Linkman wrote:
Would anyone quibble with the statement that without the relaxed availabilty of pfp there would be no reason whatsoever to go to CR? The Caribbean does the Caribbean better and Mexico does the pacific better for a lot less.
Certainly not more than once. It might be like Guatamala where a few dogooders go and have a look but just a trickle and never more than once.
I'd quibble with that. Most of the people who go to CR NOW aren't going there for the relaxed availabilty of pfp, so they must have some other reasons. Now, whether there would be any reason for them to RETURN might be another question, as you pointed out in your 2nd paragraph. There are certainly far fewer of those sorts of tourists who visit CR again (but still many who do).
There are at least 2 reasons for that. First of all, most of those sorts tourists don't travel ANYWHERE internationally with the frequency that many of you guys travel just to CR. But the other reason is because the range of choices of interesting places to visit is MUCH greater if you don't restrict yourself JUST to those places with "relaxed availabilty of pfp". In other words, if they don't return to CR it doesn't necessarily have anything to do with CR's desirability, but rather that now that they've seen CR and all of its highlights, they want to try new places they haven't seen before.
There are also still many mainstream visitors who DO return, including many who eventually become ex-pats. Or are you saying that most of the many gringos who have settled in Escazu and elsewhere throughout CR have done so only because the "relaxed availabilty of pfp"? Clearly mongerers are in the minority for even the expat community.
While many mainstream tourists do return to CR, I'd agree that probably a higher percentage of monger tourists return to CR or at least do so with greater frequency. However, there are also many 1 time monger visitors who do it just once, maybe as part of a bachelor party. More to the point, the potential market of non-mongering tourists is so much greater than it is of mongerers, that they don't HAVE to come back and make return visits. If CR got all of them to visit CR just once (and go back and tell their friends what a wonderful time they had), CR would get more than enough of those types of tourists to easily offset the monger tourists they might lose if they restrict "the availability of p4p". This can be seen on every plane flight down. Sure, you can play spot the monger and always find a handful of fellow passengers that are older males traveling alone or with a friend who you're reasonably sure are going to CR in whole or in part for p4p, however the vast majority of other passengers are still couples, families, missionary groups, youth groups, etc.
So I think that pretty much knocks out your first statement.
-----------
What about "the Caribbean does the Caribbean better and Mexico does the Pacific better for a lot less." I mostly agree. Mexico does the Pacific better for less. Its a cheaper country and it has a much longer Pacific coastline. The Caribbean also does the Caribbean better because it has a lot more islands and coastline to choose from. I'm not so sure I'd agree that the Caribbean does the Caribbean for a lot less, if that is what you were saying. The Caribbean can be every bit as expensive as CR and usually is even more so. The reason is simple. On small islands most everything you consume has to be brought in and that makes those things expensive.
Personally, I never understood why some tourists go to CR mainly for a beach vacation, nor do I understand why expats go to CR and settle along the coasts. There are some nice beaches in CR but they're not that special. Many of them suffer from rip currents. Water quality is questionable at some of the MOST popular areas. Most of the beaches are not that deep. And many of them have volcanic black sand which sounds exotic but, IMHO, is not as nice as white or gold sand beaches. There aren't any decent coral reefs for snorkling or diving near shore. It costs as much for offshore fishing in CR as it does here and Florida and the beaches here in Florida are as good or better than those in CR. As for the people who settle along the coast, I think they're nuts. I'm no big fan of northern winters but the summers in CR(which they call winter) are brutally hot and humid. Even in Guanacaste, it may be more arid but it still is brutally hot.
To me the big appeal of CR is NOT the "relaxed availability of p4p" but the "eternal spring" of the Central Valley. CR is unique in Central America in having its main cities at a higher altitude, which means it doesn't get nearly so hot as PC, Managua (or Granada), etc. and yet the low latitude means that it rarely gets really cold. Its actually cooler overall in CR's Central Valley than it is here in Florida.
The thing that I think you're missing in your statement is that most people don't come to CR JUST for the Pacific coast or JUST for the Caribbean. They come for a COMBINATION of attractions that are all available within a relatively small distance from each others. In CR, one can go to the Pacific beaches one day and then go to the Caribbean side on the next. One can climb the 12000ft Mt. Chirripo one day and lay on the beaches of Dominical the day after that (as I have done). There are great white water rivers for rafting, empty country roads for biking, rainforest paths for hiking and lush hot springs for soaking after you're done with all those other activities. True many of these things are relatively pricey compared to someplace like say Guatemala, but the infrastructure and number of options to enjoy these things is also much greater. Those are the tradeoffs involved with having a flood of tourists which encourages the development of infrastructure but drive up prices at the same time. Personally, I'd prefer a cheaper more rustic experience, but most tourists probably prefer a cushier, slicker operation even if that costs more (which is why more of them go to expensive party beaches like Cabo San Lucas rather than down to earth surfer beaches like Playa Escondido or stay at $200/nt resorts in places like Negril instead of the basic little cabinas that dominate in places like Cahuita and PV.
