I don't blame people for not wanting even a layover in the States. We've easily become the most unwelcoming (even to citizens!) and foreigner-hostile country around, short of some backwater dictatorship. Last time I flew back from LHR->ORD I was actually scared that I'd have to go through a body scanner after landing (this a few months back, after a news story of a citizen refusing a body scan at ORD after landing from an int'l flight).
It's frustrating to read things like this. If you think the US is easily the most unwelcoming country even to citizens -- to be frank -- you just haven't been through that many countries.
Does flying through the US as the citizen of a non-waived-visa country suck? Yup. But it's not like the US is the only country that has these policies. The UK has a list of countries that require transit visas. The Schengen Zone has a list of countries that require transit visas. Russia does.
And to add further anecdotal fuel to the fire (and counter yours): As a US citizen the worst customs I've been through is far and away the UK.
Check the website of my company, http://turkeysandwichindustries.com, for a map of places I've been. The past few years I've been living an expat traveler lifestyle.
Yes, other countries have visa requirements; I myself was bitten by the Schengen Zone requirement last time I was in Belgium and Germany. But the point is that I don't need to spend hundreds of dollars, navigate a series of confusing bureaucratic hurdles, and then have my body and bags x-rayed and the minutiae of my personal life cross-examined by high-school graduates on a power trip just to have a 4-hour layover in most other countries... unlike America.
To contrast this, the last international flight I took was entering Mexico last month (where I am now); the line was long, but I wasn't asked a single question before my passport was stamped. The 2nd to last international landing I had was in Belgium: I was asked the purpose of my visit and was waved along in 30 seconds.
The most complicated visa requirement I've run in to was Vietnam, which required a stamped visa to be processed before you crossed the border. Even then it was a matter of giving $25 to my travel agent along with a short customs-style form.
Yes you can say that, say, an Iraqi citizen will have a hard time getting in to any country, not just the US; but when we're talking people from England, Europe, China, hell, even Mexico and Canada--neighbors and close allies for generations--the process can still be harrowing. And that's not just unfriendly, it's damaging to relations in the long-term. 20-something backpackers who get hassled crossing into America today, or who choose to go to a different country for 6 months instead of face American border bureaucracy, will take those experiences with them when they enter industry and leadership positions in the future.
Edit: another anecdote--on entering New Zealand I was asked for proof of onward travel (as I later found out, a requirement to enter the country). I didn't have any; I had planned on staying a few months then carrying on to Australia when I felt like it. When I told the agent this, she laughed and waved me on. Can you imagine a US border agent doing that?
I didn't mean it as a pejorative. I've been living out of a backpack and travelling (adventuring?) for the last two plus years (well, until very recently), and I've grown something of a thin skin for when people vilify the US without much travel experience of their own.
> Yes you can say that, say, an Iraqi citizen will have a hard time getting in to any country, not just the US; but when we're talking people from England, Europe, China, hell, even Mexico and Canada
England and most western European countries don't require visas to enter the US at all, since they qualify under the VWP. Mexico and Canada only recently required a passport to entry, and at most high-volume crossings you can use a special state/federal ID instead.
Harrowing, I think, is too strong of a word. Several years ago I was stopped at the Canadian border on I5 (between Seattle and Vancouver) and had my car searched. I had to sit in an immigration office for an hour and answer a ton of questions. That's about as bad as it can get between NAFTA countries and it's hardly what I'd call harrowing.
All of that having been said: You're preaching to the choir. I'm 100% in favor of relaxing entry and work requirements for foreigners into the US. I think that people overreact about the US requirements when for most first world citizens it's not that big of a deal, and for the rest of the world it's complicated just about everywhere else too.
> 20-something backpackers who get hassled crossing into America today, or who choose to go to a different country for 6 months instead of face American border bureaucracy, will take those experiences with them when they enter industry and leadership positions in the future.
Agreed, but this has more to do with foreign policy and international PR rather than just border security and hassle.
> Edit: another anecdote--on entering New Zealand I was asked for proof of onward travel (as I later found out, a requirement to enter the country). I didn't have any; I had planned on staying a few months then carrying on to Australia when I felt like it. When I told the agent this, she laughed and waved me on. Can you imagine a US border agent doing that?
