Hacker News Reader

Comment by EA-3167 | Hacker News Reader

In 2023, when tourism rates had yet to fully recover from Covid, over 66 million people visited the US from abroad. I don't have more recent statistics, but I'm going to assume that the number is the same or higher this year.

Out of that population which could fill a decent-sized country, how many people have been treated so unfairly as the one in this article? How do those stats compare with other countries, and the inevitable abuses that occur in any vast bureaucracy?

It's possible to oppose the current US administration and still retain your rationality.

View on HN

https://theconversation.com/tourism-to-the-us-is-tanking-fli...

Nope, tourism is tanking. There are numerous stories about tourists being detained for little to no reason and eventually deported.

Travel warnings from various international orgs like Amnesty International and other governments have been mounting since 2019. It also doesn't help when the president attacks the country that makes up a large portion of tourist like Canada.

> In 2023, when tourism rates had yet to fully recover from Covid, over 66 million people visited the US from abroad. I don't have more recent statistics, but I'm going to assume that the number is the same or higher this year.

World Travel & Tourism Council says international visitor spending is going to drop by $12.5bn this year (down 22.5%).

Forcing you to hand your phone password and expose all your personal intimacy, or face prision, even when the chances are low, is quite a risk.

Even this comment in HN could put me into problems if the guard considers it harmful.

If a funny pic of a politician can put you into prision, the probably some messages you write in a WhatsApp group with friends, discussing world news, could mean serious problems.

I doubt it's that high with loads of Canadians not visiting the US.

I planned last year to stop off in Hawaii and Seattle on the way from NZ to the UK this May, but in March this year I altered that and just did Vancouver instead as the stop-off.

I know several friends and colleages who have also done similar (even two didn't go to weddings of friends in the US).

You're exaggerating the significance of Canadians in US tourism statistics. NY and MA have larger populations than ON and QC, Canada's two largest provinces. Therefore, even "loads" is a relatively small number.

A lot of Canadian “tourism” isn’t of the stay in a series of hotels for two weeks variety. It’s cross the border to attend a concert or sporting event. Grab a bite to eat and stock up at Walmart/Costco/<insert favorite store here> before heading home. Sales at the Costco nearest the border with BC were down 20% at the same time Costco was seeing increased sales nationwide.

Then why are all the border states, towns and cities (and their elected representatives) begging Canadian tourists to come back, with endless advertisements, appeals to our historic friendship, temporarily re-naming streets ("Canada Street", really? Can't wait for the photo-op of an ICE raid happening there) and even silly incentives (like a 3-pack of free golf balls in one case)...?

Yeah, good luck downplaying the 12+ billion the US tourism industry is about to lose this year.

What percentage of unnecessary and abusive jailings would you - as a rational person - consider acceptable?

(Not the person you originally replied to).

Zero, but that's not the same question. If something I think is unacceptable happens at a low rate, the fact that I think it's bad doesn't mean it's necessarily rational to change one's travel plans because of it, if the rate is low enough.

If I go to Iceland, there is some nonzero chance I'll be killed in a surprise volcanic eruption, but I wouldn't let that deter me from visiting Iceland.

The relatively high violent crime rate in US cities which was already present before the current administration is already a much more real reason not to visit the US than authoritarian border guards, although I'd argue even that would be a bit exaggerated.

> The relatively high violent crime rate in US cities which was already present before the current administration is already a much more real reason not to visit the US than authoritarian border guards, although I'd argue even that would be a bit exaggerated.

As a tourist doing tourist things in the US, your risk of being involved in a violent crime is notably lower than an average US citizen, and your risk of being involved with a border guard is notably higher.

Yes, that's true, but what's the base rate of each?

some nonzero chance I'll be killed in a surprise volcanic eruption

Why would you compare an unpredictable natural risk with one stemming from human behavior and government policy? This is like saying speeding limits are a bad idea because some people are killed by lightning.

Because when we use a natural risk, we remove the fact that it's actual policy put forth and implemented by humans. Otherwise, the ideology will always be brought into question, while volcanos don't have an ideology that can conflict with itself.

