Would Thailand be a happier place with no international tourists?

[namatjira]

On 9/29/2020 at 9:46 AM, cjinchiangrai said:

The tour groups may be annoying to you but they bring a lot of money and are relatively well controlled. They are not the ones trashing the beaches and damaging the reefs. The groups offer a way to travel and work around a severe language barrier.

 

This years group travelers become next years independent travelers and they come with their families not just their drinking buddies.

 

That you think you are somehow better and more deserving than those "certain nations" is disturbing. If you don't like Asians, stay home.

 

Wow that’s quite a little racist rant , not very buddha of you is it.

chip on the shoulder , what a burden you carry, I feel sorry for you.

your vicious attack is that of a small bitter man, I suggest you leave.

most Thais would think your attitude obnoxious......

 

[Lacessit]

It would be a happier place without 1000 generals.

[scammed]

thailand is a depressing place as of now,

the tourism makes it alive and vibrant

[johnray]

Tourism has totally transformed Thailand from a swamp to a major business, education and tourism hub.

 

If they lose tourists they can kiss their ass goodbye.

[GinBoy2]

For the majority of Thailand, they never see a foreign tourist, except for perhaps the bargirls 'boyfriend' visiting for a few weeks every year.

 

So whether or not the majority of Thai's would be happier is a pretty ridiculous statement.

 

Now overall they may lament the loss of revenue from the lack of tourists, but thats a way different argument

[Promula]

1 hour ago, johnray said:

Tourism has totally transformed Thailand from a swamp to a major business, education and tourism hub.

 

If they lose tourists they can kiss their ass goodbye.

Singapore developed those things decades before Thailand and before it had mass tourism. Thailand would have done the sand.

Edited October 4, 2020 by Promula

[TheFreqFlyer]

On 9/29/2020 at 10:38 AM, Promula said:

That paints a picture that Thais were mostly starving 30-40 years ago and now aren't because of international tourism. I don't think that's reality. 

True; though may I expand on this a little. I think manufacturing has also done a lot to bring Thais out of poverty. Apparently a lot of Thais were starving 30-40 years ago and tourism, manufacturing, food processing and the development of other industries have ensured that the standard of living has increased substantially since then. You are correct in your assessment that tourism only plays a certain part; it goes way beyond that. 

[scammed]

33 minutes ago, Promula said:

Singapore developed those things decades before Thailand and before it had mass tourism. Thailand would have done the sand.

singapore is a trade hub largely because of location

Edited October 4, 2020 by scammed

[TheFreqFlyer]

On 9/30/2020 at 5:33 PM, Thingamabob said:

40 years ago there were no cheap flights, and western tourists knew how to behave. At that time Thais were poorer, life was  tough, but not many were starving. Their relationship with westerners was much better than today. And they appeared, at least, to be more content than they are now.

How do you know not many were starving back then? Granted, the rural folk who lived on the farm probably didn't as they grew their own food, as many still do now. However, many urban folk were probably struggling, especially menial workers and new arrivals. The poverty rate has definitely decreased significantly over the decades. 40 years ago Thailand was like the Philippines or Cambodia today. Dirt poor, with a very small middle class. 

 

Development, traffic jams, high stress jobs, pollution, more people living in cities, all these things stress people out and aside from the fact Thais today are far more used to seeing westerners than 40 years ago (you can also thank globalization and the internet) explain why Thais might appear less friendly. In reality, I don't think that's necessarily true, but can you really expect a stressed out Thai office worker who probably works with farang or does Skype or Zoom sessions with overseas based clients or his/her farang boss in Singapore (even before this crisis started) to care about some random farang backpacker or middle class tourist sharing a Skytrain ride with him/her?

 

At least Thais don't stare at us anymore, nor is there an army of 50 children who come up to us to pinch our hair like there used to be back in those days. So to say that Thais had a "better relationship with westerners" back then is hearsay. We were more of a curiosity. Far fewer Thais had interacted with farang then. 

 

In many ways, I prefer now (aside from the charm of the old days, where life was more carefree, there was less pollution and traffic and lower population density). 

[Lacessit]

On 9/30/2020 at 5:33 PM, Thingamabob said:

40 years ago there were no cheap flights, and western tourists knew how to behave. At that time Thais were poorer, life was  tough, but not many were starving. Their relationship with westerners was much better than today. And they appeared, at least, to be more content than they are now.

Most tourists and even some long-termers have no idea of the poverty in which rural Thais lived then. Even now, the average monthly wage is 2500 baht/month. There is still a considerable barter economy in my GF's village. Pensioners that are not government employed get 600 baht/month when they turn 60. 800 baht/month if they get to 80.

My GF has told me about going to school as a child. She would walk 4 km to the school, every day. Barefoot, the family could not afford shoes. Her father worked in the rice fields all his life, walked to work as the family could not afford a bicycle.

Her mother would give her 50 satang occasionally, to spend on herself. Her mother got the money by selling frogs at a local weekly market, the frogs came from the septic tank outfall at their house. Electricity was connected to the house 15 years ago.

[Tagged]

14 minutes ago, Lacessit said:

Most tourists and even some long-termers have no idea of the poverty in which rural Thais lived then. Even now, the average monthly wage is 2500 baht/month

There is no 2500,- baht average monthly wage for regular monthly hired workes. Where do you get that number from? The minimum wages pr day is 300 baht a day with food and drinks included. Minimum wages is at least in our village 8500,- baht equal 350,- baht pr day. And that is a gas station worker. 