Counter anecdote: I once flew back from Mexico without a passport or any identification other than a driver's license (this was right after the passport requirements for flight went into effect -- Mexico didn't require a US passport for entry, but the US required a passport for re-entry) and had to convince the CBP agent that I was an American. He asked me a couple questions and ended with "Who was your freshman English teacher?" which I laughed at and said: "Are you serious?! Does anyone remember that?" and he laughed and let me in. Took just about as long as a normal border crossing.
I'm in such a scenario myself. Typically you'd have an offshore company in a place like BVI, Hong Kong or ironically in some states in the US, like Delaware (if you are not a US citizen).
For most countries in EU at least, you are only tax liable if you spend more than half the year there.
I spend my time between Russia, Denmark and Asia and I am less than half a year at each place, in a given year. This means my only tax responsibility is corporate tax, and in such places as I mentioned above, that percentage is 0.
As for visas, this varies of course from country to country. A lot of countries will allow you in for 1-3 months at a time, as long as you do the necessary paperwork.
Some countries like Thailand, gives you "visa on arrival", while some countries like Russia, require you to get a visa before you even arrive. When a visa is expired, some countries allows you to get a new 1-3 month visa, after just leaving the country for a day (such a one-day trip is what's referred to as a "visa run").
Working is generally allowed as long as you are a one man operation, doing your own thing with foreign clients. If you start to deal heavily with local companies, or start renting offices and hiring local personnel, you'd need to get a work permit and often also a locally incorporated company. Getting work permits are often much harder to obtain, as you'd generally also need a full time living permit for that.
Sam, as a British Citizen who has spent far too much time traveling through the UK border, and as a world traveller who's been through his fair share of borders, I'd agree that other countries are tricky, maybe even trickier.
However, I'd have to say that the most nerve-wracking insane experience is the US border. You cannot believe policies, as they are implemented in strange and weird ways, dependent on the officer you get to speak to.
Who are all armed. And trained in special-ops interrogation techniques.
I'd say Israel is on par with that, (though i haven't been through), however they fear daily attacks in Tel Aviv, so there's plenty to worry about.
The US Border - possibly the most trafficked today, is also the most hostile compared to what it _needs_ to be. It doesn't even matter if you are a visa waived traveller, you still go through the same crap as if you were on any other visa.
Fair enough. I obviously only ever experience it from the perspective of an American, and theoretical knowledge doesn't hold a candle to experience.
As a deal: You tell your guys stop being dicks to me when I fly to London, and I'll tell my guys to stop being dicks to you when you fly to [US city of choice] :-D
As an American citizen I also avoid domestic air travel. The U.S. is becoming a bizarre, irrational police state-- we cannot even travel freely within our own borders without enduring unconstitutional searches that serve absolutely no security purpose.
Even when eligible for a visa waiver, the process sucks. You have to register with the ESTA 72 hours before flying. You have to leave North America within 3 months, so if you're transitting to Canada or Mexico, you have to get an actual visa, otherwise you're in violation of the visa waiver.
From the cbp.gov website:
"While CBP recommends that you apply at least 72 hours before travel, you may apply anytime prior to boarding. In most cases, a response is received within seconds of submitting an application."
You have to leave North America within 3 months
I know the US is powerful, but I really doubt they can require you to leave North America. I think you're reading something wrong.
Yeah, 72 hours is just the recommended time, but you certainly can't do it once you land.
The US can't make you leave North America, but if they find out you're in violation of a visa waiver (e.g. if you transit back through the US on the way home), then they can deny entry.
The US can't make you leave North America, but if they find out you're in violation of a visa waiver
I don't understand. If you fly into the US, then enter Canada via land crossing, they will stamp your passport upon leaving the US, thereby terminating your automatic tourist 'visa'. When you return to the US via land crossing, they will give you a new passport stamp.