-------
"It might be like Guatamala where a few dogooders go and have a look but just a trickle and never more than once." I guess I'm a do-gooder because I've been there. When I went there were not as many tourists there as you see in CR today, but there were much more than just a "trickle". And from what I understand, the volume of tourists to that country has grown SIGNIFICANTLY since when I was there. It has been described as the "Next Costa Rica" or the "Poorman's Costa Rica" (which in turn has been referred to as the "Poorman's Hawaii"). Personally, I haven't been back to Guatemala, but I'd definitely LIKE to. However, I'll admit that if they had the p4p options that CR has had up until now, I probably WOULD have been back there already.
However, I don't think that the reason places like Guatemala has lagged behind CR has anything to do with its relative lack of p4p as much of a much weaker marketing campaign and word of mouth. CR gets MOST of its tourists, not because of p4p, but because of successful hype. The image of CR as a sex tourism destination helps with our sort of tourist but is counter productive with everyone else, but IMHO the thing that stands to hurt CR's marketing efforts more than any of that is its image as place with rising crime that is getting out of control.
----------
I agree with Aspensam that rising crime SHOULD be the real issue if voters were acting rationally. And I agree with JB that the mass of voters, even in a country like the US with high levels of education, are often swayed by emotional appeals as much as or more than by logic. and I agree most of all with BB57'd take on things. We are not as important to the CR economy as we like to think. Many ticos do not like their country being KNOWN as a sex tourism destination EVEN IF the go to brothels themselves.
But one of the most interesting comments that BB57 has made was this one "
The vast majority of the population sees prostitution in the gulch as a black spot on their country and
a major reason for the crime problem in San Jose. If that were true than attacking GULCH area prostitution WOULD be a logical response to the serious crime problem and the voters would be reacting in a sensible way. The problem is that I'm not so sure I buy that statement. It IS true that crime is particularly bad in the Gulch, but is that because of prostitution or because its a concentrated area filled with drunk gringos with lots of money to spend (and to steal). But does that make the gringos and the chicas that service them the criminals or does it make the leaches that prey on them the real criminals. Those leeches are usually out of work ticos or crackheads desperate for money to get their next fix. If they really want to do something about crime, they'd do something to fix the economy so that ticas wouldn't have to turn ticks and ticos wouldn't have to rob innocent tourists or sell drugs to survive,
What other countries have done in other places that WERE notorious for crime and gringo-oriented prostitution was institute a heavy police presence in gringo tourist areas (e.g. the zona vieja in Cartagena, the zona turistica in Tijuana etc.). This way gringos could continue to come in, feel safe and SPEND their money.
And all this is beside the point because there is PLENTY of crime in other parts of SJ and around the country that you'd have to really stretch to associate with prostitution. Some of it is in other tourist areas. Again, crooks will always go after tourists who have lots of money, have their guard down because they're on vacation and are unlikely to stick around to testify if the crooks ever got caught. But there is also PLENTY of tico-on-tico crime going on in areas far removed from the gulch or even any gringos. For example, they recently busted up a gang that had been terrorizing local residents in PV de Sarapiqui of all places. How does that have anything to do with anything that goes on in the Gulch. Ticos like to blame any problems in their little slice of "utopia" on outsiders (e.g. look at their racist attitudes towards Nicas).
If gringos are responsible for crime in CR, it is because of our thirst for illicit drugs back in the US, much of which finds its way into our country by way of Central America and CR. Drug-related crime in CA is a major problem in all major cities not just ones that have a heavy mongering presence. And cracking down on prostitution will do nothing to change any of that.
---------------
Aspensam,
You may hope that another party wins altogether, but you should know that the leading candidate in the main opposition party (the PAC) is another tica named Epsy Campbell and she may not be any more sympathetic to our interests than Chinchilla.
Estebanh,
As Bilko said, there are lots of executive branch actions she could take unilaterally, but I'd also add that her election could have a huge influence on the Legislative Assembly which has ALREADY passed lots of feminist oriented draconian laws in the areas of Domestic Abuse, Paternity and Ch*ld Support due to the inordinate influence of Madam Laura and her supporters.
------------
People who have read the above post are encouraged to copy sections they like and send them to Laura Chinchilla. Perhaps such a letter writing campaign might bring her back to some level of sanity and logic. If not, as VB has said, they may bore her to death. Of course, I'm sure if she starts to read it and it does not interest her at least SHE is smart enough to skip the rest. Apparently, VB hasn't figured that trick out yet.
Login
Register
FAQ
Search
Calendar
.
Pura Vida 
