[idoescompooters]

Tourism is providing these local economies with money. Shoo-ing away the tourists is not the answer. They are providing significant money into some very bad economies, and in some cases such as resorts, hiring locals and paying them decent wages (I see this in Indonesia). I assure you suburban US does not need your money.

[Thin_icE]

Tourism provides money to these local economies, true. But what airbnb, and digital nomads, did was to subvert these local economies to depend on the to survive, turning whole cities (some of which are world heritage sites) into amusement rides for tourists. Have you ever stopped to think what is life like for the locals who work in the resorts (to take your example), and can't afford to live nowhere near their workplace, having to commute for over an hour (in the best case scenarios) only to smile at tourists that become upset because they can't speak their language? It's lovely to say that businesses should pay locals a decent wage, but that very rarely happens, the "decent" is a very debatable number. And anyway, no one in the world needs your suburban US money, please keep it to yourself and your suburban US economy.

[midasuni]

How does a “digital nomad” differ from a resident that works from home?

[Thin_icE]

A resident that works from home earns a salary that is calculated according to the economy where he resides, whereas a digital nomad, tipically chooses a destination with a lower cost of living, while earning a salary that was calculated for the economy of his original whereabouts. The digital nomad creates inflation and makes it impossible for locals to live on their own region, while someone who works from home does not have that ability to tip the economy.