The Backlash Has Started

[Kerryd]

do people actually listen to their government's travel advisories? if they did then no one would ever go anywhere...

Well im sure the sexpats dont, they would walk through a minefield to get to Thailand i feel

Hmmmm.

I work in a minefield (well, a country that is one of the heaviest-mined countries in the world), and live in Pattaya.

Fortunately, the "mines" in Pattaya (mostly) come with pert figures and sweet smiles, and there are plane loads of wannabe de-miners arriving all the time, to wade through and get picked off slowly but surely.

Makes it much safer for the rest of us !

[dumball]

I know it creates a lot of jobs, but I somehow can't grieve at the decline in the tourism industry, if it continues. I wouldn't think my own country diminished if tourists didn't come or came in fewer numbers. After all, as someone said, tourism's the industry you have when you don't have much industry.

In a way, tourism can allow itself to be a form of prostitution: We'll present a false image of ourselves and give you a part of ourselves in return for money.

As one who likes to visit other places and sometimes go on tours when there, I may be hypocritical, or at least confused, but they are usually places where self-managed tourism is not practicable - the place doesn't have the infrastructure to enable it. It's a matter of balance. I don't feel that I'm adding to a distorted view of the place when I visit London or Rome, and I don't believe I'm being ripped off (I can do the things I want to do by using the Tube or the Metro). Thailand seems to be too dependent on tourism.

The shock administered to the country by the PAD's actions may be a good thing in the long run, not only because it has demonstrated that widespread venality and nepotism in government will be less tolerated, but that Thailand needs to be less dependent on the easy money that comes from smiling at tourists while you rip them off.

Not easy to read and understand at first glance , but i think you put a lot of thought into what you have written , your poignant pointers are prevalent in Thai tourism , the PADs actions have made a whole passle of people peruse the possibilities of protracted interest in the once (but no longer) LOS .

[klikster]

Well if people come they come and if they dont come well they dont have to go back . if you listen to the government you will go nowhere . a report in australia descibes thailand as a country on knife edge and beware dont go there but any sensible person would still go for a good holiday.

cheers.

Most holiday makers travel with a limited budget of money and time. Why should they pay for and suffer the inconvenience of being trapped here for days beyond their schedule .. or be required to take surface transport several hundred km just to find a place from which to leave?

IMO, "home" governments have an obligation to warn their citizens about the probabilities of incidents they may encounter. Then the citizens can decide for themselves on the risk level. These "home" governments have no obligation whatsoever to hype Thailand as a tourist destination.

As to your " .. any sensible person would still go for a good holiday.", what's sensible for one person will not be for another.

[klikster]

I know it creates a lot of jobs, but I somehow can't grieve at the decline in the tourism industry, if it continues. I wouldn't think my own country diminished if tourists didn't come or came in fewer numbers. After all, as someone said, tourism's the industry you have when you don't have much industry.

I read so often here that the tourism industry is not all that important in the overall scheme of things. Whether that is true depends on what someone considers important.

Other prognosticators have made similar statements about the importance of agriculture. Not sure how they feel about "aquaculture". Is rubber not an agricultural product?

I don't claim to be knowlegable about Thailand's economy. What is easy to see is exports of rice, rubber, and seafoods. Then there is tourism, much of the income probably untraceable.

So what does Thailand have left? Some tin, wolfram ..?

The gemstones are gone .. although Thailand is a hub for smuggled Burmese rough. Cut here, sold here. Where is the teak? Already cut and sold. Some is brought in from Burma.

Apparently, there is a huge gas field in the Gulf, but Thaland and her politics seemed bound and determined to not gather it .. and sell it to Singapore. If they wait too long, Singapore may build the gas gathering network and sell gas to Thailand.

With so many natural resources either depleted or in decline, Thailand seems to have reverted to being a big job-shop and a middleman. Much of the product of the job shops output is exported. What happens when the companies find better job shops elsewhere?

When one looks at what supports Thailand, consider what Thailand has to offer to the outside world. Then look at what Thailand consumes natively. How many vehicles and appliances will be purchased here if offshore $$ dry up? How many Sukhumvit high-rise buildings depend on foreign money?

In a way, tourism can allow itself to be a form of prostitution: We'll present a false image of ourselves and give you a part of ourselves in return for money.

Thais and Thailand decide what they will offer as tourism. The image they present will be as true or as false as they have the courage to show.

The shock administered to the country by the PAD's actions may be a good thing in the long run, not only because it has demonstrated that widespread venality and nepotism in government will be less tolerated, but that Thailand needs to be less dependent on the easy money that comes from smiling at tourists while you rip them off.

The lesson may or may not have been learned. Observation coupled with tunnel vision, compounded by finger pointing often result in more strife rather than lasting solutions.

Can Thailand be self sufficient? Of course they can. Thailand can feed and clothe its population. But if the house of cards starts to fall how many Thais will be left homeless?

Edited December 6, 2008 by klikster

[MKAsok]

Its new advice on the Foreign Office website reads: "… given the protestors' continuing threat of disruption to the airports and transport network, we advise that you continue to avoid air travel into or through Bangkok for the foreseeable future."

