DrDweeb

I really do not have any interest in economics as I am financially secure. I do not wish to get anyones backs up and do not need advice about my social activites thanks.

You said ''Your opinion about what constitutes a "tourist" is that, an opinion (i do not necessarily disagree btw)'' Please explain my opinion on tourists as when is a tourist not a tourist? If on a tourist visa how are they not tourists?

Your ignorance on terrorism is very strange. Do you not read newspapers or watch television. I think you should start.

a) Ignorance is bliss

I do not recall mentioning your social activities.

c) My comment regarding terrorism dealt specifically with how illogical your statement was in the context of this thread - not the issue per se. If you would like my bibliography of books read this year alone on the subject, I will be happy to provide it, but ... (see point (e))

d) Your opinion is your opinion - I have not challenged it - merely reminded you that it is just your opinion. You are entitled to it as are other theirs. Since you clearly do not actually research anything you say (see previous notes on economic & tax for example), your opinion might be construed by the studious follower of this thread to be less than worthy of merit.

e) Take Remedial Reading 101 as well

Dweeb

I dont need your advice about economics thanks as I am not interested in it. I am talking about 'the so called 'tourists' who may contribute to the economy by spending money, however they are possibly evading paying taxes in Thailand and possibly their own countries simply by remaining as tourists.

Lets face it tourists are tourists and should expect to be treated respectfully in a foreign country but equally they should respect the country they are visiting by not trying to buck the system as so many do in Thailand and at last the rules are being tightened up.

No one ever heard of global terrorism? Any country with an open door policy is crazy.

I can understand why so many are upset with the rule changes but at the end of the day those people complaning are only TOURISTS on a temporary stay and cannot expect a country to change its laws to suit 'tourists'.

How many long term 'tourists' are there? I am sure that those long term 'tourists' are a minority compared to the tourists who come here on their vacation and then go home, so I cannot see how their disapearance will have much effect on any economy.

I dont really care to be honest as I will be upfront with the proper authorities and pay taxes as necessary. If the laws change and I am unable to stay then I will sell up and go else where. Thailand is not the end all and be all.

If you are not eligible for a 'long term' Visa then sorry but youll have to go, end of.

Having proclaimed your ignorance of basic macro-economics and desire to remain in blissful ignorance, it behooves you to cease your pontifications about subject matter of which you are painfully and admittedly ignorant.

Your opinion about what constitutes a "tourist" is that, an opinion (i do not necessarily disagree btw)

You terrorism comment is illogical to put it mildly - please try Logic 101 at your nearest community college.

Your desire to pay taxes is admirable, though largely misplaced in Thailand - probably due to some childhood problem growing up in Scandinavia or some such place. The idea that "economic benefit = pay tax" is not a universal truism or a logical necessity.

The number of 30day visa-runner residents is very substantial and their contribution to local economy is significant. And remember, almost all of these people know a great deal more about the way the Kingdom operates than your average 14 day tourist.

As others have pointed out - the reason that 30 day visa-runner residents exist is because there is NO ADEQUATE VISA for the reasonably well heeled sub-50yo wishing to retire in Thailand, and for those over 50, the hassle and cost has been seen as far greater than the result, especially as Thai authorities have de-facto and/or explicitly accepted the model for decades. Many of the 30 day people will convert, but there will be a group for whom no adequate way to remain legally in the country will exist and their loss will be a net loss to the economy.

Sure, there are some wanting to be below the radar, they will have to find another shallow, but for most, it is just a great deal of hassle that they would rather be without.

It is also well to remember, farangs have almost no rights, we get nothing for free, and we pay "farang-price" for everything. 1 farang is not the economic equal of 1 thai - nor is the equal in legal terms - just ask Steve Millers family !

If Thais really succeed in implementing their xenophobic tendencies and driving the farangs away, it will be to the detriment of their economy - peiod. Same goes for every other developing nation. We have the wealth, capital knows no boundries, and we can vote with our feet.

That being said, I personally do not have a big problem with the 90/180 rule - its a pain, but I can live with it.

No that is not what I'm saying. Those 'tourists 'are the one who dont benefit the country by avoiding paying taxes or running a business or doing anything basically. How can tyhey be a benefit to the Thais?

You have only picked out 1 point which has possibly struck a nerve with you but you need to read my post in its full context to understand that this is only 1 reason why long term tourists want to stay

You need to take Economics 101 - and soon !!

