Boraxo

You apparently missed the key phrase they violate the spirit if not the letter of the equal protection and commerce clauses of the U.S. Constitution, which require equal treatment for all.

Nobody is claiming that the discounts are not legal or logical. My point was simply that (1) one could easily argue that the discounts are really based on race (given the ethnic composition of Hawaii) or have the effect of discriminating on the basis of race and (2) the effect of the discounts is to discriminate - economically - against the residents of the other 49 states. The reasoning behind both the equal protection clause and the commerce clauses is that people should be treated the same regardless of residency and local business should not get any special preferences. So I think the discount definitely violates the spirit of both provisions, even though no state action is involved. And as I said - the unfairness smells because it is not based upon ability to pay but rather residence. On this point we can agree to disagree.

I pay higher taxes than people who live in Hawaii, in fact one could argue that I already subsidize Hawaiians based upon overal federal income and expenditures - so they should give me a bigger discount. So I think your argument about taxes falls on itself. The overall price of paradise? It should be high, just as it is high to live in SF, Manhattan or any other highly desireable place. There is a reason real estate is cheap in Buffalo and Detroit (no offense).

kaukau

Than how do you explain the GOVERNMENT "discriminating" against residents of OTHER states by selling hunting/fishing licenses at a "discount" to in-state residents. By your reasoning that is a CONSTITUTIONAL violation! (It isn't!).

Plus your contention that the Kama'aina Discount is somehow tied into RACE is mind-boggling in it's IGNORANCE!!!

PLEASE, get yourself some kind of San Francisco Resident's discount to movies, hotels, food and attractions so you can feel good about where you live!

Just make some friends here in Hawai'i and next time you visit we can all go out together and share our discounts with you! (They give the discounts to visitors who are accompanied by residents!).

fadeforward

No, as I said, "I don't think that you're reading either the letter or the spirit of those clauses correctly," emphasis added. I simply don't think that founders or the subsequent supreme court justices ever intended a spirit of equal treatment, as you are operationalizing it, as treating everyone equally. What would become of our airline elite programs, should this be the case? There are many reasons that companies, in America, are allowed to treat people differently, and many of them are constitutional, and this is within both the letter and the spirit of the law. To extend equal protection under the law to equal treatment writ large is not extending the spirit of the law but changing it to a version you prefer.

I don't think this argument is as easy as you think. Do you really want lump all of Hawaii's residents into one racial category? If so, which one would you pick? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawaii#Ethnicities And do you want to classify all policies as racial by the majority racial group that they happen to affect? If so, there sure are a lot of pro-white and anti-white policies out there.

I'll concede that there are certainly circumstances where local whites will be "carded" more often than Asians, but since Asians get carded for liquor more often, maybe it balances out.

Again, perfectly consistent with the constitution, which always had an appreciate for state rights, and perfectly common outside of Hawaii.


You don't pay Hawaii state taxes, was my argument. Let's not even start with the cascading transaction and sales tax in Hawaii that raises all costs and doesn't go into your calculation that you pay more taxes. Besides, it's not about who pays more, it's about where that money goes. Locals are more invested in Hawaii, so they get more in return.

I think you have an underappreciation for or philosophical objection to states' rights, where I might mostly agree with you, but not on this specific case.

Boraxo

Whoa nellie!

Let me make it clear - I have nothing against Hawaii or its residents. In fact I love Maui and would probably be living there were it not for the fact that I would not be able to see my beloved Giants and 49ers games in person (well, among other reasons .

I - like many other non-resident - just think the discounts suck. I have my reasons and you have yours (most of which we can admit boil down to self-interest). I don't think we need to get into a discussion of constitutional intent (though I'd be happy to do that if I had more time). We can simply agree to disagree.

As for SF discounts - sorry, but that dog don't hunt (and there is no hunting within the county of SF). Anybody can buy an entertainment book. Anybody can make reservations during the annual dineabouttown promotion in January. Anybody can buy rooms on priceline. There are no special discounts here despite the fact that our cost of living is higher than Hawaii if you plan to own your home. We don't complain about it - we know we're living in the best city in the country.

P.S. I agree with you about the hunting and fishing licenses.

fadeforward

Haha! What a pile-on!

Okay, here's a parting shot after a quick google search re: SF resident discounts:
http://www.sfgov.org/site/treasurer_page.asp?id=13406

And, back to work. You all oughtta agree to meet up with Boraxo and get him some kama'aina discounts next time he's in Maui. It's the FT way.

kaukau

You seem like a nice enough chap!

Actually what I meant was that "You San Franciscans should look into getting a Kama'aina style discount going for your city too, so you all can have something to hui up with and feel good about".

