2 hours ago, jojothai said:

Why are you so obsessed with flaming the post?
Residents are residents as determined by the tax laws. Do you not know that?
We are all subject to however governments want to treat us in any country.
Here we put up with a lot of extra effort to live here long term and that is not something tourists suffer.

I suggest you bury whatever hangups or greivances you have against long term foreign residents and start to understand more about what many long term foreign RESIDENTS, with many married to Thais, contribute to the economy. They are not the same as tourists.
I am posting to let others think for themselves.
Not interested in any further comment from what i see as un-justified criticism of a valid point made by the original OP.

Awwwww.

Someone needs a hug.

15 hours ago, Jim Waldron said:

One only has to look at the water problem on Koh Samui to see why the TDRI researchers are right. As reported only yesterday, Samui's water infrastructure simply cannot supply enough to meet the demand from tourists, and rationing is now happening.

High-volume tourism places unsustainable strain on local infrastructure because visitor resource demand can often exceed local capacity. This, in turn creates shortages for local communities, further highlighting the environmental costs of simply chasing raw arrival numbers.

Beyond water, tourists also require far more energy and services than locals. High electricity consumption for air conditioning, and increased transport use raise emissions. Worse still, surging visitor numbers can overwhelm local waste management, polluting land and marine ecosystems.

The bottom line is that too many tourists lead to shortages of water and electricity, congested roads, failing sewage systems, and pressure on local housing rents.

It is clear that Thailand needs to shift away from its fixation on "headcounts" in order to preserve popular destinations and maintain the lifestyle of its citizens.

15 hours ago, Jim Waldron said:

One only has to look at the water problem on Koh Samui to see why the TDRI researchers are right. As reported only yesterday, Samui's water infrastructure simply cannot supply enough to meet the demand from tourists, and rationing is now happening.

High-volume tourism places unsustainable strain on local infrastructure because visitor resource demand can often exceed local capacity. This, in turn creates shortages for local communities, further highlighting the environmental costs of simply chasing raw arrival numbers.

Beyond water, tourists also require far more energy and services than locals. High electricity consumption for air conditioning, and increased transport use raise emissions. Worse still, surging visitor numbers can overwhelm local waste management, polluting land and marine ecosystems.

The bottom line is that too many tourists lead to shortages of water and electricity, congested roads, failing sewage systems, and pressure on local housing rents.

It is clear that Thailand needs to shift away from its fixation on "headcounts" in order to preserve popular destinations and maintain the lifestyle of its citizens.

15 hours ago, Jim Waldron said:

One only has to look at the water problem on Koh Samui to see why the TDRI researchers are right. As reported only yesterday, Samui's water infrastructure simply cannot supply enough to meet the demand from tourists, and rationing is now happening.

High-volume tourism places unsustainable strain on local infrastructure because visitor resource demand can often exceed local capacity. This, in turn creates shortages for local communities, further highlighting the environmental costs of simply chasing raw arrival numbers.

Beyond water, tourists also require far more energy and services than locals. High electricity consumption for air conditioning, and increased transport use raise emissions. Worse still, surging visitor numbers can overwhelm local waste management, polluting land and marine ecosystems.

The bottom line is that too many tourists lead to shortages of water and electricity, congested roads, failing sewage systems, and pressure on local housing rents.

It is clear that Thailand needs to shift away from its fixation on "headcounts" in order to preserve popular destinations and maintain the lifestyle of its citizens.

I agree- simply chasing a big number of tourists does not mean success per se

Quality of life for all is paramount

It is clear the volume of tourists is too much for an infrastructure that at times is fragile and always strained

5 hours ago, emptypockets said:

Not residents at all. Non immigrants can't be residents, says that on your initial visa. You have a 12 month temporary permission of stay that may be extendable. Or not. Circumstances can change, agree unlikely, but not impossible. Only takes a very nationalistic government and everyone goes back home.

Yes, you are resident when it's your primary home — just like being tax resident — but you are not a permanent resident.

16 hours ago, Jim Waldron said:

One only has to look at the water problem on Koh Samui

Very much the same in the uk and not just from the shift in the jet stream affecting all of Europe. Seems every summer now water levels are critical but they just can't stop building data centres. Google want to build a data centre close to where I live. Now the fact that it is almost next to a reservoir supplying drinking water is sheer coincidence I suppose. So the tech companies paying minimal tax will presumably demand priority when calling on water supplies.

14 hours ago, SiSePuede419 said:

Thailand can continue growing tourist numbers, they concluded, but each additional visitor will add strain unless standards, incentives, safety, infrastructure, income distribution and climate adaptation are brought into one framework.

Not all tourists are equal.

IMHO Thailand wants the more educated, sensitive tourists with higher levels of consciousness.

Maybe give a test before granting the visa...

Have them use "your" and "you're" in a sentence.

Filter out the layabout scroungers. 😄

You mean ....ban backpacks !

19 hours ago, Hotchilli123 said:

Thailand tourism office gave up on quality years ago, since Covid only numbers mean anything...

it's as if it's some measure of success.

Sorry your so wrong! This rubbish about quality tourists has been going on since the military coup that usurped Thaksin...... I never liked him but unlike most expats I remember his premiership and the coup! Life for common Thai people and expats was so much better..... they used to track Europe and American visitors as their scale to success. Note: English skills were so much higher in schools as well....

5 hours ago, BritScot said:

Sorry your so wrong! This rubbish about quality tourists has been going on since the military coup that usurped Thaksin...... I never liked him but unlike most expats I remember his premiership and the coup! Life for common Thai people and expats was so much better..... they used to track Europe and American visitors as their scale to success. Note: English skills were so much higher in schools as well....

I'm not wrong, I just happen too have a different opinion to you

16 hours ago, Reddavy said:

Wrong MONEY means everything to Thais and as long as that is flowing in nothing else matters.

Quality would mean more money... alas Thailand has nothing to offer to the quality tourist.

Bars, karaoke and street workers doesn't quite the bill

23 hours ago, Peterphuket said:

In fact, this is now the same problem all over the world.

Unlike in the past, people can now travel and go wherever they like, and the result is that you can’t find a single attractive stretch of countryside, or anything of the sort, anywhere in the world because everyone is flocking to the same place.

Spain has already been mentioned above, where the locals themselves have started protesting against the tourists.

It is not an easy problem to solve, and it is getting worse.

Correct, the effects of the internet and social media must have had an effect, now we have influencers and u tubers going all over the place and its getting worse?