- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
The jarring contrast between those holidaying and those hurting is hard to bear for many in Hawaii.
The jarring contrast between those holidaying and those hurting is hard to bear for many in Hawaii.
You don’t just double the cost for more people. The kids wouldn’t be renting their own cars and you could get a room with 2 kings rather than separate rooms.
In any case, the analogy doesn’t make sense because a family that can afford a $10,000 trip (when there are way cheaper options in even in Hawaii) can afford to switch their plans for a fee. They aren’t exactly worried about their financial stability. Airlines were offering to change for free anyways.
That would depend on the age of the kids. You’re right that a $10,000 trip for four would get you just about anywhere in the world, but whether its $5,000 or $500, a trip to Hawaii could be a once in a lifetime experience. Maybe they always dreamed of Hawaii instead of Fiji or Recife or the French Riviera. Nobody could have predicted these specific wildfires (climate scientists notwithstanding) when they were planning their trips.
Airlines were scrambling to provide flights off the island, and while hotels and rental companies are extending refunds now, most are only now doing it in response to this precise backlash.
I’m with you that people should leave the island, and visitors should delay or change their plans. Shit happens, and this sucks for everyone. But the people who have lost their homes, the people who have lost loved ones, they are the ones suffering and they have every right to be angry at the tourism industry that is still catering to clients above supporting relief efforts. Their anger is far more effective directed at the right people. Getting angry at crowds of tourists is like getting angry at the wildfire itself: understandable, but ineffectual.