The point of analogies isn't to claim that the two things being compared are exactly identical, it's to draw attention to the ways in which they're similar that are relevant to the point being discussed.

By the way, I never said anything like "power tripping pro-MAGA border guards are okay because there are volcanoes in Iceland", so your lightning vs. speed limits analogy isn't relevant.

Nonsense. Your presence in Iceland or not has no influence on whether a volcano there erupts, whereas a sharp drop in tourism is a market signal that may influence policy in the future (not necessarily under the same administration).

Conversely, a sharp drop in tourism to Iceland is a market signal that a something along the lines of "volcano has exploded" has happened (what with there currently being few other reasons for such a drop), and "a tourist was killed when a volcano exploded" has a non-zero chance of modifying Iceland's tourism policies.

The original post of this subthread:

> Going to the USA as a tourist might be the most stupid action that one can make at this time. Unless you have a dying mother or father, there is absolutely no reason to visit this country. It reminds me of the tourists that used to go to North Korea for fun some years ago, it never was a good idea.

did not claim that one has a moral obligation to avoid the US, but rather tried to claim that it was stupid to do so from a purely rational perspective.

It’s the latter point I disagree with. People who avoid the US due to the possibility of personal harm by border guards are being irrational (unless perhaps they’re prominent pro-Palestinian activists).

I never said there’s no reason not visit the US. Avoiding it as a political protest against the current administration is a perfectly decent reason! But that’s not what was originally claimed.

I was curious about how likely deaths actually are from Volcanoes in Iceland. It looks like 15 deaths in the last 500 years with an unknown number possibly in the hundreds in the 500 years before that. But also ~9000 deaths due to famine in from farmland and livestock destruction.

Are we talking confirmed? Or Clickbait title?

Given the repeated reports of international carriers cutting US routes due to lack of demand this year, I wonder why you would assume that the numbers this year are the same as two years ago?

> It's possible to oppose the current US administration and still retain your rationality.

Waving off new abuses isn't rationality (it's also not opposing the current administration, but the opposite, carrying water for them.)

Sure, but if they’re detaining people because the officers are personal fans of JD Vance those ICE officers need to be fired. Like now. It’s unacceptable whether it’s 1 in a million or 1 in 10.

The numbers are not a principle.

> Sure, but if they’re detaining people because the officers are personal fans of JD Vance those ICE officers need to be fired. Like now.

Pedantic, but if it is at entry rather than chasing people down afterwards, its probably CBP, not ICE. (CBP also does some chasing down afterward, too.)

They are not detaining them. They are refusing them entry, housing them and sending them back. Every country has the right to choose who they admit.

And we don't really whether the JD Vance meme wasn't just the frosting on the cake. All we have is the tourist's word.

This is unheard of anywhere in the developed world. Security at airports simply doesn't have this sort of power outside the US.

That's simply not true.

Ask people who have tried going to Canada from the US how welcoming border guards can be at their ports of entry. Say the wrong thing or try to cross with the wrong thing (in my friend's case, it was a set of tools used to repair electronics) and they will try to jam you up and deny entry.

I've faced the repair tools things in Europe. No meanness besides taking most of them.

I managed to save a few by arguing how ineffective as weapons they would be and then watch as two security staff try their best to pinch each other with wire strippers.

Yup. They asked me what guns I had in the vehicle. Totally fair. I said none and expected they might want to search the vehicle, which would have been totally fair as well. But they weren't interested in that anymore, they started asking what kind of guns I and my passenger had at home. None, for me again, but my passenger admitted to having some at home 500 miles away. He later said he felt compelled to be honest because he didn't know what databases they might be hooked into. The border guard then began grilling him about the kinds of guns he had, what their purpose was, why he would own them, etc etc. Asshole invasive questions that served no purpose. I think the border guard just saw an opportunity to needle an American for being American. At least they let us through after that. They never searched the car, clearly they didn't have any legitimate concern about anything.

