PDA

View Full Version : Econ help!



2.2vtec
09-16-2003, 10:51 AM
I have a question for all you econ experts, I really need your help.

Explain why the media has been suggesting that SARs, mad cow, an appreciated Canadian dolloar and the fires in BC have had a negative impact on tourism in Canada this summer. What could the industry attempt to do to offset this downturn?

Just would like to see some of your guy's answers.

B17a
09-16-2003, 11:09 AM
Originally posted by 2.2vtec
I have a question for all you econ experts, I really need your help.

Explain why the media has been suggesting that SARs, mad cow, an appreciated Canadian dolloar and the fires in BC have had a negative impact on tourism in Canada this summer. What could the industry attempt to do to offset this downturn?

Just would like to see some of your guy's answers.


SARS was scary shit for tourists, would you travel to a country with an outbreak? Media didn't help overglorify it either. Mad Cow has meant lost cattle exports, not lost tourism save for the few cattle buyers who would have come here. The appreciating CDN dollar means its now more expensive for tourists to come to Canada, ie Americans. Instead of their dollar buying $1.50 CDN, it now only buys $1.36. BC fires kinda made for miserable tourism, hell I cancelled plans to go to Kelowna.

The industries affected are really powerless. These are acts of God, and economic forces. They'll have to get creative to attract the crowds back and hope for some gov't help.

Weapon_R
09-16-2003, 02:10 PM
Originally posted by 2.2vtec
I have a question for all you econ experts, I really need your help.

Explain why the media has been suggesting that SARs, mad cow, an appreciated Canadian dolloar and the fires in BC have had a negative impact on tourism in Canada this summer. What could the industry attempt to do to offset this downturn?

Just would like to see some of your guy's answers.


To begin, the world health organization issued a travel advisory to anyone travelling to Toronto for fear of attracting the Sars disease. This meant that anyone who was planning on travelling to Canada, even if it meant that they weren't coming to Toronto, was advised via media and other venues that it would be unsafe to do so.

The mad cow scare didnt have any impact on the tourism industry, as far as I imagine. I doubt anyone decided to forgo their trip to Canada because they couldn't eat beef...

The Canadian dollar did not really appreciate, it stayed the same. Depending on where you came from, it may have gotten cheaper or more expensive to travel to Canada. What happened was the United States devalued their currency, and surprisingly, Canada did not do the same. This is why we enjoyed a strong dollar compared to the United States dollar for a couple of months. Other tourists would not have seen any difference in the currency exchange. With that said, much of our tourism industry relies on US tourists. Since it was more expensive for them to travel to Canada, our tourism industry felt the impact.

As one of the primary tourist locations in Western Canada, the fires in BC caused a decrease in Tourism because many tourists could not camp there (because of the fire ban) and because of the general gloomy outlook of the uncontrollable fire that left much of the region covered in heavy dense fog.

I disagree, however, with the above answer that the industry could not have done anything. With an industry as powerful as the tourism industry, a strong lobby for government to stay on par with the United States monetary policy would have maintained currency value for the United States. It would have also ensured that US importers would have continued to purchase Canadian goods in the same quantities. When the US devalued, US importers were forced to purchase Canadian goods at a higher price, which inevitably led to the decrease in Canadian exports, furthering the weakened economy.

The industry could have also pressured the government to more rigorously attack the Sars outbreak and convince the general population of the safety of Canadas largest city, which, not coincidentally, is another major tourist center. It did happen, however, relatively quickly and there was some sufficient actions taken to help calm the outbreak.

Hope that helps somewhat.

kaput
09-16-2003, 04:41 PM
.

Weapon_R
09-16-2003, 05:20 PM
Originally posted by kaput


Wrong. It didn't just apply to cows, certain other animals like moose I think (maybe elk?) were also affected. There are several hunting ranches or something like that where hunters or even just normal people visit. There are things like hunting lessons etc. where you can go kill big animals, but with the beef ban, you couldn't take the meat home. So really, why bother?

I saw this on the news awhile back, my facts may be a bit mixed up (what the fuck did I care at the time!?) but it's something to look into. I bet nobody else in the class will give mad cow a second thought with respect to tourism though.

lol. I had no idea that the so called mad cow disease affected other animals also. Either way, i'm not sure if it had a big impact anyways.

kaput
09-16-2003, 06:06 PM
.

hampstor
09-22-2003, 05:30 PM
Originally posted by 2.2vtec
I have a question for all you econ experts, I really need your help.

Explain why the media has been suggesting that SARs, mad cow, an appreciated Canadian dolloar and the fires in BC have had a negative impact on tourism in Canada this summer. What could the industry attempt to do to offset this downturn?

Just would like to see some of your guy's answers.

Here's some review for all the 303/359 people

A fairly large chunk of macroeconomics is dominated by expectations theories. To keep it short if people expect there to be a slowdown in the economy due to things such as SARS, mad cow, etc then consumption spending will reflect that. Investors will pull out of industries affected and only accelerate the slowdown of that particular industry. The media is NOT interested in assisting the industries, in fact the word choices used only make matters worse. A 'SARS CRISIS' will scare off a lot of capital/financial investment (especially foreign, all they have to go by is the media) into the Toronto economy because people fear that since there is a crisis, the entire local economy is going to be negatively affected. Investors do not like uncertainty (any kind, economic or political), and will choose to invest elsewhere.

The word choice of 'crisis' makes it sound a lot worse and gets your attention (which is what the media like) while a less extreme word would not have created the amount of expected instability that occured.