[quadrifoliate]

> But major cities just don't suffer from the same problems! Say Chennai or Mumbai or Trivendrum or Kochi or anybody else - this is simply not a problem. They don't have over tourism.

It might not be tourism specifically, but major cities have a huge problem with net migration into the cities, typically from rural areas. This causes overcrowding, slums, and a ton of pressure on land and water. Logically, the cities should also be free to ban "outsiders" from coming in for whatever time they want. After all, the outsiders are encroaching on their way of life!

Great, let's ban anyone from entering Chennai or Mumbai unless they own or rent land there, or have a confirmed hotel booking! We can set up checkpoints at the city boundaries, and require anyone coming in to show these proofs.

See how quickly this logic can fall apart if everyone starts applying it?

[thewhitetulip]

Nobody will apply this logic in major cities because it'll cause a lot of outrage and rightfully so.

This is not the first small tourist place to set restrictions as far as I know so yeah this won't be a slippery slope any time soon

[quadrifoliate]

Slippery slope is a fallacy, but enough of these incidents and people will absolutely start trying to apply this in their home states. I thought India had gotten past the "I don't like people from other states" phase by now.

For example, if people from the rest of India are not allowed to buy land in Himachal, it seems only fair that Himachalis who own land in Himachal should not be allowed to buy land anywhere else in India. Sooner or later people are going to come to that logical conclusion.