PingRoundTheWorld

I've only been in London a few times, but last I remember travelling via the subway was pretty convenient and you could get anywhere within the city in a timely manner. Bangkok has a long way to go to reach that level of ride-walkability. Tokyo is a prime example of a successful implementation- you can get within short walking distance of literally anywhere in the city and suburbs by train within ~30 minutes (a bit more for suburbs). Hell you can even get to onsen resorts in other provinces by train without walking too much. Not to mention the trains arrive EXACTLY on time as scheduled, 99% reliable. I think the point I'm trying to make is that if they want to incentivize people to ride the train they should make riding the train more convenient/efficient than a car rather than bullying poor people into trains by making it unaffordable to ride cars.

Hours of operation will have a net zero effect on the number of road deaths. Those who want to drink later will also start drinking later, and those who drunk drive will do so anyway. Next.

If and when they actually finish the EEA high-speed train between Bangkok and Pattaya then there will be something to incentivize. As far as local travel within Bangkoka hike in petrol prices will just be a tax hike - those who already travel by train will continue to do so, and those who have cars aren't going to start selling them and switch to trains - they're just going to take the hit and pay more taxes for no reason. In general taxation is a rotten way to "incentize" and control people's behavior. Most people will not be "incentivized" by it and will just have to pay more for the same things. Stealing from the poor, basically.

What does it matter who is "preffered"? the facts on the ground here and now PTP is in charge. Polls don't really matter for the next 3 years.

Yes, they seem to finally start realizing who their actual targets are- it's not families and it's not rich Chinese/Indians (or rich any nationality). Most tourists come to Thailand to relax and/or party, and obvious alcohol consumption goes with that for most. The previous government thought it could force Thailand into being Singapore - and failed miserably resulting in lower tourist numbers. Lowering alcohol taxes (especially if they tackle the ridiculous 300% on imported stuff) is a step in the right direction for everybody.

The right to travel is a constitutional right. While the Supreme Court allowed states to require driver's licenses - it is doubtful it will stand for denying people travel based on a "carbon passport". That's clearly a violation of the constitution. (not to mention not everybody in the US is a crazy progressive - there's still plenty of conservatives and libertarians who won't go along with this)

Hahahahaha. Idiots. Really have no words beyond that. The level of stupid has exceeded the quota allotted.

None of this is going to happen. It's insane to think people will accept carbon passports as they represent a huge infringement on personal liberty and most likely unconstitutional in most countries. And that is assuming a government is crazy enough to even try it - there's zero chance my home country will, and Thailand with it's reliance on tourism... are they going to accept it?

Depends what kind of pension you have, if it's a government one - they can do whatever they want and you can't do anything about it, but if it's a private pension then they can't retroactively amend the terms. I'm not sure why you're freaking out- the US is almost completely over the minor recession it experienced, and when it charges forward it will pull the entire world with it. The only thing that could possibly spoil that is a large-scale war - something that's very unlikely to happen in an election year.

And you came to add to the party? pointless post.

Depends on the person, some counties I've seen mentioned in travel plans were Japan, Taiwan, Philippines, Vietnam, Indonesia... Overall they seem to be travelling less post-Covid, but these are rich guys so money is not the reason. I think for most of them in the past they travelled to Thailand on a regular basis to party, but once that's stopped they haven't really replaced it with anything.

Malaysians, Lao, Burmese, and hey even Vietnamese. Just because they're "Asian" doesn't mean they actually stay in the country (for more than a day) nor does it mean they spend (much) money. Whereas if they're western you can be sure they'll be staying (and spending) longer.

It's not that simple. I pay nearly 50% tax on income in my home country, which has a DTA with Thailand. So even if it was deemed "income" we now enter the murky waters of DTA and how it will be applied: if tax credits - how do you calculate the tax credit for the small portion remitted to Thailand - is it based on my highest marginal rate? lowest rate? entire sum paid in taxes?? or will Thailand want me to pay full (Thai) tax on the remitted sums and go knocking on my home country's doors for a refund of those amounts? That's kind of the whole point- I don't think I'll legally owe more tax either way - it's just the complexity and filing I want to avoid. Again remains to be seen if and how this is enforced...

Depends on the bank. Some limit to 20k, Bangkok Bank ATMs 25k, Krungsri ATMs 30k. Probably some more with higher limits but I'm sure you can find one of those two anywhere.