To clarify: on entry to the US, a visa-waiver national is given allowance for a 90 day stay (usually). If the traveller leaves the US, but remains in North America, and then re-enters the US, they won't give you an additional 90 days. Instead, they'll just treat it as a continuation of your initial 90 day authorization.
Note that it isn't illegal to enter the US for two months, and then spend two months in Canada. It's just that the US won't let you back in until you've left North America. How exactly (or even if) they know you've left North America, I have no idea.
I'm appalled at how hard it is to find any usable information. The many government websites involved are full of rapidly changing links, so even links between government organizations are broken.
From what I can turn up, you are correct about the Visa Waiver Program. Once you enter the USA, your 90 days begins ticking. The one and only way to reset it is to leave the region of the USA, Canada, Mexico, and minor islands.
It appears, however, that if you skip VWP in favor of of a B-2 tourist visa, you can renew this upon reentry, with no hard-set limit on renewals.
As in all things, everything is up to the discretion of border patrol. It seems that while reentry renewal of a B-2 visa is considered normal, they generally want you to go back home for six months out of the year.
I can confirm this, I applied for my ESTA online a few weeks before leaving and I paid with my credit card and printed it in a few minutes.
That said, the process of going to the US was every bit as onerous as described, being asked questions multiple times, being subjected to a backscatter scan (which I declined and got patted down, tested for explosives, etc), etc.
Interesting. As a Brit I generally don't have trouble at UK immigration, but being married to a Turk my wife did (before she became naturalised).
The big problem with UK immigration is that it seems to take the lead from the US. Unfortunately we end up with more theatre and less security as a result.
If I was a foreigner I would have stopped traveling in the US, as soon as they started rendition in 90s. It was only in the 00s that the fact of being a citizen didn't really protect us from the threat of being disappeared in the US. In my not so humble opinion it's a disgrace, and that it continues to persist is even worse - It shows that no matter who is in power, this lawlessness is tolerated.
On my last flight to the US British Airways at first didn't allow my friend to board the plane, because they told us that her name is on some watchlist. An airline employee then phoned ~30 minutes with the US department of Homeland Security and asked my friend lots of questions - and then finally allowed her to board. Needless to say that we nearly missed the flight.
I can fully understand anyone who wants to avoid having a transfer at an US airport. Why risk any of those problems when you can just transfer via another country?
Right. That explains the infinite, insatiable lust for our Treasury bills, notes, and bonds.
Until I see the world protest US actions in the only way that matters( e.g. refusing to finance our government's activities ), I will continue to laugh off the "world hates the US" babble.
Stop buying our toilet paper and I'll take it seriously.
Drive down to the poorest section of your town. Do you see any pawn shops? Do you see any signs offering to buy dilapidated houses for cash? Do you see cash for gold signs? Do you see payday loan businesses? Do you see businesses that advance you money against your tax refund? Will someone give you a sub-prime loan to buy a house you can't afford? Is there a WalMart ready to sell you plastic junk?
I am not saying that the US is an economic slum. However, I offer this analogy to demonstrate that it is a logical fallacy to assume that just because people want to sell you stuff and loan you money, therefore your actions must be respected.
The world doesn't boycott doing business with you. So what? That doesn't automatically mean that it respects what you are doing, any more than a pawnshop owner loaning money in the slum respects his clientele.
p.s. Please don't take my response too personally, I'm reacting to the previous 999 times I've read it or variations of it as well.
p.p.s. FWIW, If I were to argue that the world still looks up to the US, I wouldn't use treasury bonds to bolster my argument, I'd use immigration. It's hard to argue with the hordes of people who pack up their lives and cross oceans to start fresh in the USA.
As long as auctions maintain a BTC ratio over 1.0 with short tails, the appetite is effectively insatiable, especially at the enormous rate of issuance over the last few years.
"For the duration of QE2, the Fed has been buying 70% of all new Treasury-bond issuance, and foreigners have been buying the other 30%. When the Fed stops buying, who will step in to replace it? After all, with a $1.5 trillion budget deficit, there’s a lot of new supply coming." -- Felix Salmon, Reuters
When the world stops buying your toilet paper, as you so eloquently put, you won't have the opportunity to take it seriously. Your economy is predicated on people buying your toilet paper so your government overproduces it. If it all comes back to you, you'll be lucky if the US is doing any better than Zimbabwe a few years later.
