Dual Pricing in Thai Tourism: Economic Necessity or Hidden Bias?

[Neeranam]

22 hours ago, CCesar said:

Even my pink card didn't work at a military check point trying to enter a park. It is simply called discrimination, which should be illegal, but I suppose they like to remind us constantly where we are, in case we forgot! 

Not sure why you would show a card that says "non-Thai" in big letters on the front. 

 

[kevozman1]

I don't have a problem with double pricing. National parks/cultural monuments should be cheaper for Thai nationals to enter. The land ownership only going to nationals also makes sense. It's only down to Modern Liberalism that has infected Western countries in recent decades that has BS'd people into thinking that some random from Asia or Africa should be on par with you as a European in your own country. Absolutely not and in reality they should be disadvantaged much more because they are coming from a lower place, but Modern Liberalism is inversion/the opposite of reality. 

[kwilco]

53 minutes ago, kevozman1 said:

more because they are coming from a lower place

So you think Thai people cone from a "lower place"?

[kevozman1]

6 minutes ago, kwilco said:

So you think Thai people cone from a "lower place"?

 

I have a soft spot for Thai people so I wouldn't say that as a fair person, but overall the continent of Asia yes, along with Africa and its populace undeniably.

[kwilco]

3 minutes ago, kevozman1 said:

 

I have a soft spot for Thai people so I wouldn't say that as a fair person, but overall the continent of Asia yes, along with Africa and its populace undeniably.

How are they "lower"?

How does this then relate to dual pricing in tourism?

[kevozman1]

10 minutes ago, kwilco said:

How are they "lower"?

How does this then relate to dual pricing in tourism?

 

Well it's the point that a country like Thailand, which as much as I like it, isn't exactly a superpower country or even close to it, and yet they look after their citizens by only allowing them to have land ownership, and becoming a Thai citizen is safeguarded to the point where it's mostly restricted to people born in Thailand and have at least one parent that is a Thai national. Obviously an offshoot of that mindset is giving more rights to nationals such as cheaper access to national parks and cultural monuments. Then I could go to far less impressive countries than Thailand where the same ideologies are implemented. 

 

Anyway, as you are not dealing with a fool who answers questions without asking his own, what do you think about double pricing in Thailand and should it also happen to foreigners in Europe? 

[lordgrinz]

1 hour ago, Neeranam said:

Do you pay tax here? 

 

More than 95% of Thai's do, Yes.

 

1 hour ago, Neeranam said:

Do you speak Thai?

 

No.

[Neeranam]

1 hour ago, kevozman1 said:

I don't have a problem with double pricing. National parks/cultural monuments should be cheaper for Thai nationals to enter. The land ownership only going to nationals also makes sense. It's only down to Modern Liberalism that has infected Western countries in recent decades that has BS'd people into thinking that some random from Asia or Africa should be on par with you as a European in your own country. Absolutely not and in reality they should be disadvantaged much more because they are coming from a lower place, but Modern Liberalism is inversion/the opposite of reality. 

I agree except that I believe Thailand is a 'higher' place in many areas other than financially - spiritually, for example.  Also the community spirit; my mother told me she never speaks to her neighbours and doesn't even know some of their names. Actually, Thailand is better in many ways to my native Scotland in many respects. 

BTW, there my daughter, who is a UK citizen had to pay more than other teenagers when getting into many places last year. She couldn't get a Young Scot card. 

Also, my other one has to pay 13,000 GBP a year as a foreign student, despite being British. 

Thais are Xenophobic, perhaps for a good reason, and the ban on foreigners owning land happened when Japanese were trying to buy up all of Bangkok, and the Chinese. Thais don't particularly like farang but tolerate us and I've had  very little discrimination and racial abuse compared to what I would have as a Thai in the UK. 

yet, this topic appears every few months and usually old expats who have been here a few years moan about not getting Thai discount when in fact they don't realize what side their bread is buttered. 

