Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People who aren't vacationing in DC because of fear of being murdered are also not vacationing in NYC, Chicago, LA, Seattle... in other words, people who are very fearful of crime avoid large cities. Your risk of being a victim of crime while vacationing in DC are ridiculously low.

The actual threats to tourism in DC are the closures of bars and restaurants and the decline in activity in popular tourist destinations like Chinatown. If raising tourism tax helps the city invest in those neighborhoods and support small businesses, it genuinely could benefit the city.

Many DC tourists stay outside the city anyway. The big tour groups often stay in budget hotels just outside the city and then take the buses downtown and to the Mall.

We don't vacation as a part of tour groups, and yes -- I am afraid of crime in DC. Murder isn't my primary concern -- being mugged, robbed at gunpoint, or carjacked would be the concerns.

So you don't vacation in any large cities?

I live in Atlanta but would never walk around after dark. Same when I visit other larger cities.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:LA has close proximity to many known beaches, high end places that people want to experience, tours of homes if the rich and famous, nearby cities to visit like San Diego or Santa Barbara. Plus great weather.

NYC has the big name, shopping, interesting nightlife and amazing food.

DC has… free museums, that draws a certain type of tourist but not large masses, government buildings- the main draw to DC. Also draws a certain type of tourist but not masses.

If I didn’t live here, I’d visit DC once for a few days, mostly for the government buildings. Once you’ve seen them, you’ve seen them.

I go to NYC multiple times per year and LA once a year and Miami at least once a year. DC is a great city but not on tourism par with other big cities.

Exactly. Maybe you visit DC once for just a long weekend, perhaps around the 4th of July, when your kids are 10 or something like that. If they make it as expensive as LA or New York then I’m not sure of the value. The actual cool stuff that forms great memories, like the elevator to the top of of the Washington Monument or a White House tour are now so difficult that they are basically impossible to do. You can see a space shuttle in LA. You can see much better art in both LA and New York. You can see a better natural history museum in New York. The only unique DC things generally open to the public are the Capitol Building, Library of Congress and Arlington Cemetery and the only essential visit out of those three is the cemetery and it’s not even in DC proper. What’s the unique value proposition again?

DP. You are acting like DC has never had a tourism industry before and is trying to build one from scratch. DC has had a thriving tourism industry in the past that it now needs to re-vitalize post-covid. Many cities are facing this.

Anonymous wrote:LA has close proximity to many known beaches, high end places that people want to experience, tours of homes if the rich and famous, nearby cities to visit like San Diego or Santa Barbara. Plus great weather.

NYC has the big name, shopping, interesting nightlife and amazing food.

DC has… free museums, that draws a certain type of tourist but not large masses, government buildings- the main draw to DC. Also draws a certain type of tourist but not masses.

If I didn’t live here, I’d visit DC once for a few days, mostly for the government buildings. Once you’ve seen them, you’ve seen them.

I go to NYC multiple times per year and LA once a year and Miami at least once a year. DC is a great city but not on tourism par with other big cities.

Exactly. Maybe you visit DC once for just a long weekend, perhaps around the 4th of July, when your kids are 10 or something like that. If they make it as expensive as LA or New York then I’m not sure of the value. The actual cool stuff that forms great memories, like the elevator to the top of of the Washington Monument or a White House tour are now so difficult that they are basically impossible to do. You can see a space shuttle in LA. You can see much better art in both LA and New York. You can see a better natural history museum in New York. The only unique DC things generally open to the public are the Capitol Building, Library of Congress and Arlington Cemetery and the only essential visit out of those three is the cemetery and it’s not even in DC proper. What’s the unique value proposition again?

An increase of $2-3 in there room rate is unlikely to make or break anyone’s vacation budget (and if it would, they’re already going to be looking for cheaper hotels outside DC). This is an easy way to raise more tax revenue that can be used to boost tourism.

Anonymous wrote:I suppose visitors could stay in Virginia and then use the free Metro to visit sites around DC.

Is this what most spring school tourist groups do? I know we did in the 80s and metro was brand new. Our home time was bigger and more dangerous so didn’t notice the crime much then or when we moved here in the 90s.

Some of these taxes though will push me and other locals outside the city limits to find more affordable places to dine and spend our time. Metro and no the Diamond Highways (I66, DTR etc) into DC have made it not worth the trip. (DTR another example of once governor starts charging for something, it won’t stop even if agreed to from the beginning.)

Part of the calculation that goes into raising taxes is the room rentals driven by convention and business visitors. Bargain hunters aren’t paying rack rates downtown.

Tired of all the Pearl clutching about crime in DC. The number of crimes committed against tourists is de minimis: DC is remarkably safe in terms of almost any area a tourist would find themselves. The odds of getting mugged or carjacked in the downtown area where most hotels are located is infunitesmly dmall. You have better odds of being shot by a FBI agent or stabbed by a Proud Boy.