The fact that transit visas are something you need to apply for, pay fees, and risk being refused (and that going into a permanent record) makes no sense for me.
It's because American airports stupidly don't have sterile transit, unlike practically every other country. I'm a Canadian, and when I transfer through LAX and go through customs, I pop out in the arrivals area. There's nothing to stop me from hailing a cab.
Last time I went to Japan, I connected through Vancouver airport in Canada. I had to go through Canadian customs because they don't segregate all international flights. Bizarrely, the customs guy looked at my ticket, then asked how long I intended to stay in Canada (my connecting flight was in ~2hrs).
For the same reason, on return, I couldn't bring back any Japanese booze from the airport. I had to go through a second liquids and customs check at YVR.
Canada does have transit lounges - but Vancouver is a bit odd. They have pre-cleared US immigration, so you have effectively 3 airside zones domestic/US/International.
So if you are coming off/going to a US flight from an international one you have to go out and back in. There is a US <-> International security gate but it's not normally staffed
And screw ups happen - I lost a Lufthansa bottle of champagne they gave me on board for screwing up my seat. At a change in Frankfurt the we had to be bussed from the plane to the terminal - the bus dropped us outside security and I lost the sealed Lufthansa labeled champagne to the security desk.
Note that you have to show up for an in-person interview with documentation about your job, family, and finances just to apply for a transit visa. The appointment for the interview costs $140. And the visas are frequently denied without explanation. No refunds.
I just recently ( 3 days ago) transitted through JFK airport, NY, to Haiti on a business trip. And it wasn't that bad. Even though the transit time was 12 hours, they gave me one month, until the end of March. Plus, I was allowed to go out of the airport during this period, which I didn't expect at all. So I got out of the airport and stayed in Comfort Inn for a night before going to Haiti
The only thing that pssed me off: I had to pay $5 for the trolley. No where in the world have i traveled (Britain, Finland, France, Australia, Singapore) where I have to pay for the trolley in side the airport!
At both JFK and EWR (Newark) the air trains are also the links out to NY/NJ mass transit (LIRR/Subway from JFK and NJT from EWR). I always thought/it's been my experience they were free for intra-terminal stops and you only had to pay if you were at an end that allowed outside access. It's basically their way of increasing the price of what would otherwise be a rather cheap trip on public transit (NY Penn Station to Newark Penn Station is about $5, but to the airport is $15 even though the added distance is negligible)
I don't miss the 18hour europe-far east flights with stopovers in Alaska or India because you couldn't fly over the USSR.
Of course that was because the USSR was an evil empire with an out of control military, a bloated sense of it's own importance and a paranoia about foreigners.
> Of course that was because the USSR was an evil empire with an out of control military, a bloated sense of it's own importance and a paranoia about foreigners.
Wait, are you implying that that is now the US, or should I make that implication?
As someone from a country with a long history of imperial aggression, bloated sense of self-importance and paranoia of foreigners you have to call it as you see it, and that's what the US is today.
To be fair, we British have pretty good form on doing terrible things to Afghanistan, and it wasn't exactly a source of pleasantness when we all went in this time round.
While I accept the original mission was justified for the US, I have absolutely no idea what we were doing in Iraq other than empire-building.
You don't even need to land, flying from europe to Canada you need to not be on the US no fly list and have your details (credit card, phone number type of meal) sent to the US.
I think Greenland should retaliate with a $100 overflying charge
To be pragmatic London to Sydney via SKG, DBX, or HKG is shorter than via LAX. And since it sits on the other side of the IDL you'd be flying for 2 days rather than 28 hours.
Apparently, that is already the case for certain countries:
> Citizens of the following countries are required to have airport transit visa when they are passing through the international transit area of airports in Germany: Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Ghana, India, Iran, Iraq, Jordan*, Lebanon, Myanmar/Burma, Nigeria, Pakistan, Somalia, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Syria and Turkey.
