Thorn Tree travel forum

1

I have heard the arguement made that travel to luxury (read expensive) resorts and hotels in poor countries is good because it flows a lot of money into the economy. Even if the hotel you are staying at is owned by some company in Europe, at the very least the government is collecting taxes on your stay (which adds up to much more than the taxes it gets from the budget travellers), and luxury resort dwellers are more likely to spend money on expensive tours that pump money into the economy.

From a ethical standpoint, it probably makes the most sense to try and stay at locally owned properties, that way you maximize the amount of money you are putting into the economy.

"Even travelling despondently is better than arriving here." - Mostly Harmless, Douglas Adams

2

Personally, I also think it is okay...

However, I think we should also be sensitive and respectful to the local people, and perhaps have any gestures which could make little difference to us, but make some people's their day... (Such as giving a chid a coin, an orange...)

“ Don't grumble that roses have thorns...
Be thankful that thorns have roses !!"

3

I think everybody needs to decide her/himself. It's fine by me if someone likes it although it's not my style of travel. It's not that I couldn't afford it - I just don't like it. That said, I do like luxury from time to time in other places. Also, I think - but I might be wrong - that those people cannot experience the country as intensive as someone who stays in budget accommodation, takes local transportation etc.

What I absolutely dislike though, if those people think they are the queens and kings in those countries. Every now and then I encounter travellers whose behavior is more than unacceptable.

"If future generations are to remember us more with gratitude than sorrow, we must achieve more than just the miracles of technology. We must also leave them a glimpse of the world as it was created, not just as it looked when we got through with it." – Lyndon Baines Johnson

4

I wonder if you feel guilty staying at luxury hotels etc. in your home country??

"Is it ethically ok to visit a poor country and live like a king there because you can afford to do so?"...same question, how do you feel about poverty in your own country?? Most of us have it to some degree.

And how far do you take the whole ethical thing anyway? - if you feel extra responsible for the enviroment then you will keep off an airplane in the first place.

Seems all we can do in these situations is to set our own personal boundaries on what we consider to be acceptable behaviour, what we individually feel comfortable with.......havent met anybody yet who lives an ethically pure life.

Ask the people!

5

Keep the guilt at home. The world has enough of it. Of course you shouldn`t be under any illusions that by staying in a 5-star hotel in a poor country you`re really experiencing anything, but don`t talk your way into an ethical quagmire over the smallest things. Kalumpus is right - I haven`t met anybody yet who lives an ethically pure life, either, and I wouldn`t want to. What a boring, useless life that would be. You`re an individual with all the goodness and imperfections that implies. Don`t over-logic or over-rationalize things. The road to hell is paved with good intentions. Scumbags have all the logical, rational arguments for why it`s ok to go to a poor country and bang 11 year old girls and boys. I wouldn`t worry so much about staying in a nice hotel.

6

Doesn't matter. Either way, money is being added to their economy.

"Too much sanity may be madness. But maddest of all, to see life as it is.....and not as it should be!"

Don Quixote - Miguel de Cervantes

7

if that brings you sense of guilty, the first thing you can do is try to stop those fancy hotels/resturants/bars.... building plan in the poor countries, then we'd all stay at local lodges and travel with peace of mind.

i don't like those fancy facilities not because they make me feel unmoral, it's because the environmnet impact they impose on these lands.
but yes, i stayed at some of them though i didn't choose to.

Moo-dy cow.

8

It should be up to the individual. Mind you, whether luxury or basic I think it's good to support locally owned businesses, that way more money goes to the country than through it.

It would be good if LP had a symbol or something in their guides which could be placed next to locally as opposed to internationally owned enterprises.

There's nothing worse than a hysterical tourist denied the luxuries they expect - EEEEEEEP!!! Keep 'em locked in the 5 star hotels I say, preferably too scared to cross my path in the local joints!

It's rare but if you see child abuse in Sri Lanka it is worth reporting to the Police.

9

Quote

---

It would be good if LP had a symbol or something in their guides which could be placed next to locally as opposed to internationally owned enterprises.

---

I would definitely consider choosing a guide book that does this. We'd have to leave it to an extremely hard-working editor to navigate the ambiguities of what constitutes "locally-owned." Does a privately-owned franchise licensed by a foreign company count? How about a luxury hotel owned locally by colonial expatriates (for example, a lodge owned by a French family in Morocco)? How does one sensitively deal with ownership of luxury property in South Africa? Or, for that matter, in any location in which a small minority of the population controls the tourist industry, and the benefits don't quite "trickle down"?

