"expensive" countries vs. "cheaper" countries for traveling (crime, hotels)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
One hears and reads so often from people who travel about
this country being "too expensive" or that country being way more "affordable/bargain" when discussing travel destinations,
but do some of these people not even factor in the general correlation that "expensive" countries are expensive because standard of living, level of infrastructure, health and safety, education/literacy which translates to better linguistic communication are all at a higher level than countries that are seen as cheap and affordable.
I know, I know there are safe and cheap places, but I come across people IRL and online who for example talk about Australia/NZ, Western Europe, Asian Tigers being too expensive, why not travel to SE Asia or eastern Europe as being cheaper alternatives.
Maybe I'm just an ignorant, classist American afraid of other places, but not really . . . heres the thing, I HAVE traveled to a developing country in the past with typical developing country issues (Ecuador). I have nothing against traveling to countries that are a little lower down the health/safety/quality of life scale, but if/when I do I would do it with a professional tour company that focuses on ecotourism and indigenous tourism.
And sure if you are looking to "live it up" and have more "semi-hedonistic" experiences (I don't mean that in a self righteous way) a cheaper, less developed country will certainly be a cheaper place to experience that (Thailand, Carribbean etc.)
but in terms of backpacking/budget/solo type travel, my opinion is that "expensive countries" are better to do this in, because you are not compromising health and safety at all.
I was in Australia last month, and spent half the time in Sydney, half the time volunteering for a conservation organization in a small city two hours to the north. Some nights in Sydney I did the dorm hostel experience for $35/night, other nights my own room, still for under $100, ate at corner Asian restaurants or corner fish and chips places, etc.
But in Central America, Southeast Asia, etc. you would be more at risk being robbed, ripped off, etc. choosing the low budget accomodations, and food at markets, if you do know what you are doing, you might be consuming stuff that may make you sick.
So, bottom line, I don't see "expensive countries" and "cheap countries", I see "expensive" countries that are safe to travel cheaply, and cheap countries (tropical, developing) countries that are better left to professional tour companies which would cost more money.
Also, expensive countries are often the ones that have quality of life that is considered even superior in some ways than the US according to some people and I like traveling and getting to know those places because I want to learn about them (Western Europe, Aus/NZ, Asian tiger economies, even southern cone of South America). (The following January I'm looking to go to Chile to volunteer and travel, considered the safest but also most expensive country).
Developing countries I like traveling but for different reasons than the others.
What are you thoughts? Do people NOT factor this in? Are other people just way more worldy than I and know how to handle themselves better than I would? Am I just a classist American afraid of poor people??
Here's the difference. It is possible, and in fact easy in Quito to find a safe place to sleep for under $20, it is possible to get a taxi ride for two bucks, it is possible to eat a nice varied nutritious dinner for 3-4 dollars. It may not be up to the standards of New York or Washington, but it is possible to travel safely and with fair comfort for $35 a day, or $200 a week. In NYC or Washington, a foreign traveler not familiar with the city would never be able to arrange a stay muck less than $200 a night, without putting himself in serious danger. The class of accommodations that prevail commonly in Quito simply do not exist.
However, if you want to, there is a $200-a-night hotel in Quito, with $40 entrees on the dinner menu, and the sky's the limit in the wine cellar. Just like New York.
This summer, I stayed in Karakol, Kyrgyzstan, for two weeks, on less than $200, in a comfortable private room in a clean and respectable hotel, and ate daily in a restaurant that was classier than any I would ever dine at in America. No prior arrangements nor helpful contacts, just got off the bus and checked into the first hotel I saw and ate in a restaurant down the street. I could live there, in hotels and restaurants, for $5,000 a year (and I'm seriously considering doing it). See how long $5K lasts you in London.