The situation in the article is embarrassing. On the flip side, the US is really big. 4 US states are larger than germany. Getting the visa sounds like a pain in the ass, but it's more like a visa for the EU, rather than member nations.
cough The whole US of A has only less than 4 times the population (308,745,538) of Germany (81,757,600) according to Wikipedia..
Comparing USA and EU: The EU has 501,064,211 people, according to the same source. Like - 160% of the US. And, as others pointed out in this thread: Large parts of it are part of the Schengen treaty(?) and therefor rather easy for travellers.
You're misunderstanding a little -- he's saying that the USA is like its own Schengen Area (according to wikipedia, ~400 million). So for travelers from outside the EU, you just need one visa to enter and then you can move about freely. Similarly, you just need one US visa and you can go from NY to California freely.
I probably (wrongly) conflated the two parts (4 states are larger than.. vs. large area in which you can move rather freely). No offense intended and I see the point now.
Well, many tourists need a visa to connect via the UK. I avoid travel through Heathrow because of it. (No, not as a protest; I'm usually traveling with someone not covered by a reciprocal visa and it's just easier that way.)
Actually, the UK allows people of any nationality to enter the country for up to 24 hours for transit, including travel between airports, as long as you have evidence of your connecting flight and a visa for the country of your destination:
Even though they say that entry is "at the Immigration Officer’s discretion and there is no guaranteed right of entry", I've used this concession twice (I'm a citizen of Armenia) with no problems, and have never heard of anyone being refused entry.
The first time I used the concession was when I was flying NYC -> Heathrow (arriving at 2am), followed by Gatwick -> Prague (departing at 10pm). Not only did this allow me to take advantage of a cheap EasyJet fare, but I managed to fit in a full day of sightseeing in London into the 24 hour allowance.
Did you mean need a visa, or are supposed to have a visa? I connected via Heathrow yesterday (arrived from Toronto, departed to Copenhagen) and while I had to go through airport security, I never went through customs/immigration.
Ah, the joys that being born in right place brings for you. Anyways, that sort of stuff happens all over to million of people travelling everyday.
Let me recount my last year experience. My friend and I had to travel to Portugal for a summer intern from India. To keep transit headaches to minimum, I booked flights such that transits occur in Istanbul. No visa crap, just walk across to international transit and board the next flight. My friend on the other hand made a mistake to fly Lufthansa, and transit through Frankfurt.
Now, we were given a National Schengen Visa, one that was although granted under Schengen agreement, was valid only in Portugal and no other place. However, it allowed transit through other countries only while going to Portugal, and not while returning. Thus, my friend was detained in Frankfurt on his way back, searched and interrogated for 4 hours, and put on some Schengen no-fly list. OTOH, I walked like king in Turkey and enjoyed their hospitality.
So there you have it, all 1st world nations are assholes, including US, and I find it little hypocritical when somehow only US gets picked for it. I guess US is equal in discrimination of all people in transit.
Forgive my geographic ignorance, but why would you fly through the US to transit anywhere?
US is between 2 vast oceans and I just cant fathom anyone flying let say from Europe to Asia over both atlantic and pacific or from asia back.
Even flights from NorthWestern Europe(UK) to South america are shorter and faster through southern european connection.
LHR-MAD-Brazil.
I mean, look at British Airways route map:
http://www.britishairways.com/travel/routemapsflash/public/e...
Almost any destination in the world that is NOT the US is closer to other countries via routes that dont go over US as opposed to those that do go through the US.
Im sure there are few exceptions, but still.
I dont disagree that not having separation between transit and exit terminal is the suck, but how much of a problem for people whose destination is not US is it?
Firstly, the Earth is a sphere, not a flat map projection like in your link. In order to fly the shortest straight distance over the curved surface of the Earth, Northern Hemisphere routes "bend" toward the poles on a flat map. The shortest routes to Central and South America from Asia or Europe often cross USA airspace or make connections in the USA.
Second, the USA is economically more influential than its mere land area indicates. There are a more big international airports located in the USA than in all of Latin America or Australia/Oceania. Flights often have connections through those USA airports instead of flying direct to smaller markets.
