Caldera

6 minutes ago, mike787 said:

NOWHERE near as bad as Thai...look at the numbers

I did look at the numbers. Thailand IS worse than Vietnam in that regard, but both are well above the average (worldwide as well as within Southeast Asia).

Moving from Thailand to Vietnam in order to avoid becoming roadkill doesn't make any sense. A more sensible suggestion - for both countries - would be to avoid riding a motorcycle, as motorcyclists are most at risk in both countries (by quite a margin).

It's a tropical banana republic, so in that sense it already is a republic anyway. No big deal.

Boost the economy by killing productivity? I guess you have to be Thai to find that convincing!

Works fine for me whenever I use it in Bangkok. They still accept cash, but promote cashless payments.

I'd imagine that they are a bit more thorough with new applicants now, simply because of the dire economic situation.

That's exciting news at face value, but let's face it, it could well turn into a ghost town of unused warehouses unless they have a good grasp on actual demand (which I doubt).

It sure doesn't help that a big piece of the infrastructure they use to promote this industrial estate - the high speed railway network - is nowhere near ready and just seems to keep getting delayed year after year.

Let me throw out my prediction, while we're at it: Minus 10% this year.

Careful there! If you seek, you may find.

That's the kind of decision that's best revisited once the coronavirus restrictions have been lifted. Who knows how the visa landscape in both Thailand and Vietnam will look like afterwards!

And since tourists now cannot travel to Vietnam anyway, there's really no rush.

Charging $5 per day is probably too low to have any real impact, but I agree that mass tourism is extremely damaging, so thinking along the lines of reducing travelers' impact while maximizing their spend goes in the right direction.

They could start by increasing the departure tax. Flying in for a short trip is a lot worse than staying put for a few weeks.

Attracting quality tourists isn't that easy though and competition is tough. Thailand has tried and failed to do that in the past, they'd need to increase service standards by at least the same rate as they increase the cost, probably quite a bit more.

1 hour ago, ireckonso said:

I just flew out last night no shortage of flights contrary to popular belief on here.

It obviously depends on where you need to go and where you are eligible to transit, if necessary. I could easily get home, too. Others can't though.

I'd legalize recreational drugs, mainly to flush out criminals from the supply chains and to alleviate overcrowding of prisons. That people get locked up for nothing else than using is a travesty that needs to end.

Same as with alcohol, however, I would be tough on people who use drugs irresponsibly and who damage property or endanger others while under the influence.

5 hours ago, sandyf said:

The arrogance lies in expecting the government to bow to the needs of foreign nationals.

They have already done much more than they needed to, and only those full of their own self importance would expect more.

Keep in mind that Thailand was very slow when it came to repatriating Thais stranded abroad. Tens of thousands of Thais, too, had to rely on their respective host countries being lenient / allowing them to stay for the time being.

Thailand's "visa amnesty" doesn't really stand out internationally - many countries have been doing pretty much the same.

"Much more than they needed to"? I don't think so! They pretty much just go with the flow.

On 9/9/2020 at 7:28 PM, humbug said:

they should never be allowed to use the volunteer visa, have to be honour amongst thieves, respect the needy and the voiceless, once they abuse this, lots of real places will be destroyed and then the last one to abuse will be the visa for monkhood

You do your user name justice, I'll give you that!

That sounds like the Phuket proposal which has been postponed since. Nothing to do with Pattaya in any case.

That's excellent news in principle, but based on past performance, I'm worried about the fine print.

What I find delicious is how this proposal flies in the face of what those rogue immigration officers who attempted to impose a "180 days per year" limit on tourists were up to. Suddenly long-stay tourism is the only tourism still viable when you have to quarantine and what not!

I think these scanners serve the sole purpose that people who think they might have or develop a fever are discouraged from taking the chance they are found out.

I know several people who have reported sick for exactly this reason, when otherwise they would have gone to work with what they assumed was a minor cold.

If they offer a special tourist visa that allows a longer stay than the current one, there will be some takers despite the quarantine requirement.

The big question is how they will manage to have enough flights in and out to accommodate them, considering that they are few and far between.

Also, their expectations with regards to numbers will probably be delusional once again. As I said, there will be takers, but not millions of them.