The people in the streets, even in that provincial town, are virtually 100% literate, most of them in two languages, everybody has a cell phone, people in the streets look healthy and are dressed neater than those in an American mall. The streets are paved, the electrical grid is reliable, the tap water is potable, public transport is safe and reliable and affordable, there is no trash or litter on the ground. Buildings and lawns are neat and well-maintained and colorful. Everybody had the patience to endure my linguistic ignorance, and were invariably polite, helpful, honest, not just to me, but to each other.. Some became lifelong friends. There are no beggars, and no outward signs of homelessness. How could one possibly feel threatened or intimidated by people, merely because they do not have the personal wealth of Americans? Why would I want a professional travel agent to arrange and guide my visit to Karakol? What, as a visitor, am I supposed to "factor in"?
---
Let me end with an anecdote. My wife fell in the street in a little town off the beaten track in Panama, and re-dislocated her elbow. A taxi driver was parked a block down the street, there were no other cars in sight. He saw that she had hurt herself seriously, and immediately drove over, told us there was a little medical clinic in the town, and drove us over there. I tried to pay him, he refused, he said he took some time off his job to help someone in distress, and now he will go back to work.
What did we need to factor in?
If I injured myself in a little town in Yemen or Burkina Faso, the whole town would adopt me, and would see to it that I received all the comfort and attention possible, and expect nothing in repayment. If I injured myself in my WalMart parking lot, someone would phone 911, and everyone would just stand there and gawk at me until the $1500 ambulance took me a few blocks down the street to an emergency room, and the shoppers would waddle off to their SUVs and forget about me before supper time.
If I injured myself in a little town in Yemen or Burkina Faso, the whole town would adopt me
Keep in mind, it is illegal for Yemeni women to go out of their house without the permission of a male relative or husband. They will get arrested by the police.
One hears and reads so often from people who travel about
this country being "too expensive" or that country being way more "affordable/bargain" when discussing travel destinations,
but do some of these people not even factor in the general correlation that "expensive" countries are expensive because standard of living, level of infrastructure, health and safety, education/literacy which translates to better linguistic communication are all at a higher level than countries that are seen as cheap and affordable.
I know, I know there are safe and cheap places, but I come across people IRL and online who for example talk about Australia/NZ, Western Europe, Asian Tigers being too expensive, why not travel to SE Asia or eastern Europe as being cheaper alternatives.
Maybe I'm just an ignorant, classist American afraid of other places, but not really . . . heres the thing, I HAVE traveled to a developing country in the past with typical developing country issues (Ecuador). I have nothing against traveling to countries that are a little lower down the health/safety/quality of life scale, but if/when I do I would do it with a professional tour company that focuses on ecotourism and indigenous tourism.
And sure if you are looking to "live it up" and have more "semi-hedonistic" experiences (I don't mean that in a self righteous way) a cheaper, less developed country will certainly be a cheaper place to experience that (Thailand, Carribbean etc.)
but in terms of backpacking/budget/solo type travel, my opinion is that "expensive countries" are better to do this in, because you are not compromising health and safety at all.
I was in Australia last month, and spent half the time in Sydney, half the time volunteering for a conservation organization in a small city two hours to the north. Some nights in Sydney I did the dorm hostel experience for $35/night, other nights my own room, still for under $100, ate at corner Asian restaurants or corner fish and chips places, etc.
But in Central America, Southeast Asia, etc. you would be more at risk being robbed, ripped off, etc. choosing the low budget accomodations, and food at markets, if you do know what you are doing, you might be consuming stuff that may make you sick.
So, bottom line, I don't see "expensive countries" and "cheap countries", I see "expensive" countries that are safe to travel cheaply, and cheap countries (tropical, developing) countries that are better left to professional tour companies which would cost more money.
Also, expensive countries are often the ones that have quality of life that is considered even superior in some ways than the US according to some people and I like traveling and getting to know those places because I want to learn about them (Western Europe, Aus/NZ, Asian tiger economies, even southern cone of South America). (The following January I'm looking to go to Chile to volunteer and travel, considered the safest but also most expensive country).
Developing countries I like traveling but for different reasons than the others.
What are you thoughts? Do people NOT factor this in? Are other people just way more worldy than I and know how to handle themselves better than I would? Am I just a classist American afraid of poor people??