I've crossed into Canada multiple times and never had the guards comment on anything, personally? Was this a very recent thing and has there been a change in policy?

Just like US CBP, it depends on who you run into and the mood they are in. 10 years ago, I found cheap flights to Toronto from my city. When I got to Canadian Immigration, they asked, "Where are your guns?" and I said "I guess at home" just because it's a weird question that caught me off guard.

Canadian Border Guards then lectured me about responsible gun ownership, tore about my bags going "Since you don't keep track of your guns, let's find out if they are in your bags", went through my iPad movie content and finally was like "Ok, you are clear".

I've been back multiple times and since then, Scan Passport Check Computer STAMP PASSPORT Welcome to Canada.

I'm an American citizen, and when I cross into Canada I'm greeted courteously and professionally. I've never been pulled to secondary screening and I've never had a hostile interaction.

However, when returning to the United States, even as a citizen (born, not naturalized), I have frequently faced questioning about my social graph, who specifically I have contacted, and things of that nature. I thought it was one dickhead guard in Vermont, but it keeps happening.

Airport security might not, but this is border control, which has the authority to deny entry in every country.

> Security at airports simply doesn't have this sort of power outside the US.

No qualms with your actual point, but immigration/customs is not the same thing as airport security, sorry but it's my pet peeve when people conflate them.

Ah yes let's ignore tech conferences like H.O.P.E. [0] or even my own [1] suffering drastic setbacks due to international attendance dropping off a cliff.

We should just lecture our audience to keep their head on straight and come travel.

[0] https://archive.is/QWmxO

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44084767

We used to take two annual trips to the US, and cross the border every 4-6 weeks to shop, eat, and fill up our gas on the way home.

We haven't been there since this current administration took over, and have no plans on it until something changes.

Trumps comments regarding Canada, and the whole "51st state" rhetoric triggered the decision, but these stories absolutely play a part in it. I'm not about to put myself, or my family, in a position where someone might be detained for anywhere from days to weeks for no reason.

There's a big, beautiful world out there, and plenty of countries who are happy to have us and take our tourist dollars, all without me having to worry about getting detained for silly pictures on my phone. It's a pretty easy decision if you ask me.

So sad that one little man can affect your view of an entire place. The tone of this thread really pins Trump as a true King.

So sad that the policies and actions implemented by the current "regime" can affect the views of people that are not living there, or perhaps you just haven't been paying attention to the news since February 2025...

The world might be much better off if we could remember that a place is that place, not just the few rich people who own the guns and the news.

Places are filled with people... 70 million of whom wanted this nonsense and another 90 million too apathetic to vote, so willing to accept whatever the incoming administration would be.

Sure - America is a beautiful country, and people that I had met while on vacations and business trips were all very nice - I have driven thousands of miles (to/from Las Vegas from AB, Florida from ON) and never had a bad experience. But - unfortunately, the current political and cultural climate down there is just a little too "hot" - I hope it works out for the average person, but I don't have high hopes.

It’s not just one man, it’s also the millions of individuals who voted for him.

> I don't have more recent statistics, but I'm going to assume that the number is the same or higher this year.

Why would you?

> Out of that population which could fill a decent-sized country, how many people have been treated so unfairly as the one in this article? How do those stats compare with other countries, and the inevitable abuses that occur in any vast bureaucracy?

Most people have an opinion about the US. They might have shared it on social media.

For comparison, the government of Turkey might care if you have insulted Erdoğan on social media (I don’t know; they might). But chances are you want to travel to Turkey while not having strong enough opinions to have flamed Erdoğan on social media. People care more about what they can see in Turkey; foreigners objectively spend more time on US political news than they spend thinking about the US national parks.

I'm quite sure that turkish police doesn't have time to waste checking the social accounts of people.

ROTFL.

I'm quite sure that's their main job, finding out who are the adversaries of the regime.

Do you have any sources of them actually doing it or is it just a feeling?

Türkiye was just a hypothetical example. “Might”

Reply on news.ycombinator.com