vicarage ([info]vicarage) wrote,
@ 2009-09-07 11:36:00
Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Share this!  Next Entry
Current location:Home

US plan to charge for visa waiver scheme
William Delahunt (rhyming slang) wants to charge for the visa waiver scheme to fund a scheme to encourage travel to the US. What a jolly good idea, get people to pay for all those ads extolling the majesty of your country, and the extra cost won't dissuade them at all, oh no. And the EU can then retaliate with visas for US citizens, so we can all become more insular.


(8 comments) - (Post a new comment)


[info]celestialweasel
2009-09-07 10:44 am UTC (link)
Isn't this just the Beeb churning up a very old news story? I'm sure this one came round a year or two ago.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

[info]vicarage
2009-09-07 02:49 pm UTC (link)
A search didn't reveal a charging story

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

[info]celestialweasel
2009-09-07 03:10 pm UTC (link)
Hmm. I am clearly suffering from jamais vu, I am sure the charging and the money going to something to encourage people to visit was floated before, I even think someone mentioned it on LJ in much the terms that you did.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

[info]mkillingworth
2009-09-07 03:25 pm UTC (link)
I'm sure they floated this idea before we moved. It was stupid then and it's stupid now. Who the hell wants to *pay* to visit a country that treats all outsiders as being somehow suspect? I had great hopes that the new administration would take steps to reverse some of that attitude.

(Reply to this)


[info]zengineer
2009-09-07 08:02 pm UTC (link)
Many countries do have some form of visitation tax. For Japan it is an exit tax payable only in cash at the exit port. I did wonder what happened if you didn't remember or if you lost your wallet. Do they deport you? Locking you up obviously wouldn't work as you would still not have money when they let you out. Not that I am supporting this, you know my views on government.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

[info]vicarage
2009-09-07 08:20 pm UTC (link)
That's general taxation, like our departure taxes. Delahunt wants to boost tourism, but to make it revenue neutral, he wants to tax those same tourists...

http://www.house.gov/apps/list/press/ma10_delahunt/travelbill09.html

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

[info]zengineer
2009-09-08 08:21 am UTC (link)
I understand and had spotted the incongruity but in a sense this is the model of advertising - putting a small premium on the product to be used to get more people to buy. Also from a politician's point of view it is obvious - tax foreigners to get more American jobs.
For me the strange thing is in the false linkage, the idea that a tax is neutral and can ever be neutral. One group pays and another group benefits. I find a similar problem with carbon offsetting. You do not use less carbon but you pay in the hope that someone else will absorb some of the carbon you use. You could have paid anyway but not made the journey or you could have paid more or less. There is no real link between one activity and the other except in the mind of the politician or the offsetter.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

[info]bureinato
2009-09-07 09:02 pm UTC (link)
It's not just the money, it's the pain in the neck part.

(Reply to this)

(8 comments) - (Post a new comment)

Create an Account
Forgot your login or password?
Log in with OpenID
English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…