Greed knows no bounds.

[Globalti]

Actually when I first saw this thread I thought it was about corporate lawyers, the greediest parasites on the Earth.

 

[Supersuperleeds]

Pretty sure when I went to Amsterdam with work I had to pay some sort of tourist tax. Personally I don't have a problem with it as long as you are told about it upfront.

 

[srw]

I was talking about cost to room rate, i dont mind the tax.
Nice london hotel at £400 a night + £2 to a Premier £35 deal +£2 .

If we're really talking greed i think the trains have it.. For peak time robbery

Except that you were specifically talking about Paris. Which is why I linked to the Paris tourist office where there is a differential between cheap and expensive hotels.

 

[Globalti]

It used to be that you paid a "tax" when arriving at Lagos airport and at roughly five mile intervals on any road trip within the country. Things aren't quite so bad there nowadays.

 

[srw]

Except many of those towns would barely exist without tourism. It's tourists that sustain the cafes, restaurants, attractions and geegaw shops - all of these create jobs and generate income directly to local authorities through business rates. Instead of looking at tourists as generating "costs authorities are forced to incur", such expenditure should be looked upon as investment to encourage tourism.

You're quite right. The four specific places mentioned in this thread: Oxford (two universities, car factory, local government), York (university, railways, local government, financial services), Edinburgh (national and local government, two universities, financial services) and Bath (two universities, financial services, local government and a useful commuter town for Bristol) just didn't exist before the advent of mass tourism in the 18th century - their apparently ancient mediaeval buildings are modern reproductions - and would be absolutely nothing without tourism.

 

[Slick]

I haven't read the whole thread but just in case anyone is worried, I'm sure Edinburgh will be fine.

 

[Andy in Germany]

I haven't read the whole thread but just in case anyone is worried, I'm sure Edinburgh will be fine.

I'm not so sure: imagine all those Japanese tourists saying "What? two pounds extra a night? We can't go to Edinburgh then."

Then they'll book a hotel in Birmingham instead, just you wait and see.

 

[Joey Shabadoo]

Tourists generated £1,320,000,000 for Edinburgh in 2015 alone, more than all the money paid by locals in council tax and business rates combined. Perhaps the locals should pay more for services they use all year round rather than tourists only there for a few days.

 

[Slick]

I'm not so sure: imagine all those Japanese tourists saying "What? two pounds extra a night? We can't go to Edinburgh then."

Then they'll book a hotel in Birmingham instead, just you wait and see.

 

[Slick]

Tourists generated £1,320,000,000 for Edinburgh in 2015 alone, more than all the money paid by locals in council tax and business rates combined. Perhaps the locals should pay more for services they use all year round rather than tourists only there for a few days.

I'm sure the edinburgers would be quite displeased at the thought of their tax bill being linked to tourism, although if it was I'd probably get a rebate.

 

[screenman]

I wonder when Lincoln is going to start paying people who visit.

 

[Joey Shabadoo]

I wonder how much Edinburghers realise just how much they're subsidised by the tourists they can't stand?

 

[Slick]

I wonder how much Edinburghers realise just how much they're subsidised by the tourists they can't stand?

I certainly didn't know. Stirling and Inverness must be similar though.

 

[Andy in Germany]

I wonder how much Edinburghers realise just how much they're subsidised by the tourists they can't stand?

I certainly didn't know. Stirling and Inverness must be similar though.

To say nothing of London...

 

[tom73]

I've been going to games in Glasgow for over 50 years and have yet to see a stabbing or bottling.
There is very rarely as much as a handbag swung in anger these days but we still have ridiculous numbers of police.

Party conferences have huge numbers of police in attendance, why should they be subsidised by the rest of us

Over policing is an issue but that only effects the the ground and the area round it not the wider over spill. Which still need to be covered.
Over the 20+ years of proving FA cover 1st as a cadet then as an adult duty office responsible for not just 1000's of fans but the safety of 20+ fellow members. I have seen violence had to deal with it from punch ups to having to treating fans in the middle of a full on riot of away fans.

Football is like no other licensed business if you owned a bar that required police to call round every week to deal with violence both inside and outside the venue. You'd soon find yourself before licensing and be closed down. But football can just carry on. As for local taxpayers are fans yes it's true but away fans are not. So maybe a charge back to the away LA maybe a part fix. In the end if you wish to run and event or put on show ect you have to arrange and pay for correct cover of stewards, FA ect or you can't run the event it's called being responsible and fair to all. A concert by a big name as an eg has to also show how they internet to reduce the impact on local A and E and hospitals so my 20 members becomes 200+ along with 20+ team of HCP's and a large number of the big vans with blue lights. Football is in a world of its own.

As for party conferences ect police are able to apply for home office funding to cover the cost. But yes that needs looking at but its not every week and its not just down to one local force but others. inc the met and special branch. In the end someone has to pay if footballl can have transfer budgets 1000's of times bigger than a police force budget then they can well afford to pay the true cost of covering a match.