Dweeb

How are 30 day visa runs an abuse of the system?

30 day visa exempt stamps are issued for tourism purposes. A tourist is someone who travels for pleasure, tourism is the practice of traveling for pleasure. Building a house/running a business/living in the country for X years are activities that cannot be defined as tourism. Before anyone says anything, tourist have been known to build/buy houses in countries other than their own and visit for short spells/rent the property out but their main domicile is in their own country. Long staying visa runners are not tourists and are therefore abusing the system.

Sure they are. They are long staying tourists as evidenced by the fact they travel to another country every 30 days.

I know what your saying but its a pretty piss poor way of implementing it with so little notice on people who have made lives for themselves under the old rules.

Actually, the visa-run model has been institutionalised with the blessing of Thai authorities (proof by existence). While the system may be designed for "tourists", there has been no attempt to discourage visa-runnner residents in the slightest for decades.

Changing such an entrenched system is bound to cause some problems, especially when there is no real system in place to accommodate the change in administration for the 10s of 000s of visa-runner residents.

Dweeb

I think there is no IM class visa anymore ?? Phased out the 3 mil this year ??

Anyway I refuse to bring into Thailand anything I wont walk away from.. Letting 10 mil rot in a Thai account instead of working for me isnt how I got rich..

If I decided to buy a Villa instead of rent, again I would want more security..

And Anyway it would be cheaper (then the lost return on 10 mil) to simply have clerks make a fake company for me.. Lets face it the rules are so shoddy and full of holes anyone with an ounce of sense can get through them (clue.. Get a second passport.. wow that was tough)..

My point is they are once again acting ass backwards.. They over react to Mark Carr and invent a system they cant control, cant really implement (the days not stamps) or that actually does anything.. So very Thai !!

Why a married person can support a couple for 400k yet a retiree has to be defined by double that in assets and an age.. So someone with a grand total of 20k USD and is 51 is ideal for retirement but a millionarre at 40 isnt.. Dont follw that..

Man, do you know how hard it is to get a 2nd passport if you are Australian ? It is not a slam dunk without the right "connections", trust me.

So, being a rich bastard, I like many others, need some other simple, legal way of enabling us to live, relax and enjoy Thailand without the constant drama ofd immigration hassles.

Sorry to disappoint the less wealthy on this board, but people like us are net gains for the Thai economy as we are foreign exchange importers. There is no valid reason not to have a visa type for people like us. I am sorry for not being over 50, but that day will come, but even then, why should I put 800K THB in a non working account. Next year it may be 3m THB.

yeah, I can teach, volunteer or whatever. Actually the volunteer thing is cool - I was going to do that anyway, because I have a social conscience and truly like much of thailand, the Thais and what the country has to offer.

Anyway, what we need is the "Thai Elite" program with better guarantees. Does anyone trust this program ???? As far as I can see, one should view it as a one-time 5year visa payment with free golf. Anything beyond that is a bonus.

Dweeb.

I think the value of the western farang is about to be understood.

The western farang who hasn't the resources to do anything other than scurry across the border every 30 days before returning to some work that generates minimal income but no foreign exchange is also understood, which is why they want them to go home.

And how about the wealthy young farang ?? Putting >2mil baht into the Thai economy per year ?? Wont marry, have money why work ??

Whats my visa class ??

Of course its not hard to scam a B visa or similar but bit of a joke no ??

No no no, you do not have to worry about anything at all. Maestro, the moderator of this forum has stated that the elite program solves your visa problem and those of other like persons. Thanks maestro, you are a tremendous help to so many folks like Livinlos. problems solved

You know.. If I actually had any faith at all in the promises of Thai systems I wouldnt mind a lifetime use and 5 years visa's for 1mil..

I dont care about golf, I dont care about the biz intros, I guess fast track immigration would be ok..

But 1 mil for lifetime 5 year visa's.. OK sure I would bite..

The the fact is its backed up by the promises of a Thai company.. who have already backed out of many initial promises (land).. And the pet project of the head waiter..

I know how much after sales service you usually get in asia, once the money is paid the service is concluded.. And I have my doubts about its lifespan say 10 years out..

I actually started coming to Thailand because of the golf. Now I am in the process of buying a condo on Phuket (off- plan - what a legal quagmire - another story).

