• Voli@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    29
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Think this is more about taxing companies who have been having it good with the current tax system, the tourist that are planing to come will come.

  • YurkshireLad@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    32
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    I want to visit Iceland some day and I’d rather pay their tax than pay to visit a tourist clogged Venice. So I’m not put off. Unless it’s incredibly expensive.

  • SHOW_ME_YOUR_ASSHOLE@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    Iceland is already a pretty expensive place to visit and it’s honestly not that amazing (it’s beautiful for sure, but it didn’t stand out to me). Everywhere you go you have to pay to park and pay to camp. The food, drink, lodging, and transportation is super expensive already and a major part of their economy is built on tourist dollars. I’m curious to see how much the tax would be and how much of it goes to actually protecting their environment.

    • bobman@unilem.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      Everywhere you go you have to pay to park and pay to camp.

      Whew, thanks for letting me know that.

      Now I will never be going there with my own money.

      • Anonymoose@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        1 year ago

        Iceland is quite beautiful, I didn’t camp but I recall the park areas being quite fierce about not venturing off of walking paths to protect sensitive things like moss that take forever to grow. That may be a reason why they don’t allow dispersed camping. I’d say still go, it was beautiful in the winter and I didn’t find it too crowded or unbearably cold.

        • bobman@unilem.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          I’d like to, but I’ll just go somewhere else beautiful that doesn’t try to gouge me at every turn.

  • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    12
    ·
    1 year ago

    Good, tourism is way too cheap for the environmental impact, the less people travel the better for the environment.

    • JimmyMcGill@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      21
      ·
      1 year ago

      That is somewhat true but what this also causes is that poorer people have a harder time travelling and visiting other countries while rich people are unnaffected

      • Mkengine@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        The common good and environment of a nation has priority over cheap tourism, so I don’t necessarily see that as a problem. Especially when the number of annual tourists exceeds the population by a factor of five in the case of Iceland, I can understand why some residents would like to reduce it.

            • FabledAepitaph@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              I’m sure the entire government of Iceland, including any departments dedicated specifically to, and with decades of experience in tourism, could figure it out if they really wanted. But just charging a tax is easier, so here we are.

      • Kecessa@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        8
        ·
        1 year ago

        Considering the climate crisis we’re facing I don’t care, anything to reduce air travel. All countries should turn non-local private jets around too.