As for thinking that our K.D. "sucks", that's just childish envy. You won't think it sucks next time you visit Maui and I help you get a little benefit out of it!

kaukau

Nice one. WOW! That link to the "San Francisco Golf Resident Card, valid only to California Residents having a valid California Drivers License or California State ID" offering discounts on golf to locals only is RIGHT out of the pages of the Kama'aina discount!!!! And our colleague didn't even realize that his town has exactly the same program that he is so vehemently criticizing in ours! All I can say is "Wow", and Mahalo!

Boraxo: No act! You got da kine too! Offer still stands - we'll get you some discounts when next you visit!

LV702

I live in Vegas and there are locals rates for hotels, shows, and rental cars. Just have to ask

kaukau

And if you argued that, you'd be wrong. It appears that there are "Residents Only" discounts in cities and states all across America!!! You just have to google!

Here's a Bridge toll discount in NYC available to Staten Island residents ONLY: http://www.mta.info/bandt/html/siresidt.htm

Heres a BUNCH of toll/fee discounts available to Boston RESIDENTS ONLY: http://www.masspike.com/travel/fastl..._programs.html

Chicago RESIDENTS WITH VALID ID receive a 25% discount on admission to the Shedd Aquarium - Chicago RESIDENTS ONLY: http://www.sheddaquarium.org/discounts.html

Just google "(your city) resident discounts" and you too will be amazed at what is discounted to residents, but sold at full price to visitors where you live!

My goodness: it appears that "Discounts for RESIDENTS ONLY with VALID ID" appear all over this glorious country, not just Hawai'i!!!!!!! This should be a real eye-opener for those who think the Kama'aina (Locals Only) Discount is unique to Hawai'i!!!!!

Orchids

Seems less a question of fairness and more a matter of opportunity. One might say Equal Opportunity.

A suggestion for non-residents: every time you save money locally, SAVE IT in an envelope marked Kama'aina Discount. Bring it with you next time you visit Hawaii, and apply your "discount" wherever it makes you happiest.

trilinearmipmap

Regardless of the debate I will vote with my wallet. I do visit Hawaii but less often than I otherwise would given how close it is to me. Besides the rainy weather that I have experienced in Hawaii, the Kama'aina discrimination is definitely a factor that has made me choose Mexico and the Caribbean for the majority of my winter vacation trips.

kaukau

Aloha 'oe, dear colleague.

Mrs. kaukau and I, on the other hand, will happily continue to frequent Las Vegas, in spite of their ubiquitous, but in our opinion, entirely reasonable and non-discriminatory "Locals Only" discounts policy. Same for San Francisco, Chicago, Boston and New York, 4 other cities which offer discounts to "Local Residents Only, with Valid ID" but not to tourists.

Aloha 'oe.

(Do you really think for one second that the resident locals in the Caribbean and Mexico pay the same as the tourists for the same things?)

pbz

The aquarium is supported by tax dollars which come from a local taxing jurisdiction, the park district if I recall correctly. Why shouldn't the price be higher for those whose taxes don't support it.

Either way if I as a businessman decide to charge one customer one price because I like them and charge another customer a different price because I don't like them, (or for whatever arbitrary reason I think of) who is the government to say I can't.

Instead of complaining about the kama'aina discount, why not find a manager and say "I won't buy it at the regular price but I will buy it if you give me the kama'aina rate".

/pbz

fadeforward

You mean regardless of the facts? Regardless of the law? Regardless of solid logical reasoning? Vote however you please, but don't fling loaded words like "discrimination" around unless you are prepared to back it up with some kind of argument. This is simply not the same as discrimination on the basis of race or nationality, and your continuing inability to make a distinction between them in spite of very clear arguments and examples above is disheartening.

Racial discrimination is a very serious and complex issue, and your attempts to classify this legal and widespread discount as racial discrimination trivializes the efforts of those who fight against real racial discrimination.

trilinearmipmap

Please point out where in my posts I claimed that this was racial discrimination.

There are many kinds of discrimination, none of them acceptable. Racial discrimination, sex discrimination, discrimination against gays, age discrimination, probably other kinds of discrimination I haven't thought about.

The Kama'aina rate is discrimination based on residency. In the case of foreign citizens who cannot qualify for the Kama'aina rate, it is discrimination based on nationality. Different from racial discrimination but not much better.

The basic idea is, let's set up an "in" group and an "out" group. The in group will get special treatment, special rates, whatever. It is ironic that ALL of the arguments that have been made in favour of the Kama'aina rate, are the EXACT SAME arguments that were made 50 to 100 years ago to support the (then) widespread discrimination in the US made on the basis of race.

Same concept, different application, stinks just the same.