The Thai Elite deal sounds perfect, because for an avid golfer, it makes some sense, and a lifetime of 5yr visas is enticing.

I have the same issues you relate. Just how reliable is this promise. I saw some article recently that said only 1756 (or some such number) had actually paid the million THB. Some spokesperson said that they company is liquid and viable forever. That sort of statement is usually made the week before bankruptcy proceedings begin. Also, I have not been able to determine just how secure the government underwriting of the 5*5*... visa is.

Anyway, for the time being I am still in reviewing my options, so any insights or info would be useful.

ciao

Dweeb

Stamps or days? Wait and see Lopburi, wait and see......

I hear ya Lopburi - however for someone (not me by the way) who has stayed here for years by doing 30 day visa runs, there clearly will be no difference between the number of stamps and the number of days.

Of course, there are going to be some great arguments between imm and business men who (say) come here 6 or 7 times within a 6 month period, each visit being for only a week.......

I think counting the days is gonna be a lot harder than imm imagined. Then again, TiT.

Folks, I currently have 4 marker pen entries in my passport. I was not refused entry on the fourth. The Immigration officer glanced quickly at my other entry stamps and issued a new one without comment.

From this I conclude that it is "number of days", as was clearly stated by some official about 2 1/2 months ago.

Why speculate when there is proof by existence ??

The Dweeb

Are there any links with photos of these supposedly half naked young women ?

I have a sneaking suspicion that there were not many bare breasts or pantyless women - which is what most wetserners would consider a pre-requsite for being half-naked.

I suspect the girls were showing some flesh - but despite my personal feeling that it is inappropriate in a Buddhist Temple - the "moral outrage" by some conservative forces does seem a tad over the top.

Of course if they were buck naked and dry-humping a pole, then that's a different matter. If they were like the girls you will see at any trade show anywhere in the world on any given day, then some moderation of the reaction would seem in order.

I don't see what scantily clad girls have to do with selling just about any product other than scantily clad girls. I don't care if DTAC has scantily clad girls gyrating in front of a display if the dtac service sucks. same goes for girls selling Nescafe or Leo Beer or whatever. Of course, I may not be a typical consumer in Thailand, I suppose.

Whitey, I'm with you on that one.

Once I was at Pantip Plaza and the ground floor had a dance troup of young ladies half clad in sparkly silver outfits performing for a computer manufacturer. I thought to myself: "How bad must their products be that they can't be sold on features, performance and reliability alone? How does a gyrating half-naked lady in any way persuade me to buy their computer?"

I believe they were wearing stockings, mini skirts and quite sexy tops. Outfits quite commonplace on any western street (in terms of the amount of material - not the silver/red colour).

Having "eye-candy" to pull in the punters is a strategy older than civilization itself. The Canon girls (of whom I believe you refer) were really cute and made me stop by. That is the intention.

You should go to a technology trade show in Asia sometime - it is eye-candy city.

I have no problems with this at all !!

I would have a problem of a pole dancer in my place of worship (if I had one which I do not) - so it is a question of respect and of what is apprpriate in a given lication

"Doing the same thing outside the Vatican, or at the Wailing Wall or at Mecca would" .......

Yes that would be interesting, especially at Mecca! but that's why the Muslims are here - just pop down soi 3, same goes for the jews, god knows which soi they are, but as for the Catholics - ummm don't they do worst things?

I am investigating Buddhism as a guiding set of precepts for my life from now on

I am neutral on this issue and will leave it up to the Thai people to decide what they want...but...it seems to me that I heard that in times gone by there used to be young women dancing with bare breasts as a regular thing at temple festivals.....am I mistaken or has anyone else heard of this?

Chownah

Yes, ironically toplessness only became "immoral" after western influence.

The "christian west" and its prudish obsessions about the human body havbe a lot to answer for. It is one of the big downsides of western economic power, that it has forced a view of the human body and sexuality upon other cultures which is inapprpriate and IMHO wholly wrong.

A naked body is not "bad" per se, unless you are a bible bashing biggot.

Several persons in this thread have inquired as to whether under 20yo's are children. In fact, they are. By Thai law, one does not reach the age of majority until 20, until which point every decision they make (including dating) is theoretically subject to parental approval.

"Steven"

What are you talking about? Even the age of consent in Thailand is only 15. This includes Male/Female sex, M/M sex, and F/F sex.

Actually according to the Interpol site it is 13.