I question the effectiveness of the advertising. Has anyone ever chosen their vacation based on one of those TV ads?

At the same time my bet would be most of the tax comes out of the pockets of the hotel owners. Elasticity.

LA has close proximity to many known beaches, high end places that people want to experience, tours of homes if the rich and famous, nearby cities to visit like San Diego or Santa Barbara. Plus great weather.

NYC has the big name, shopping, interesting nightlife and amazing food.

DC has… free museums, that draws a certain type of tourist but not large masses, government buildings- the main draw to DC. Also draws a certain type of tourist but not masses.

If I didn’t live here, I’d visit DC once for a few days, mostly for the government buildings. Once you’ve seen them, you’ve seen them.

I go to NYC multiple times per year and LA once a year and Miami at least once a year. DC is a great city but not on tourism par with other big cities.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People who aren't vacationing in DC because of fear of being murdered are also not vacationing in NYC, Chicago, LA, Seattle... in other words, people who are very fearful of crime avoid large cities. Your risk of being a victim of crime while vacationing in DC are ridiculously low.

The actual threats to tourism in DC are the closures of bars and restaurants and the decline in activity in popular tourist destinations like Chinatown. If raising tourism tax helps the city invest in those neighborhoods and support small businesses, it genuinely could benefit the city.

Many DC tourists stay outside the city anyway. The big tour groups often stay in budget hotels just outside the city and then take the buses downtown and to the Mall.

We don't vacation as a part of tour groups, and yes -- I am afraid of crime in DC. Murder isn't my primary concern -- being mugged, robbed at gunpoint, or carjacked would be the concerns.

That's fine. Would you vacation in New York City, central Boston or Chicago, downtown Seattle or San Francisco? Or, for that matter, central London or Paris or Berlin or Tokyo or Hong Kong or Buenos Aires? My guess is no. If you won't visit large cities with some inevitable incidence of crime, then there is likely nothing DC could do to make you feel "safe".

Enjoy Disney World or the OBX or wherever it is you do enjoy traveling.

PP here. I've traveled to quite a few cities in the states and Europe in my lifetime. Feel free to dismiss the crime in DC.

Which cities? When? The point is, if you are currently unwilling to travel to DC because of crime, you must not travel to other major cities which all have the same issues with crime at the moment. I am a resident of DC and don't dismiss the crime at all -- I know it's happening and would like it to be addressed, plus understand that we likely need to address some of the systemic issues driving it at the moment (like housing costs resulting in more unhoused people, lingering issues with truancy and criminality among teenagers owing in part to school closures during Covid, and inflation and cost of living increases that are leading people on the economic bubble to turn to property and violent crimes).

But it's silly to act like we should address crime so that YOU can feel more comfortable visiting our city, when it's unlikely you would visit any city right now due to your sensitivity to crime. Cities have crime. If that is too scary for you, don't visit cities! I don't think DC should tailor it's policies to pleasing you, a person who does not live here and doesn't want to visit.

Anonymous wrote:Liberals never met a tax they didn’t like, especially if they don’t have to pay it, e.g., soak the rich tourists.

Remember, many cities also have commuter taxes to help pay for the roads, etc, which DC doesn't. So no, it isn't soaking the rich tourists.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People who aren't vacationing in DC because of fear of being murdered are also not vacationing in NYC, Chicago, LA, Seattle... in other words, people who are very fearful of crime avoid large cities. Your risk of being a victim of crime while vacationing in DC are ridiculously low.

The actual threats to tourism in DC are the closures of bars and restaurants and the decline in activity in popular tourist destinations like Chinatown. If raising tourism tax helps the city invest in those neighborhoods and support small businesses, it genuinely could benefit the city.

Many DC tourists stay outside the city anyway. The big tour groups often stay in budget hotels just outside the city and then take the buses downtown and to the Mall.

We don't vacation as a part of tour groups, and yes -- I am afraid of crime in DC. Murder isn't my primary concern -- being mugged, robbed at gunpoint, or carjacked would be the concerns.

So you don't vacation in any large cities?

Anonymous wrote:Seems pretty straightforward. How much does anyone pay attention to these tax rates when planning their vacation anyway? And, as the article notes, the proposed rates are similar to other large cities. The money just goes into promoting more tourism.

Honestly, DC has to work extra hard to undo the stink of the Trump years.

People do pay attention to the overall cost. They are benchmarking themselves against NYC and LA. But DC is not NYC or LA. If it’s just as expensive to stay in DC as NYC or LA it won’t be hard for people to decide where they would prefer to visit.

Do people complain about hotel costs in DC to the point that it is an issue? Feel like DC is pretty affordable for hotels compared to other major cities

I suppose visitors could stay in Virginia and then use the free Metro to visit sites around DC.