2 minutes ago, Gecko123 said:

I understand and accept the government's dual pricing at national parks and tourist attractions, but it is nevertheless unquestionable that this policy sets an undesirable tone about the acceptability of dual pricing by vendors. Were the government to abolish that policy it would send a powerful signal regarding the unacceptability of dual pricing, and would likely have a very salulatory effect on tourism as well.

Respectfully, why do accept dual pricing by the government?

Who has big enough balls to real in the Phuket maffia?

This government?

Not likely.

8 minutes ago, colinneil said:

The man is priceless, absolutely priceless, no more ripping off tourists, thats the governments job.

Ironically looking at the "development " of the country , the next phase to watch for will be the growth of institutionalised ripping off rather than on a personal level. A bloated state system will have to sustain and legitimise itself on many levels. Unfortunately the average Thai citizen can't see the game of chess that is being played in their very midst.

  The never ending story of Mr. P. 

14 minutes ago, Gecko123 said:

I understand and accept the government's dual pricing at national parks and tourist attractions, but it is nevertheless unquestionable that this policy sets an undesirable tone about the acceptability of dual pricing by vendors. Were the government to abolish that policy it would send a powerful signal regarding the unacceptability of dual pricing, and would likely have a very salulatory effect on tourism as well.

The support of a separate rule of ethics for government and personal entities is somewhat problematic.

8 minutes ago, nickstav said:

Respectfully, why do accept dual pricing by the government?

National parks and monuments are part of the national trust which should be made accessible to all Thais regardless of their station in life. A disproportionate share of the cost to maintain these properties is placed on visitors to the Kingdom in order to subside the price of admission for Thais. This is done so that admission fees remain low enough so as to not exclude admission to Thais with even the humblest of means. A further rationale used to justify the dual pricing is that most foreigners enjoy on average a higher per capita income than Thais. While I fully understand complaints about discriminatory pricing, there are many examples of preferential pricing for residents around the world, such as in-state tuition at many US schools. In the end, even though I'm not crazy about the policy, I accept Thailand's right to do this if they so choose.

23 minutes ago, shady86 said:

He forgot to mentioned that immigration has ripped of a lot of long term visa holders with TM30.

I don't think tourists go to immigration.  So, it's OK to rip off expats.  Not that many of them.  40,000,000 tourists and you only need to take 20 baht per to make a good payday but expats one needs much more per person.  

The most notorious people in Thailand are not the Thais but westerners themselves.

They have a well deserved reputation for being incredibly gullible when paying for goods , services even land and home building  costs  upcountry are absurd.Thai families and builders conspire to rip off the old farang for as much as possible. Land is very cheap for Thais but not for Bob or Hans.

Tuk tuk rides cost roughly the same as taxis for locals for longer journeys with groceries or 4 students etc.say 40 -60 baht total fare.

Same journey for farang  200-500baht maybe each farang pays!!!

Farang are easy targets.

Nothing will ever change.

16 minutes ago, cmsally said:

The support of a separate rule of ethics for government and personal entities is somewhat problematic.

That's not exactly an apples-to-apples ethical situation.

 

In the case of the government's dual pricing, it can be argued that the government is doing this not to discriminate against foreigners, but to ensure that access to national parks and monuments is maintained for the benefit of the largest number of Thai people possible. In other words, it is being done for the common good of the Thai people.

 

In contrast, a street vendor gouging a foreign tourist is only doing so out of the self-interest of making a profit. He is not doing it for any higher social purpose. 

 

I believe this is what distinguishes the two activities from one other, and makes one ethically defensible and the other less so.

 

More hot air from the omnipotent one.

1 hour ago, nickstav said:

Lead by example! Thais pay 20 Baht at National Parks/foreigners 200 Baht.

if one has Thai driving licence you might find that you could/would be charged only 20 baht.....

5 minutes ago, Gecko123 said:

National parks and monuments are part of the national trust which should be made accessible to all Thais regardless of their station in life. A disproportionate share of the cost to maintain these properties is placed on visitors to the Kingdom in order to subside the price of admission for Thais. This is done so that admission fees remain low enough so as to not exclude admission to Thais with even the humblest of means. A further rationale used to justify the dual pricing is that most foreigners enjoy on average a higher per capita income than Thais. While I fully understand complaints about discriminatory pricing, there are many examples of preferential pricing for residents around the world, such as in-state tuition at many US schools. In the end, even though I'm not crazy about the policy, I accept Thailand's right to do this if they so choose.

Again respectfully, I disagree with some of your points. If it is justified for the government to charge foreigners more because they make more, than it would be justified for songtaew drivers to charge foreigners more, as long as the extra charge was universally applied (i.e. all songtaews can charge Thais 20 Baht, but can charge 40 Baht for foreigners). In-state tuition usually only applies to state-run schools or schools that accept governmental assistance, and is based on your paying taxes in that particular state. You say there are many examples, but list only this one. I agree that the parks and monuments should be affordable to all Thais, regardless of their station in life, but I don't think that justifies charging us more. 