But hey, what would I know - I just read it in some other thread somewhere else and the link checked out as accurate.

First of all I happen to totally agree with the statement, regarding scantily clad dancers, made by Her Majesty. Coyote girl style dancing in the vicinity of a temple is inappropriate according to the Five precepts of Buddhism. I doubt the comments would have been so public if the dancing had taken place at a sports stadium or other suitable venue

THE FIVE PRECEPTS

All religions have some basic rules that define what is good conduct and what kind of conduct should be avoided. In Buddhism, the most important rules are the Five Precepts. These have been passed down from the Buddha himself.

1. No killing---------- Respect for life ( Ask politicians and police involved in slayings of drug dealers two years ago. Ask personnel involved in Tak bai incident))

2. No stealing--------- Respect for others' property (Ask Thaksin and his cronies)

3. No sexual misconduct-------Respect for our pure nature (Ask any Thai woman and man involved in sex industry)

4. No lying ----------Respect for honesty. (Ask any Thai politician)

5. No intoxicants----------Respect for a clear mind. (Ask any Thai citizen who drinks alcohol)

Western culture is always used as a scapegoat by Thais as having a negative and destructive influence on their culture. Really?

They (the culture vultures) seem to react by immediately blaming the decadent west. How about a little self examination?

Was there killing in Siam before westerners came?

Have land grabs, cheating, scamming the poor, acquiring vast wealth and paying no taxes,only been a recent phenomenon?

Have Thais only recently discovered sex and sexy behaviour? Who mostly uses Thai brothels? Farangs ?

Was there prostitution in Siam before western influence?

When did some Thais learn to lie their heads off? Did they import corruption from America or Europe? I don't think so.

Has alcohol use only been allowed since the first western tourists arrived? Ask any rice farmer.

Moderation in all things would be a good start here instead of overreaction to every problem.

Think things out before planning an event and think twice before banning something.

Certainly the intent of the comments made by H.M. The Queen was totally appropriate but the people in the administation need to think wisely before passing ineffective laws.

Absolutely. It was the LOCATION that was inappropriate - the age thing subsidiary.

Doing the same thing outside the Vatican, or at the Wailing Wall or at Mecca would probably invoke a less restrained and thoughtful response than that made by Her Majesty !

I flew out from the new airport on Emirates last Saturday at 01:25.

From the outside and arriving at night by taxi the building is very impressive but i was quickly disappointed once inside. The first thing that annoyed me was the very low lighting and the glare from all the blue lights. It made it difficult to see anything clearly.

Emirates checkin was a shambles. Waiting in line for well over an hour and i'd already checked in online. Even when i got to the desk it took the guy 15 minutes to print me a boarding pass for seats i'd already selected.

I then had time and went off to find a restaurant for something to eat. Downstairs looking for a half decent restaurant or pub and nothing. Cafe style places only from what i could see. I asked someone if there was anything else nearby and the hotel way opposite the terminal building was suggested... decided it was too far to walk so i sat down in one of the cafes. No service... everything self service. Queue up to order your food... then sit and wait for your food. I then had the misfortune of eating the worst meal i have EVER had in 4 years of living in Thailand. I sent it back because it was cold but they only gave me new rice. Disgraceful.

Immigration was virtually empty, however, i had to stand behind the only guy who seemed to have some problem. While deciding if i should change lines more people came in and i was effectively stuck where i was while all the other people were sailing through. Bad luck this, or it could of been that the young lady at the desk wasn't quite sure what she was meant to be doing, she did seem rather slow.

Customs only glanced at me... and i didn't see them stop anyone else either.

Inside and things were a little better. Shops were mostly up and running and I found an uncomfortable little bar for a beer before heading round to the gate.

The departure gates were spartan to say the least. Concrete pillars, metal chairs... the place was cold and uncomfortable. No shops to even buy a bottle of water. Overall it reminded me of Charles De Gaulle in Paris. Not a good thing as i consider that to be one of the worst major airports in Europe.

Boarding the place now... 30 minutes late. As i was halfway on the gangway (is that what you call it) approaching the plane the whole thing started to shake from side to side. And it didn't stop. A bit nerve wracking to say the least.

So basically, i didn't like the new aiport one bit. The only good side to this is things can only improve. I'll see how things are on arrival when i come back in 3 weeks.

