I probably agree that tourists are a net benefit, but like any transaction, they receive a good (experience of visiting a city), and pay a cost (part of which is to the city and its citizens); seems fair.
That being said, not all cities like tourists. Ever tried to go to the beach in New York? They are all private, you have to be a member of a club with beach access. That definitely cuts down on day trip tourists. Some cities in Florida with beach access have added taxes and regulation to keep spring break tourists away. The cost of those tourists was too high.
"Escape taxes" is a bit harsh. If the tourists are a net benefit, who cares if it's perfectly fair or not?
If you are really concerned about this inequity, you need to also consider the services that tourists don't use, such as schools, and most of the roads outside of tourist-trap areas.
I probably agree that tourists are a net benefit, but like any transaction, they receive a good (experience of visiting a city), and pay a cost (part of which is to the city and its citizens); seems fair.
That being said, not all cities like tourists. Ever tried to go to the beach in New York? They are all private, you have to be a member of a club with beach access. That definitely cuts down on day trip tourists. Some cities in Florida with beach access have added taxes and regulation to keep spring break tourists away. The cost of those tourists was too high.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/jun/3/florida-sprin...