3 minutes ago, essox essox said:

if one has Thai driving licence you might find that you could/would be charged only 20 baht.....

I tried that...didn't work.

very strange turn - the last time, some 3 years ago, he condemned raped on the death island (koh tao) english girl, for wearing swimming costume as a cause for her ordeal. 

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/thailand-beach-murders-thai-pm-suggests-attractive-female-tourists-cannot-expect-to-be-safe-in-9737016.html 

 

looks, like economic slowdown is making him thinking twice about free dollar from tourists. He needs more tanks, submarines, guns and explosive detectors

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-07-18/world-beating-baht-is-a-big-big-headache-for-thailand-s-tourism

 

 

12 minutes ago, Gecko123 said:

That's not exactly an apples-to-apples ethical situation.

 

In the case of the government's dual pricing, it can be argued that the government is doing this not to discriminate against foreigners, but to ensure that access to national parks and monuments is maintained for the benefit of the largest number of Thai people possible. In other words, it is being done for the common good of the Thai people.

 

In contrast, a street vendor gouging a foreign tourist is only doing so out of the self-interest of making a profit. He is not doing it for any higher social purpose. 

 

I believe this is what distinguishes the two activities from one other, and makes one ethically defensible and the other less so.

 

Of course a street vendor could argue that you are subsidising cheap meals for the local Thai population .

Credit Suisse notes Thailand is the most unequal country in the world. It is industrial-scale corruption by the privileged and elite that makes it so. Combine that with general greediness and it's understandable there are so many ripoffs at a more grassroots level. Not acceptable, but certainly understandable. Some of the ripoffs of their own people such as the Yingluck government rice scandal and the ridiculous submarine saga beggar belief. Shame on Prayuth for not acting upon the bigger picture.

On the lighter side, funny story...we went to a major waterpark. My girlfriend was charged the full price of admission, while I got the 50% senior citizen discount. She was so pissed-off about that and all day was mumbling under her breath "490 Baht" (the senior citizen price I had paid).

PM said it, so problem solved! Lol

 

He needs to do the same for how they are making all the Expats feel like bad guys. Is this the new twist on Good Guys in and Bad guys out?

 

How about if we spend our money out of our own province, we are treated like bad guys and must report our presence, so they can track us down. I though they want to boost tourism in the North East and Northern provinces. Theses rules don't make me want to travel!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Great.

Bring back 500 b on Soi 6.

Thanks.

Add the hospitals to that list and that would be Wonderful

If something is bad for Thailand image it is their current visa policy and hostility towards foreigners.
It are government institutions themselves who are guilty to ripping off too.

PM worried about country's image after overcharging complaint by tourists in Phuket

By The Nation

 

 

Prime Minister General Prayut Chan-o-cha is concerned about Thailand’s tourism image after two Australian tourists filed a complaint with police that they were overcharged.

 

Lt-General Weerachon Sukhontapatipak, a staff of the prime minister, said on Thursday that Prayut had been informed of the case of the two Australians being overcharged and he had expressed concern about it.

 

Weerachon said the two tourists took a van from Phuket International Airport to a hotel for which they were charged Bt3,000.

 

Weerachon quoted Prayut as saying that the government was taking all possible measures to promote tourism to Thailand, and make the country, especially Phuket, a world class tourist destination so that the country and Phuket’s economy would benefit.

 

However, if some people continue to take advantage of foreign tourists, it would have a negative impact on Phuket and the damage the reputation of Thais and Thailand, Weerachon quoted Prayut as saying.

 

He said the prime minister wanted tourism business operators to help monitor and ensure that no foreign tourist would be taken advantage of again.

 

The prime minister said warm Thai hospitality was a factor that prompted foreign tourists to return to the Kingdom so he wants all Thais to play good hosts to foreigners and help monitor and ensure that none of them would be taken advantage of, Weerachon added.

 

Source: https://www.nationthailand.com/news/30373173

 

-- © Copyright The Nation Thailand 2019-07-18

Follow Thaivisa on LINE for breaking Thailand news and visa info

How many times has the Phuket "tuk-tuk" mafia been told to reign in their practices?  No governor or police chief has been able to do it (or wanted to).  Now the diaper wearing PM wants to try?  Good luck!

 

Of course kiss the ars...es of the tourists who come here and spend a pile of money but make it more and more difficult to be an ExPat.

Sent from my CMR-AL19 using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

put the drivers in the immigration detention room at the airport for a week. they will never do it again.

1 hour ago, nickstav said:

I tried that...didn't work.

and how many tourists have a Thai driver license ?

The PM is right, a lot of the prostitutes ask outrageous prices these days!

Oh do try and keep up! Look at that horse GO!

Thanks for solving that problem. I guess it is solved within 7 days as usual.

Blah... Blah... Blah... With no plan of action or change by gov't. Only spouted directives, true to a military leader, not political one. Sheesh!