I believe maritime words are still correct for air travel. This is the historical precedent. However, the septics have given us the following terms, which you may encounter on your travels.

deplane = disembark

debark = see deplane

jetway = gangway

flight attendent = steward/stewardess

There are plenty of others I would guess, just too slack to raise them to a level of consciousness just now

I look forward to the day, when some has the balls, to take the immigration department to the International Court in the Hague, for seperating a man from his legally wedded wife!

Good luck with that.. But be sure to bring a case against virtually every country in the world when you do it..

You don't get an automatic right to live in any country just because you are married to someone..

This has been the case since the middle ages almost.

I don't know what Hague will do about it but what you say is bull. Tell me one other country that does not allow you to live in it if you are married to one of their nationals.

This is allowed in all of the Americas, North and South and in all of Europe. Asia may be differen, Africa too, I don't have som much experiene there, but "virtually every country in the world" is just bull, pure unadulterated!

It is not a slam dunk in Denmark any more, and I believe several other EU states have similar legislations.

Congratulations for the opening!!

I hour delay for baggage?

In the UK a 1 hour wait is the Norm at LGW, LHR, STN, MAN - all airports I've used in the last 12 months, and all equally appalling for luggage delivery times. Indeed at LGW I waited 90 mins for my baggage, without an apology or explanation - it was NOT to do with the recent security situaiton.

I hope that the new BKK proves to be a wonderful success, and a showcase for visitors entering the country that Thailand can be proud of.

One hour wait for baggage? No excuse, no matter where it is.

In Japan, your baggage consistently arrives at the carousels BEFORE you do. Someone should take lessons from the Japanese (or from the American who taught Quality Control to all the big Japanese corporations during the 60's and 70's). (Too bad US corporations initially rejected his advice!).

That happenned to me a while back at AMS. My buddy and I were waiting at a stopped carousel chatting. Neither of accustomed to travelling with baggage - we stood aimlessly for 5 minutes before we realised our baggage was already there. I have seen this event at other airports too - casual empricism suggests that it depends on the foot distance from arrival to baggage claim

Just an aside, relating to a previously closed post.

crit·i·cism Pronunciation (krt-szm) n.

1. The act of criticizing, especially adversely.

I fail to see how discussing the etymology of the airport name and the relative ages (language tree) of languages which have the roots which make up the said name, can in any way be construed as criticism.

Personally, I would have preferred a transliteral spelling more likely to result in a correct pronounciation by an anglophile, but I am slightly biased on this point. Otherwise, I think it is a fine name, and for those of us with an interest in such etymological musings posts on the name are both relevant and of interest.

I think the moderator should acquire a dictionary and chill out a little.

Long Live The King (he is a cool dude)

the toilet, seats are serious design issues.

given the problems thailand has created for its expat community it is possible to see people flying into kuala lampur, singapore or enterining cambodia from hkg or kl.

coming up from malaysia one can stop in penang for visa. heading to cambodia overland. why stop in bkk. just fly in and you dont hassle with any time ticking on your stamps.

this IS the thai way folks. this airport was not needed. nothing a facelift, new equipment and THE REMOVAL OF ALL MANY OF DUTY FREE SHOPS IN DON MUANG (WHICH HAVE GROWN INTO INFECTIOUS DISEASE LEAVING NO SPACE FOR SEATING) and a new runway would not fix.

this would also have avoided many of the corruption issues as well.

thailand is under misimpression that somehow a new airport will mean more tourists. unless people could not holiday here due to full flights this is pure folly.

i am really angry they have put in all that freaking duty free garbage and no seating - EXACTLY like don muang (so everyone will be sitting on the floor like DM and PAYING XTRA B200).

changyi ROCKS - it must be the BEST airport in the world. all airports should take a clue from sng.

Good anti-Thai diatribe! Why do you hate everything Thai? Do you hate to see see them have success at anything & does it make you rage inside?

Singapore Changi could perhaps be a little bit better but the new airport has only just opened so all problems will soon be creased over.

I rest assured that wherever you are from be it London, Sydney or New York that your airport is no match for the new Thai airport.

Stop being so bitter!

Sydney is pretty good actually !

And I know for a fact that the roof does not leak

The Taxi access works, the train access is easy.

There are plenty of shops, seating, loos etc. in the departure hall

I cannot recall any complaint at Sydney except that the immigration queue on the way out at peak hour is sometimes a bit long.