For example, there are exactly three flights between Asia and Latin America. A few times a week, Aeromexico flys between Mexico City and Narita, Japan (via Tiuana one way because of high/hot regulations). Similarly Emirates between Dubai and Sāo Paulo. And once a week there's an Aeromexico flight between Shanghai and Mexico City (also with high/hot limits).
Those flights can and do charge about $500-$700 extra per passenger for the luxury of avoiding the USA transit. The usual routings used by at least 10 times more passengers every day pass through US airports on those routes.
Technically it's what is called an "Geoid"[0] but for most purposes the description of an "oblate spheroid" [1] will do. Those "shortest straight distances" are called "great circles" or geodesic; an arc between two points on a spheroid also called a great distance. Technically, because the Earth isn't spheroidal but oblate, the shortest distance isn't quite a great circle. [2] The maps used for aeronautical navigation are "gnomonic" in projection to show great circles as straight lines. [3]
I visit the Bay area yearly, and every time I make sure that my connection is in Europe and I never have to connect in the U.S. I've visited a ton of countries (including China), and the U.S. is definitely the most hostile to visit.
FWIW, my sister-in-law took stopped in LA bound for South Korea without a Visa and wasn't just kicked home. The US embassy ultimately got things sorted out.
Good thing. I'm from Uruguay too :) and I miss the time we were able to visit the US without a visa.
There's also the time when the Pan-American games teams were stuck because the US implemented the visa just at the time they were leaving.
The fact that we can't even transit is very annoying - Miami used to be a big hub for the Caribbean, and flights to Canada are more convenient through the US (I've got family in Canada, and I took the Air Canada Buenos Aires - Toronto flight even though it's more expensive than going through the US, because of the transit visa).
I've never visited the US for that reason (I stood a few miles from the border in Niagara, but it made no sense to go through all that hassle and expenditure for just a day's visit)
FWIW, as a EU citizen the things I've heard about traveling to/from/in US have mostly made me go wtf. Perhaps it's just because I spend too much time reading about TSA etc. on reddit, but maybe not.
On one hand, what your read online is greatly exaggerated. Most of the time, you show up at the airport, stand in line for 5 minutes, go through a metal detector, and that's it. Just like it's always been.
On the other hand, recently (should I say this anonymously), annoyed by the extra security and machines, when a TSA agent asked me to take off my shoes and my sweater, I said fine. I went topless. After all, that's what the new machines see anyway.
As an EU citizen you get interrogated why you're visiting the U.S. When I was in SF for WWDC, it was easy, "I'm here for Apple's WWDC". Any other time it's been a 15 minute ordeal of explaining what computer software is exactly and how my international contractor relationship works and why I'm not going to escape into the forests and become a day laborer. Once they even asked for a bank statement. In no other countries I've traveled to (20+) have I had to explain why I'm there aside from checking a box on a paper form.
As a US citizen I've been hassled in much the same way by the UK (the Schengen zone is generally much easier). I've had to produce both bank statements and proof of onward tickets. I've been to a ton of other countries (30+) and your method of entry (train, car, boat, motorcycle, or air) in general effects how difficult the entry is more than anything else.
Everyone has to take off sweater, sweatshirt, coat, shoes, and sometimes belt and watch.
I have flown in JFK, LAX, LAS, and MKE since the body scanners started. There's usually at least one line that uses a metal detector still. So I always pick that line.
It is a joke, though, to see middle-class, middle-aged women in a long-sleeve shirt and jeans getting a body scan and then a subsequent pat-down. What a waste of my tax dollars.
This would be my biggest problem, I think it's just nuts: "all travellers transiting in the USA using either a transit visa or the Visa Waiver Program will be photographed and fingerprinted."
US airports aren't really fenced off by immigration. In fact the international and domestic components are mixed. Escape from an airport is easy in the US.
Once you leave an international flight you are herded straight to immigration for the fingerprinting.
Like the clever way that your baggage comes off a belt that is basically open to the street.
So while you spend 2hours getting through immigration your cases are just sitting there - if you are lucky there is a single old women supposedly checking baggage tags.
