefully before it's too late.

It saddens me actually because the fate of the US is the same as that of many companies. Early-stage companies are innovators. Eventually they get so large that they live in constant fear that their success will go away or something will kill the golden goose. Instead of innovating they simply play a game of defense and interference. This is Microsoft of today with its Windows/Office cash cow.

The US was formed my immigrants coming to escape the rigid structure and persecution of the Old World. In a mere century the US turned from an agrarian backwater of 2 million (in 1800) to an industrial superpower of 50 million, thanks largely to migrants. The US shut its doors at the outbreak of World War One has been building increasingly larger walls ever since.

What disturbs me most is the presumption of (criminal) guilt that seems to pervade state institutions, particularly when it applies to confusing, complex, special-interest bought rules like the IRS code. In no other country I've been have I felt fear that I'd be locked up even when trying to do what I believe is the right thing. This doesn't just apply to foreigners either. The US seems just as hostile to its own citizens too.

EDIT: regarding Internet speed, so as to be clear there's a difference between Internet end-user cost (consumers and businesses) and service provider cost.

End user cost is indeed expensive, which seems largely due to the regional monopolies that exist in the US, meaning cable companies. That is however irrelevant (for the purpose of my argument).

I'm interested in the cost of a Facebook, Google, Ebay or Amazon providing their service in resource terms. Of course there's a latency component to this as well (the US being disproportionately represented in customer terms) but ultimately it has been cheaper and I believe that to still be the case, especially if you get to the scale whereby peering is possible and viable.

pbz2• 14 years ago

I agree with what you say, except for point #1. At least as far as Europe or East Asia is concerned you can find much faster and cheaper internet connection. Even for hosting it's common when buying from Europe for them to advertise unlimited bandwidth - which usually means up to 10T/m and you get slowed down after.

taligent3• 14 years ago

1. Wrong. Completely wrong. Internet is cheaper and much, much faster in many other countries. And many of those countries are rolling out FTTH/FTTN as we speak e.g. Australia.

2. True but a bit irrelevant.

The reason the US is the capital of the tech world is 110% due to the success of the VC industry. It is so flush with cash (from its previous successes) that it can reinvest in whole rafts of companies to create tomorrow's successes. It's very much self perpetuating.

detst• 14 years ago

>> 2. The university endowment system combined with some of the greatest research institutions on the planet created the tech VC system that fuelled the growth of Silicon Valley.

> 2. True but a bit irrelevant.

> [...] US is the capital of the tech world is 110% due to the success of the VC industry.

Are you disagreeing just to disagree? How is the thing you're giving "110%" of the credit irrelevant?

Access to money doesn't create success and without success that money would just go somewhere else. You can't seriously give it "110%" of the credit without looking at the reasons for the VC system and the underlying factors of the success.

latch2• 14 years ago

Yes, I'm so glad I have 1000 mbps line so that I can play games at > 200ms ping and watch stuttering movies. It isn't wrong to say that the internet is faster in the US as long as so many sites/services are hosted in the US.

jrockway2• 14 years ago

1. Wrong. Completely wrong.

He's talking about prices ISPs pay, not prices consumers pay.

malandrew3• 14 years ago

Exactly. Near as I can tell, internet cost-to-bandwidth is pretty much a function of affluence and population density. The US, while affluent, has a low population density. High speed internet isn't that expensive. Getting people connected to that high speed internet is.

why-el• 14 years ago

1. is completely wrong. (Last time I checked the US was the 15th). 2. I think the Pentagon deserves more credit, as some of the most important research was publicly funded.

paganel• 14 years ago

> Now some of the post-9/11 measures I don't have a problem with. I see no issue with fingerprinting those entering the United States.