My other half got her USA passport in the 90's - at which time there were a lot less hurdles to complete.

It what no easy matter then - its even tougher now.

All I can say is congrats - wish you both the very best.

Just to put the whole matter of dual nationality straight - insofar as the Thai authorities view it.

There is a common misconception that Thai's (in particular women) cannot hold dual nationality.

This was the case way back whenever, but it is no longer the case - Thai citizens are permitted by the Thai authorities to hold dual nationality.

They are however obliged to report it i.e. the question is asked on Thai passport application forms, but many Thai's simply don't aginst the understanding that it is not permitted. It is permitted.

I can't speak for all countries but know for a fact that in the case of the USA and the UK, there is no restriction - as far as those countries are concerned, and suspect that is the case in respect of all EU member countries.

I am told that the USA authorities, on their own initiative formally notify the Thai authorities when they issue dual nationality to a Thai citizen (?)

You cannot acquire dual nationality if you are Danish. Denmark does not recognise dual nationality acquired by residence. Dual nationality is only recognised for individuals born with both nationalities.

I know this because (a) I tried to do it, and ( my daughter is it.

This was always my preferred way of grabbing a taxi primarily because the queue in front fo the booth was often so long.

Is this still possible at the new airport? Anyone tried it yet? I know taxis arent allowed to wait, but the way it worked before was that you'd just get in immediately as an arriving person got out.

Made for a happy driver too, who got an immediate return trip, not havign to wait in the taxi queue himself.

Cheers,

Chanchao

Good question ! I did that a few times when things were too hectic, but that is pretty rare in my experience - could be my arrival times are well matched to taxi availability at DM.

In another forum that shall remain nameless, a punter indicated that the departure lounge is a good place to pick up something else as well for the ride home in a taxi

We want to add our congratulations to the Airport authority for doing what many deemed impossible.

Two questions:

1) Now that the Snake Pit has become operational, has it assumed the airport code "BKK" and is Don Muang now and forevermore designated "DBK"?

2) Until today, Don Muang held the record for the international airport in longest continuous operation in the same location. Which airport now inherits that record?

Seems that Schiphol already had the record !

Amsterdam Airport Schiphol is the world's oldest international airport still situated at its original location.

http://uk.biz.yahoo.com/060919/81/gmi0m.html

Well, it rather depends upon definition. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingsford_Smi...ational_Airport suggests 4 years younger than Schipol, but the question is when Schipol became a "commercial" airfield, which as you will see here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schipol_Airport was at the very end of 1920 (I suggest after Sydney) when it changed from being military.

So, as usual, it depends on which "facts" one wishes to use and how one wishes to define the question.

I guess Suvarnabhumi has the record as the youngest commercial airport

I am not talking about adding thousands of seats in the departure hall.

If you are sending your 16 year daughter on her first trip going alone I am sure that you want to go to the airport together with her to see that she arrives at the right terminal, that she come to the right checkincounter etc etc. And you have to be there 2 hours before flight time, maybe you add 30 min for eventual trafficjams etc so you are there in good time.

After checkin maybe you want to have chat with her, still 2.5 hours before the flight so why rush.

In your world you are not allowed to follow her to the airport, you send her by taxi, with a driver that does not talk english, that might drop her at wrong terminal etc. etc.

Still I like airports that are designed for their customers. Not to make records to be the biggest, the highest, with most corruption etc etc etc.

If they design to cut the walking distance from the plane to immigration, to bagage and from there to taxi/airportbus (without loading your luggage in and out of the local airportbus).

If they design so it is easy to find your way to the right departureterminal, the right checkin, easy to find a restroom, easy to find your gate without too much walking.

And maybe with a variety of dutyfree shops that have prices that are lower than outside the airport.

I don't think that will be a more expensive design and they does not need to rise their fees.

What do you think?

In your original post, you quoted an article that said this

Now on to question 2: On that very same fourth floor, the only departure hall, how many seats are there for the public to rest their weary bones?

A couple of thousand would seem reasonable, you'd think.

That is where I came up with the "thousands of seats" from. I thought the author of that article was absolutely looney to suggest that thousands of seats in the departure halls of airports should be a standard feature. If you say you think there should be 500 rather than the existing 100, I wouldn't argue the point. I see 100 as being adequate being I'll likely never use the seats, but I can see some people using them and 500 wouldn't be so excessive as to cause major conjestion problems.