OP - one thing to remember is that, regardless of your budget, travelling itself is a luxury. Even if you're an unwashed, dreadlocked hippie hitchhiking and couch-surfing, you're enjoying every bit as much luxurious frivolity as someone staying in a 5-Star. Fortunately, the locals anywhere you go are bound to be indifferent to your "ethics." Really, they're hard-working people with more urgent concerns than how much you paid for your room. Besides, having been born in and enjoying the privilege country that are largely responsible for the economic conditions of developing countries, you're welcome to carry the burden of guilt without leaving home. The thing about guilt, though, is that it doesn't really do anyone much good. Respect, on the other hand, goes a long way. Treat the natives as equals, and become acquainted with the local issues and concerns. Find out if your particular skills or your stronger currency puts you in a unique position to contribute to their communities.

It is very easy to live like a king by spending lots of money. But with the right attitude, you'll find people all over the world who are happy to treat you like a king in exchange for your company, and this is infinitely more rewarding.

What have I become,
my Swedish friend?
Ev'ryone I know
Goes away Indian

10

Quote

---

Even if you're an unwashed, dreadlocked hippie hitchhiking and couch-surfing, you're enjoying every bit as much luxurious frivolity as someone staying in a 5-Star.

---

Yup... and as a resident of one of the less-wealthy nations, I can tell you that the locals prefer the 5-star luxury travellers. The "unwashed, dreadlocked..." are often seen as not only rich tourists, but as RUDE rich tourists, who show contempt for the local values. Mexicans, for example, no matter how poor, wash daily and their clothes are kept in good repair.

Working people find the idea that people who can afford to just hang out and not work, but who act as if they were poorer than they are, insulting. The 5-star tourists are appreciated for spending their money ... and, of course, expected to do so. Most people on the planet don't hold wealth against you, they hold hypocracy against you.

Pero yo ya no soy yo.
Ni mi casa es ya mi casa.
(Garcia Lorca)

The Mex Files

11

I enjoyed the comment by richtx.

There are wide and wonderful gray areas when choosing how to spend your money traveling. Is it better to choose an all-locally owned business on the basis of some ideological standard of purity when that company is more likely to evade paying taxes (because it is local and knows how to go under the radar) and when that company also pays it's employees far less than a foreign owned company?
Individual travelers who overly indulge themselves in the 'angst" of spending their money in the PC way are the also, imho, the most likely to exude a certain unconscious arrogance about themselves which locals pick right up on.. a sort of "holier than the average tourist" aura.

Mongolia, my area of expertise, is a case in point. On the one hand we have backpacker travelers who are so enamored of their false romantic impression of nomadic hospitality that they travel for weeks, leeching off the local people and convincing themselves that it is all a good thing because it is "natural" and doesn't corrupt the pure culture with a commercial relationship. Horseshit.

Even worse are the backpackers who make a game of competeing to see who can go the cheapest. This obviously pisses off the locals and is hypocrisy at it's worst.

Remember this simple rule: "If you can afford the leisure time and money to travel, you are on of the "haves""

12

Mongolia, my area of expertise, is a case in point. On the one hand we have backpacker travelers who are so enamored of their false romantic impression of nomadic hospitality that they travel for weeks, leeching off the local people and convincing themselves that it is all a good thing because it is "natural" and doesn't corrupt the pure culture with a commercial relationship. Horseshit.

LOVE THIS OBSERVATION!!!!!!!!

Cheers,
Terry

13

Agreed with 10 and 11.

Also, kind of related-- it's not clear that a foreign owned hotel wouldn't actually tend to treat its people better, pay taxes more honestly/fully and otherwise contribute more to the overall good of a country. It's kind of silly to assume that the kind of elites that can afford to own big hotels in developing countries are somehow better to their country-people and country (like the environment), than foreign corporations.

14

Quote

---

Working people find the idea that people who can afford to just hang out and not work, but who act as if they were poorer than they are, insulting... Most people on the planet don't hold wealth against you, they hold hypocracy against you.

---

I don't see anything hypocritical about hanging out and not working, and living cheaply. If you work for a while and spend less than you are earning, then you accumulate some savings, which means you can afford to spend some time not working, but only until your savings run out. That you can afford to not work does not mean you can afford to stay in 5-star hotels.

Many people seem compelled to work all the time, and to spend money as fast or faster than they earn it. For people earning barely enough to survive, it's their only choice. But many people who earn a comfortable living do this too. To me, that seems perverse, but to each his own. I won't hold it against them. Neither do I think they should resent those of us who make the opposite choice.