 

We pay our daily workers 350 - 400 pluss food dependes what they going to do, but most things have prices p m2, unit, kg or whatever they have to do. 

Edited October 4, 2020 by Tagged

[BritManToo]

16 minutes ago, Lacessit said:

Most tourists and even some long-termers have no idea of the poverty in which rural Thais lived then. Even now, the average monthly wage is 2500 baht/month. There is still a considerable barter economy in my GF's village. Pensioners that are not government employed get 600 baht/month when they turn 60. 800 baht/month if they get to 80.

Thai pensioners don't need to heat their homes, and have enough to eat (rice is cheap, food grows on trees & bushes).

That beats many Brit pensioners I knew when I lived in the UK.

[Lacessit]

1 minute ago, Tagged said:

There is no 2500,- baht average monthly wage for regular monthly hired workes. Where do you get that number from? The minimum wages pr day is 300 baht a day with food and drinks included. Minimum wages is at least in our village 8500,- baht equal 350,- baht pr day. And that is a gas station worker. 

 

We pay our daily workers 350 - 400 pluss food dependes what they going to do, but most things have prices p m2, unit, kg or whatever they have to do. 

We'll have to agree to disagree, then. The wage in my GF's village is 250 baht/day. The rice grows by itself, it is lumpy income where things are busy during planting and harvesting time, some months there is almost no work at all.

Perhaps you don't understand what the term average means. I can use mean or median if you prefer.

[Lacessit]

3 minutes ago, BritManToo said:

Thai pensioners don't need to heat their homes, and have enough to eat (rice is cheap, food grows on trees & bushes).

That beats many Brit pensioners I knew when I lived in the UK.

I guess that's why I see radiant heaters being sold at Big C in Chiang Rai every winter.

[BritManToo]

Just now, Lacessit said:

I guess that's why I see radiant heaters being sold at Big C in Chiang Rai every winter.

I live in Chiang Mai, they sell radiant heaters here too ....... I don't have one, it never gets below 12c at night.

[Lacessit]

Just now, BritManToo said:

I live in Chiang Mai, they sell radiant heaters here too ....... I don't have one, it never gets below 12c at night.

Colder in Chiang Rai, and up in the hills.

Are you saying UK pensioners have a choice between staying warm, or starving?

[Tagged]

1 minute ago, Lacessit said:

We'll have to agree to disagree, then. The wage in my GF's village is 250 baht/day. The rice grows by itself, it is lumpy income where things are busy during planting and harvesting time, some months there is almost no work at all.

Perhaps you don't understand what the term average means. I can use mean or median if you prefer.

Well, if thats how you ment avarage of those who sit and waith for the rice to grow, I have to aggree with you. 

 

However, most of them is on social Payroll/care from family members working other places in thailand. 

 

What I see here is seasonal workers who use their forrest and resourches well. They pick wild vegetables, mushrooms, bamboo, fish, jungle fruit, pick crabs during the rainseason. Its a bit more sustainable living most rural places in thailand. 

 

[Hamus Yaigh]

On 9/29/2020 at 9:19 AM, Promula said:

Go back 30-40 years to a time when Thailand had very few international tourists, and I'm sure it was a happy place - possibly happier than it is now. 

 

So ok, international tourism brings in 12-15% or whatever it is of Thailand's GDP. So what? I've always thought of mass international tourism as like having a lodger.

 

I was here 30-40 years ago and to say they had few tourists is nonsense. It was a thriving tourist destination in this part of the world even then. Tourists or lodgers as you call them help pay the bills, who would be daft enough to turn that source of income off?

[Promula]

2 hours ago, Lacessit said:

Most tourists and even some long-termers have no idea of the poverty in which rural Thais lived then. Even now, the average monthly wage is 2500 baht/month. There is still a considerable barter economy in my GF's village. Pensioners that are not government employed get 600 baht/month when they turn 60. 800 baht/month if they get to 80.

My GF has told me about going to school as a child. She would walk 4 km to the school, every day. Barefoot, the family could not afford shoes. Her father worked in the rice fields all his life, walked to work as the family could not afford a bicycle.

Her mother would give her 50 satang occasionally, to spend on herself. Her mother got the money by selling frogs at a local weekly market, the frogs came from the septic tank outfall at their house. Electricity was connected to the house 15 years ago.

Everything is relative. They didn't see themselves in poverty at the time any more than you do now. It was just normal life for them, and they probably felt more comfortable and fortunate than Thais that lived a generation before them. 

 

Perhaps 50 years from now people will be able to travel across the planet for free in an instant and never have to work, and will sneer at your level of poverty at having spent time having to work to pay for such things as slow expensive intercontinental flights. 

[Lacessit]

8 hours ago, Promula said:

Everything is relative. They didn't see themselves in poverty at the time any more than you do now. It was just normal life for them, and they probably felt more comfortable and fortunate than Thais that lived a generation before them. 

 

Perhaps 50 years from now people will be able to travel across the planet for free in an instant and never have to work, and will sneer at your level of poverty at having spent time having to work to pay for such things as slow expensive intercontinental flights. 

I think it's more likely people will be fighting over diminishing resources. For example, if the climate models are correct, flows of water from the Himalayan glaciers to the Ganges and Mekong rivers will be halved in 50 years. Those two rivers support about two billion people.

IMO I lived in a golden age for job opportunity and wealth creation.