With regard to wanting to bring your daughter to the airport and spend some time on her first trip, certainly as we already discussed, you can go have a seat in one of the coffee shops or restaurants and enjoy eating/drinking something while spending your time with her. And certainly wouldn't that be more enjoyable as opposed to just sitting in a departure hall? For me, I don't see the big deal. If there's empty seats in the departure hall and you want to sit, then sit. If there aren't any, then go to a restaurant and buy something and sit there. Whether they put 100 seats in or 500 seats, or even 1000 seats, undoubtedly there will be certain times when all the seats are occupied and you'd still be forced to find alternate seating or do without. There is no solution to this problem without creating a new and bigger problem.

Your other comments seem to me to be valid. Certainly designing an airport with the customer in mind would be great. It would have been great if this new airport could have been built without any corruption, which will only be paid for by us passengers. It would be great if they would have allowed real competition at the shops, resulting in fairer prices. But this is Thailand and we all know that corruption exists here as it does in many other countries. We can dream of a perfect airport, but I don't think it's really reasonable to expect one. Even without the corruption, the airport, just like any other business, has to balance the customer's wishes against the economics. You could build the world's greatest airport that had everything any passenger would want, but if the construction and maintenance costs were too much so that the passengers and airlines couldn't afford to pay the fees, then it would do nobody any good.

Anyways, based on initial reports, I certainly don't think the new airport is the best that it could be. I think many people's complaints are valid, at least to some extent. But I also am very thankful for the new airport as I'm sure it will be a vast improvement over Don Muang, certainly after the initial kinks are worked out.

You know, I really like Don Muang. It is one of the easiest airports to go through anywhere in the world. I fly well over 100 sectors a year, and hit plenty of airports and Don Muang is fine by me.

From my Hotel to DM, checkin and through immigration is rarely ever more than 30 minutes (OK, my flights are almost always between 23:00 and 01:00, but still ...). Coming in is always brisk with a minimum of fuss, kerbside cabs 10 metres from the door - ok, I have waited 5 minutes in the queue on rare occasions. If you want to talk about airport disaster zones, DM is not on my list.

I will miss DM.

I will in and out of TNA next week and 3-4 times more before year end, so I will have some first hand experience soon

Page 12 of wishful thinking that the PM is going to be hurting for funds.

These funds were never meant to be stored in the LOS in the first place. Would you keep the bulk of your funds in a country that automatically taxes your interest revenue?

Like Australia ?

Seems to me Taksin improved and developed Thailand greatly on the world stage and internally during his rule.

He introduced significant improvements to peoples lives with the hospital and the one product one tambon schemes.

I am told that his attacks on the drug trade while too violent has reduced the growth of this industry and annoyed many Thai gangsters. Its these people that ordinary Thais should get rid of!

Compared to previous Thai leaders I think he was superior in action and benefits to Thailand.

And, much of the complaint against him appears to be jealousy.

I think he will accept whatever is thrown at him provided its handled by the legal system and not simply a political witchhunt by an elite minority that could not achieve enough votes to topple him constitutionally.

Oh my, you really are naive.

Democracy requires certain preconditions to continue to exist (and flourish). Not all these preconditions are met in Thailand. As such, an unscrupulous individual, once democratically elected, is able to acquire absolute control through the subversion of public institutions, authorities and individuals.

This has happenned before in the history of democracy, and will doubtless happen again, and certainly happenned in Thailand under Toxin.

I am personally quite happy with the good General's moves, as they break a deadlock and guarantee that a Toxin coup to make his position unassailable (something that most every educated person expected any day from Toxin) did not occur.

Hamas and Hizbollah have public support for the same reasons that Toxin had substantial public support. Those organisations, like Toxin, can inexpensively maintain that support and go about their dirty business - in Toxin's case acquisition of extreme wealth and supreme executive power (bombing people for the others named).

People are not jealous of Toxin, they are asking the not unreasonable question of just how did he amass such extreme wealth in such a short space of time, and why he has felt it necessary to lie about it knowingly, subvert the activities of the state auditor general etc. etc.

I hope this post is sufficiently intellectual to pass the censorship muster.

I always get mine from the Athinee tailors (cannot spell the name). It think it is just past the ex-Sukh Soi zero on the left heading into town.

Excellent service, perfect fit first time.

Mike