Just out of curiosity, why is that? If it matters, I live in Eastern Europe (and grew up under an oppressive regime as a kid), and I had this same discussion (about the US fingerprinting innocent people) with some of my friends way back in 2007. At the time I thought this was crazy, I still do.

smallblacksun• 14 years ago

The US has a large problem with people entering on limited term visitor or student visas and then never leaving. While most of those people are harmless, others aren't (including a number of the 9/11 hijackers). By taking fingerprints of all foreigners, those prints can be entered into law enforcement databases if they overstay their visas. I don't really understand why people would have a problem with it. What bad things would having your fingerprints make it possible for a government to do that having the information from your passport and visa forms wouldn't?

userulluipeste2• 14 years ago

I also live in Eastern Europe and I've enjoyed the american experience of being fingerprinted in my attempt to get a touristic visa ...before deciding if they'll grant or deny it to me (which is before knowing if I'll ever set my foot anywhere close to their territory). Till then, the fingerprinting was something I only heard of to be something applied in the case of suspects and criminals, in law enforcement institutions.

jbarham• 14 years ago

Wholesale bandwidth is probably cheaper in the US than anywhere else, but retail internet service certainly isn't. And neither is mobile internet access given the oligopoly of the big four cell phone companies.

polshaw• 14 years ago

The cost of bandwidth for US servers is little of an advantage to the tech start up (or later) world. Being outside the US doesn't make using US servers more expensive, plus, when you are the size of those you mentioned, you are multi-national anyway. Servers need to be near the consumers, not their owner; and again multinationals will have servers on each continent.

One significant advantage for the US is that you have 300m customers to hand, while European citizens will have a 'only' a home market 60-100m. To move above that, you have to deal with multiple languages, legal systems and tax issues etc.

So where would you start? Not to mention it is also the richest country, low tax (especially if you are choosing your state), and seems to have no other major issues (decent education system). The VCs multiply the advantage, as does the community that arises because it is attractive in the first place.

greggman• 14 years ago

This program on PBS claims manufacturing has not left the US. They claim the US is still #1 in manufacturing in the world and growing.

http://www.pbs.org/america-revealed/episode/4/

jandrewrogers• 14 years ago

The United States is one of the most dominant manufacturers in the world, $2+ trillion dollars every year and continues to grow. Until the last year or two, no other country was even close. Most economists predict that over the next ten years manufacturing will be a major growth area as China's competitiveness in this area declines.

Do not make the mistake of conflating manufacturing jobs with manufacturing. US manufacturing is almost entirely high-end and very automated, not the kind of thing you can do with minimum wage labor.

The United States will never employ millions of workers making cheap clothing. However, it will employee thousands of highly paid engineers to design the machines that make cheap clothing.

malandrew3• 14 years ago

To be fair, requiring you to leave the country to renew your visa is not unique to the US. China does this as well and I've heard that are many other countries that do too. Honestly, I've never understood why this happens and I can't come up with any explanation that makes sense.

cgs1019• 14 years ago

So, tourism decreases as a consequence of our making it significantly harder to enter and much less pleasant and welcoming once you do, and our solution is a marketing campaign to convince people that's not really how it is. This seems so fundamentally flawed I don't even know where to start.

rsanchez1• 14 years ago

For the first time? Have these people heard of Disney World and Universal Studios?

NoPiece• 14 years ago

Everyone's skeptic meter should be triggered at the line, "...launched America’s first-ever campaign to attract visitors from overseas."

30 seconds on youtube and you'll find this UK targeted ad than was uploaded 4 years ago.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tkcYTVfXn74

I'm sure there have been hundreds of ad campaigns in hundreds of countries.

rocky11382• 14 years ago

As a Canadian citizen, I am close enough to the United States already.

It's great that they want to share their landmarks, friendly people, and history. The problem is the gatekeepers AKA the TSA and border police. A quick google search on TSA will give you all the information you need to make an educated choice on where not to spend your holidays.

Until this is fixed, I cannot see how the USA can beat places like Taiwan, China, anywhere in Europe (except maybe Germany), Australia, or Iceland for the image of "welcoming tourists." It's purely anecdotal as it's an opinion, of course. Take it or leave it :)

America is wooing foreign tourists for the first time

Related Stories