I mostly agree. I've traveled and worked all over the world and currently been in southern Peru for over a year. Chile is a pretty good between 1st world and 3rd world as you have good travel and infrastructure with a good subway system in Santiago and even in Viña del mar there is a small subway system. I consider Chile (Santiago) to have the minimum infrastructure that I would want to live in long term.
Where I work in Peru is a city of a million that is very inexpensive (we spend about 30% of what we spend when living in USA), has great climate year round, nice restaurants and bars, beautiful architecture...but the infrastructure is insufficient and there is a level of trash and pollution that would be hard to accept for living here permanently. It is relatively safe, safer than many US cities but not as safe as where I live in Washington state.
I do consider Thailand to also be a safe place, acceptable infrastructure (Bangkok), great food, and still inexpensive.
Most of the rest of South America, Central America and the Caribbean are too dangerous for me to want to live there.
Keep in mind, it is illegal for Yemeni women to go out of their house without the permission of a male relative or husband. They will get arrested by the police.
Aside from being irrelevant to this topic or to my reply, that does not fairly reflect the social reality. A husband or brother has the right to restrict a woman from going outside the house, and can prevail upon the police to enforce that legal right. Some men are more conservative than others. But that is not he same as saying the police automatically round up all unaccompanied women in the streets and throw them in jail just for being outdoors, as your description implies.
Girls go to school in Yemen (over 30% are literate), but it is customary for them to be escorted to and from school by a male family member, as is the case in many Arab countries. I taught school in Jordan, and I had a lot of female students, who outwardly appeared to be just like western girls in the dress and comportment, but many were escorted to and from school by their family.
I mostly agree. I've traveled and worked all over the world and currently been in southern Peru for over a year. Chile is a pretty good between 1st world and 3rd world as you have good travel and infrastructure with a good subway system in Santiago and even in Viña del mar there is a small subway system. I consider Chile (Santiago) to have the minimum infrastructure that I would want to live in long term.
Where I work in Peru is a city of a million that is very inexpensive (we spend about 30% of what we spend when living in USA), has great climate year round, nice restaurants and bars, beautiful architecture...but the infrastructure is insufficient and there is a level of trash and pollution that would be hard to accept for living here permanently. It is relatively safe, safer than many US cities but not as safe as where I live in Washington state.
I do consider Thailand to also be a safe place, acceptable infrastructure (Bangkok), great food, and still inexpensive.
Most of the rest of South America, Central America and the Caribbean are too dangerous for me to want to live there.
Thanks for seeing my point. Yeah, I have definitely decided that Chile is my next place I travel to. I loved Ecuador (that was years ago), and of course Costa Rica and Panama are also very much anomalies in their region.
The comment on Thailand . . . I was wondering what about it that turns me off slightly, then it dawned on me . . . I think places known for the sex tourism, I assume there's a darker truth surrounding it. Is it self righteousness on my part? Do I think deep down good girls might find it suspicious that I would prioritize travel to places known for sex tourism? (or drugs for that matter).
Look, I understand the argument for legalizing prostitution, and I know one doesn't have to solicit services, but I tend to automatically assume that there must be some kind of seedy underbelly that one doesn't hear about with sex tourism. Even if it is legal, it seems like it is a risky environment.
And so MANY westerners travel to Thailand and the rest of SE Asia with that goal in mind.
Here's the difference. It is possible, and in fact easy in Quito to find a safe place to sleep for under $20, it is possible to get a taxi ride for two bucks, it is possible to eat a nice varied nutritious dinner for 3-4 dollars. It may not be up to the standards of New York or Washington, but it is possible to travel safely and with fair comfort for $35 a day, or $200 a week. In NYC or Washington, a foreign traveler not familiar with the city would never be able to arrange a stay muck less than $200 a night, without putting himself in serious danger. The class of accommodations that prevail commonly in Quito simply do not exist.
However, if you want to, there is a $200-a-night hotel in Quito, with $40 entrees on the dinner menu, and the sky's the limit in the wine cellar. Just like New York.
This summer, I stayed in Karakol, Kyrgyzstan, for two weeks, on less than $200, in a comfortable private room in a clean and respectable hotel, and ate daily in a restaurant that was classier than any I would ever dine at in America. No prior arrangements nor helpful contacts, just got off the bus and checked into the first hotel I saw and ate in a restaurant down the street. I could live there, in hotels and restaurants, for $5,000 a year (and I'm seriously considering doing it). See how long $5K lasts you in London.