 

 

 

[sandyf]

22 hours ago, kwilco said:

You're  making  ridiculous false dichotomies

That would  only come from someone with the falang mentality.

[Neeranam]

32 minutes ago, kevozman1 said:

becoming a Thai citizen is safeguarded to the point where it's mostly restricted to people born in Thailand and have at least one parent that is a Thai national.

Not true. I got Thai citizenship by being married to a Thai and working as a teacher for 3 years, earning 40k baht  a month. Nowadays, there isn't even any requirement to speak Thai. The process only took 3 years from when applying. '

I looked into getting Australian citizenship and that was much harder. 

[Hummin]

1 minute ago, Neeranam said:

Not true. I got Thai citizenship by being married to a Thai and working as a teacher for 3 years, earning 40k baht  a month. Nowadays, there isn't even any requirement to speak Thai. The process only took 3 years from when applying. '

I looked into getting Australian citizenship and that was much harder. 

I thought you where half thai? At least what you have been writing before, made me think so

[kwilco]

1 hour ago, kevozman1 said:

 

Well it's the point that a country like Thailand, which as much as I like it, isn't exactly a superpower country or even close to it, and yet they look after their citizens by only allowing them to have land ownership, and becoming a Thai citizen is safeguarded to the point where it's mostly restricted to people born in Thailand and have at least one parent that is a Thai national. Obviously an offshoot of that mindset is giving more rights to nationals such as cheaper access to national parks and cultural monuments. Then I could go to far less impressive countries than Thailand where the same ideologies are implemented. 

 

Anyway, as you are not dealing with a fool who answers questions without asking his own, what do you think about double pricing in Thailand and should it also happen to foreigners in Europe? 

Well you should have read my previous posts.

And I don't see it from a fmracist point of view and neither does the OP... 

[kwilco]

1 hour ago, Neeranam said:

Thais are Xenophobic

In itself this is am oxymoron as it is itself a xenophobic generalisation .

The OP is about "Dual Pricing in Thai Tourism: Economic Necessity or Hidden Bias"   this is not a comment or generalisation about the people of Thailand it is a partial policy by certain Thai organisations. 

[Rimmer]

Some off topic deflection posts and replies have been removed

[Expat Tom]

"International Living Magazine" and  "Live and Invest Overseas" both produce a yearly top 10 list of countries to live and retire in for expats. Thailand is on the list. However, Thailand is not ranked as number one and there are 9 other countries on the list as well.

 

Many of those other 9 countries offer expats with retirement or long term stay visas DISCOUNTS on a variety of

goods and services rather then charge them more. In Thailand a farang can not own a house with land without going through some quasi-legal corporate structure. Many other countries grant long term visas to those who BUY real estate and make their homes there. 

 

If you chose some of those other countries on the top 10 list of countries to live and retire in you are allowed to participate in that countries national health care program at a very very low cost. In Thailand you are on your own and have to buy expensive expat insurance. 

 

If you visit the website, "Transparency.org" and view the yearly , "World Corruption Index" and cross reference it with the "Top 10 Places to Live and Retire" you will notice that our beloved Thailand is ranked as MORE corrupt than the other 9 countries on  the list. 

 

It be VERY clear, I have lived as an expat (legally) in Thailand for over 15 years. I love much about Thailand notwithstanding the morons who run the Thai government. I have traveled to over 70 countries and lived for months in 11 different countries. 

 

My advise to all expats, "We came here by airplane (at least 99% of us) and the last time I checked, airplanes fly in both directions". We are all individuals and have our own likes, dislikes, tolerance levels and resources. There is NOT one size fits all in the expat community. We all have choices.

 

I will be very sad to leave the land of smiles but I do have an exit strategy and so should you in case the stupidity out of BBK becomes unbearable. The Thai government needs to fully appreciate the economic impact of the expats living here. They further need to realize that tourism dollars will decline if the government levies too many stupid regulations on expat residents. I have had many friends come from abroad as tourists to visit me over the years. They can just as easily come for a visit to my new country of residence. 