Source? Whether ATM withdrawals and paying for goods and services with an overseas credit card will be considered remittance is hugely important (for those of us who use foreign cards for the majority of their expenses). Which also brings the question- how do you "decide" if a credit card purchase/ATM withdrawal is income or not? I could pay the credit card bill with income, or I could pay for it with savings. It would be difficult to keep records and prove it either way.

Which hospital?

Then how do you know it was Dengue? (seriously asking, I don't think I've ever had it)

I will never understand why some foreigners choose to live in Thai villages with zero security. Almost every time you hear about a neighbor going stabby or a foreigner getting robbed it's at some village out in nowhereville. I'm sure it did happen.. sometime.. but I can't recall hearing about someone getting randomly stabbed by their neighbor in a condo. Better security, actual security guards (when they're not asleep), and less easy access (if you don't open the door nothing will happen). For those of you who live in villages/houses - do you actually feel safe??

This. People come to Thailand because it's (somewhat) seedy and unpredictable and the image of "anything can happen", or what you call character. Their past efforts to make it a wholesome family friendly destination are completely the wrong direction - western families have plenty of closer, cheaper places to go on vacation - why would an American family choose to fly 24 hours to Phuket when they can fly 4 hours to Puerto Rico, and they don't even have to worry about visa or currency exchange. For people to prefer to Thailand over other destinations there needs to be a differentiating factor, and that differentiating factor is character - and I'm not even talking about prostitution and all that - just the feeling that you're coming to a place where anything goes is exactly what young people want. Families won't come anyway - it's young couples and single people (all ages) Thailand should be aiming at. A great example of them suffocating tourism is their insistence on regulating nightlife closing hours. Bangkok still hasn't nearly recovered fom pre-Covid levels and tourist nightlife have crowds which are a fraction of what they used to be as a result of the 2am curfew. No tourist wants to be told to go home at 2am - so next trip they just won't come - I know many people who used to come every month or two, now they don't come at all because Bangkok is too boring for them. They are (finally!!) taking a step in the right direction with allowing nightlife (in designated areas) to open until 4am, however that is too little too late, and it still doesn't address major tourist areas in Bangkok like Nana/Asoke and soi 11, and Thong Lor - which are NOT allowed to open later under the new rules. There is a very limited number of tourist venues which will be allowed in Ratchadapisek and Silom, but the grand majority of venues affected are actually local Thai (RCA, Ratchadapisek are predominently Thai). Whoever made the rules clearly does not understand the tourist nightlife market at all.

While Thailand may want them (*their money), less Chinese means better treatment and lower prices for those of us who aren't Chinese. Don't legalize gambling! Taiwanese are great- they're basically like Japanese who speak Chinese A lot of them are highly educated and well mannered. Bring 'em on!

Not everybody has a great pension plan that adjusts for inflation. With my pension plan it's almost guaranteed it will be eroded by inflation. Not to mention I could only start pulling reduced benefits at 60, or 67 if I want full benefits. I do have other investments that I expect will far outweigh my pension, but for those too I will have to actively manage them to make sure they outpace inflation - it's not automagic - I'd think on the contrary, most pension and like-pension plans (savings) people have aren't protected against inflation.

Yeah no kidding. Ludicrously overpriced. I have a friend who got admitted there for another condition (also was on the brink) - he survived but had to sell an apartment(!) to fund his hospital bills. Out of curiosity- if one were to be in critical condition, where would you recommend they go/get admitted to? can a government hospital be trusted? are there private hospitals that won't cost you an apartment or a kidney?

By not declaring I mean declaring it as sourced from savings, gift, or other source that isn't income. Assuming we'll actually be required to file tax returns if we don't have taxable income - that remains to be seen.

Bingo. This whole system is unrealistic and relies on people coming forward and declaring that the source of the money is income from the same year. Very few will actually do it, and anyone who can will avoid (not evade) it.

Yeah, it's quite a wonder how they want tourists to stay longer, yet they do everything they can to make sure visas are short. Simply changing from 30 day to 90 day visa waivers will by itself encourage longer stays, and if they allow 90 day extensions on top of that they'll get plenty more European winter crowd (they already get some, but the visa hassle is for sure keeping some away).