The people in the streets, even in that provincial town, are virtually 100% literate, most of them in two languages, everybody has a cell phone, people in the streets look healthy and are dressed neater than those in an American mall. The streets are paved, the electrical grid is reliable, the tap water is potable, public transport is safe and reliable and affordable, there is no trash or litter on the ground. Buildings and lawns are neat and well-maintained and colorful. Everybody had the patience to endure my linguistic ignorance, and were invariably polite, helpful, honest, not just to me, but to each other.. Some became lifelong friends. There are no beggars, and no outward signs of homelessness. How could one possibly feel threatened or intimidated by people, merely because they do not have the personal wealth of Americans? Why would I want a professional travel agent to arrange and guide my visit to Karakol? What, as a visitor, am I supposed to "factor in"?
---
Let me end with an anecdote. My wife fell in the street in a little town off the beaten track in Panama, and re-dislocated her elbow. A taxi driver was parked a block down the street, there were no other cars in sight. He saw that she had hurt herself seriously, and immediately drove over, told us there was a little medical clinic in the town, and drove us over there. I tried to pay him, he refused, he said he took some time off his job to help someone in distress, and now he will go back to work.
What did we need to factor in?
If I injured myself in a little town in Yemen or Burkina Faso, the whole town would adopt me, and would see to it that I received all the comfort and attention possible, and expect nothing in repayment. If I injured myself in my WalMart parking lot, someone would phone 911, and everyone would just stand there and gawk at me until the $1500 ambulance took me a few blocks down the street to an emergency room, and the shoppers would waddle off to their SUVs and forget about me before supper time.
I've heard that Kyrgyzstan is starting to really develop its tourism industry and is much more tourist friendly than the other central Asian republics. I know it has spectacular mountains, and maybe an alternative to crowded Nepal. (Tajikistan on the other hand might be better to be pass up from what I've read).
I am aware that Panama has become just as safe, stable, and developed as Costa Rica. I would go there.
Sorry, you're not going to convince me to go to Yemen or Burkina Faso anytime soon.
Thanks for seeing my point. Yeah, I have definitely decided that Chile is my next place I travel to. I loved Ecuador (that was years ago), and of course Costa Rica and Panama are also very much anomalies in their region.
The comment on Thailand . . . I was wondering what about it that turns me off slightly, then it dawned on me . . . I think places known for the sex tourism, I assume there's a darker truth surrounding it. Is it self righteousness on my part? Do I think deep down good girls might find it suspicious that I would prioritize travel to places known for sex tourism? (or drugs for that matter).
Look, I understand the argument for legalizing prostitution, and I know one doesn't have to solicit services, but I tend to automatically assume that there must be some kind of seedy underbelly that one doesn't hear about with sex tourism. Even if it is legal, it seems like it is a risky environment.
And so MANY westerners travel to Thailand and the rest of SE Asia with that goal in mind.
Plenty of people go to Thailand for reasons other than sex tourism...I've been several times with my wife and she loves it there as well. For those that do go to the sex tourism areas, chances of having problems are higher but I still classify Thailand as a quite safe country although I have a friend in Chiang Mai that has said crime is increasing. I really like Chile and could live there happily....from my standpoint, the most highly developed country in South or Central America but it still has high poverty and income inequality.
Plenty of people go to Thailand for reasons other than sex tourism...I've been several times with my wife and she loves it there as well. For those that do go to the sex tourism areas, chances of having problems are higher
Naw. Most of the sex tourists who run into trouble do so because they are drinking, not because they are looking for sex. No joke, it's not an exaggeration to say that over 99% of the problems sex tourists run into are alcohol or drug related.
Naw. Most of the sex tourists who run into trouble do so because they are drinking, not because they are looking for sex. No joke, it's not an exaggeration to say that over 99% of the problems sex tourists run into are alcohol or drug related.
That's pretty much what I implied.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