 

Let me sum this up by repeating that there are 9 other countries on the list of the beat places to live and retire .

The Thai government needs to wake up and get competitive unless they want to be the worlds capital of Russian, Chinese and Indian tourism. 

[MartinBangkok]

On 12/8/2024 at 10:13 PM, Neeranam said:

Not true. Anyways, Thailand is a developing country, it's rather pathetic those coming from rich Western countries, especially those that we allow to retire here in paradise so easily, complain about the locals getting discount.

Do you really want equality? if you are from USA, then let's make you invest 16 million baht in order to get your long-term visa. I thought not, you can't burn your cake and eat it at both ends. 

Are you for real Neeranam?

 

Or are you a chatbot developed by the obnoxious xenophobic Thais that seem to rule this "paradise" as you call it?

[Neeranam]

On 12/10/2024 at 7:55 PM, MartinBangkok said:

Are you for real Neeranam?

 

Or are you a chatbot developed by the obnoxious xenophobic Thais that seem to rule this "paradise" as you call it?

Not sure your point, please clarify. 

 

I asked if you want equality? Yanks retiring here need to invest $500,000 in a Thai company, as Thais retiring in the US have to invest  $500,000 in a US company. 

 

Is this fair?

[lordgrinz]

1 minute ago, Neeranam said:

Not sure your point, please clarify. 

 

I asked if you want equality? Yanks retiring here need to invest $500,000 in a Thai company, as Thais retiring in the US have to invest  $500,000 in a US company. 

 

Is this fair?

 

Do Thai's need to share 51% ownership with a Yank first?

[Neeranam]

On 12/10/2024 at 9:03 AM, Expat Tom said:

The Thai government needs to fully appreciate the economic impact of the expats living here.

Please enlighten us as to the importance of expats on the Thai economy. Extremely minimal in my opinion, but I'm not an economist. .

[Neeranam]

Just now, lordgrinz said:

 

Do Thai's need to share 51% ownership with a Yank first?

No. 

Can Thais retire to the US by paying $500 a year to an agent who bribes an immigration officer to bypass immigration requirements? 

[lordgrinz]

10 minutes ago, Neeranam said:

No. 

Can Thais retire to the US by paying $500 a year to an agent who bribes an immigration officer to bypass immigration requirements? 

 

What does that have to do with what you posted? You talked about $500,000 between the two, that's what I called you out on, nothing to do with $500 bribes. 

[Neeranam]

4 minutes ago, lordgrinz said:

 

What does that have to do with what you posted? You talked about $500,000 between the two, that's what I called you out on, nothing to do with $500 bribes. 

Called me out, on what?

 

My point was that it is so much easier for Yanks to retire here, or start a business than the other way around.  

 

Although I wasn't replying to you, do you think it is fair?

 

 

[lordgrinz]

19 minutes ago, Neeranam said:

Called me out, on what?

 

My point was that it is so much easier for Yanks to retire here, or start a business than the other way around.  

 

Although I wasn't replying to you, do you think it is fair?

 

 

 

I think it's unfair that we must give 51% of ownership of a company to a Thai, yes.

 

[Neeranam]

28 minutes ago, lordgrinz said:

 

I think it's unfair that we must give 51% of ownership of a company to a Thai, yes.

 

Why do you think that? 

Do you know about BOI incentives?

This policy protects the Thai economy - local businesses and are not pushed out by larger, wealthy foreign companies.

Is it just sour grapes or Western entitlement that you think it unfair?

You ignored my question if you think it fair that Thais retiring in the US must invest $500,000 in an american company and pay at least $10k in legal, application, and other fees related to immigration.  Old Hank on the other hand, jumps on a plane, pays an agent $500 and sets up a business with 49% of the company very easily. Oh, once a year he has to pay $5 more to get into a park and moans about it on the internet