Someone please feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, I just scanned the page, but I don't see the above sentence anywhere. The advice, from what I can see reads:

"You should continue to exercise caution when travelling around Bangkok and major cities, avoiding any demonstrations or large gatherings of people. If you plan to visit Thailand you should consider the present situation when making your decision."

and regarding the airports

"Anti-government demonstrators have threatened to blockade Bangkok airports again should their political demands not be met. Further serious disruption to the transport network cannot be ruled out. Please check with your airline or tour operator if you intend to travel into or through Bangkok airports and monitor this advice."

[bluemanna]

Aren't we due to get a new Prime Minister on Monday..??

Let's see how PAD reacts to the appointment, we must make sure they "approve" eh..??

Sad but true CockneyGit

[mrbojangles]

A temporary closure of the Airports will do nothing to deter many so called tourists.

The threat of bar closures would have much more impact.

Ain't that the truth

Me, the Mrs and little one will carry on going to Thailand to visit the wifes parents, no matter how difficult to travel. But if they closed the bars, she can go alone and i'll go to Benidorm

[misterman21]

do people actually listen to their government's travel advisories? if they did then no one would ever go anywhere...

You obviously live in a dream world my friend. The Government advisory services are very very very relecutant to give negative travel advice. If they do then they mean it is serious

[APMann]

Its new advice on the Foreign Office website reads: "… given the protestors' continuing threat of disruption to the airports and transport network, we advise that you continue to avoid air travel into or through Bangkok for the foreseeable future."

Someone please feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, I just scanned the page, but I don't see the above sentence anywhere. The advice, from what I can see reads:

"You should continue to exercise caution when travelling around Bangkok and major cities, avoiding any demonstrations or large gatherings of people. If you plan to visit Thailand you should consider the present situation when making your decision."

and regarding the airports

"Anti-government demonstrators have threatened to blockade Bangkok airports again should their political demands not be met. Further serious disruption to the transport network cannot be ruled out. Please check with your airline or tour operator if you intend to travel into or through Bangkok airports and monitor this advice."

Apparently (and quoting the UK Times again) they changed their advice within 24 hours of posting it on their website to what it reads now. That either suggests the FO don't know what to make of it all, or the Thais begged them to chill out and tone it down a bit.

[Beardog]

I know it creates a lot of jobs, but I somehow can't grieve at the decline in the tourism industry, if it continues. I wouldn't think my own country diminished if tourists didn't come or came in fewer numbers. After all, as someone said, tourism's the industry you have when you don't have much industry.

I read so often here that the tourism industry is not all that important in the overall scheme of things. Whether that is true depends on what someone considers important.

Other prognosticators have made similar statements about the importance of agriculture. Not sure how they feel about "aquaculture". Is rubber not an agricultural product?

I don't claim to be knowlegable about Thailand's economy. What is easy to see is exports of rice, rubber, and seafoods. Then there is tourism, much of the income probably untraceable.

So what does Thailand have left? Some tin, wolfram ..?

The gemstones are gone .. although Thailand is a hub for smuggled Burmese rough. Cut here, sold here. Where is the teak? Already cut and sold. Some is brought in from Burma.

Apparently, there is a huge gas field in the Gulf, but Thaland and her politics seemed bound and determined to not gather it .. and sell it to Singapore. If they wait too long, Singapore may build the gas gathering network and sell gas to Thailand.

With so many natural resources either depleted or in decline, Thailand seems to have reverted to being a big job-shop and a middleman. Much of the product of the job shops output is exported. What happens when the companies find better job shops elsewhere?

When one looks at what supports Thailand, consider what Thailand has to offer to the outside world. Then look at what Thailand consumes natively. How many vehicles and appliances will be purchased here if offshore $$ dry up? How many Sukhumvit high-rise buildings depend on foreign money?

In a way, tourism can allow itself to be a form of prostitution: We'll present a false image of ourselves and give you a part of ourselves in return for money.

Thais and Thailand decide what they will offer as tourism. The image they present will be as true or as false as they have the courage to show.

The shock administered to the country by the PAD's actions may be a good thing in the long run, not only because it has demonstrated that widespread venality and nepotism in government will be less tolerated, but that Thailand needs to be less dependent on the easy money that comes from smiling at tourists while you rip them off.

The lesson may or may not have been learned. Observation coupled with tunnel vision, compounded by finger pointing often result in more strife rather than lasting solutions.

Can Thailand be self sufficient? Of course they can. Thailand can feed and clothe its population. But if the house of cards starts to fall how many Thais will be left homeless?

dam_n good post klikster TY

Edited December 6, 2008 by Beardog

[Gravelrash]

I know it creates a lot of jobs, but I somehow can't grieve at the decline in the tourism industry, if it continues. I wouldn't think my own country diminished if tourists didn't come or came in fewer numbers. After all, as someone said, tourism's the industry you have when you don't have much industry.

In a way, tourism can allow itself to be a form of prostitution: We'll present a false image of ourselves and give you a part of ourselves in return for money.

As one who likes to visit other places and sometimes go on tours when there, I may be hypocritical, or at least confused, but they are usually places where self-managed tourism is not practicable - the place doesn't have the infrastructure to enable it. It's a matter of balance. I don't feel that I'm adding to a distorted view of the place when I visit London or Rome, and I don't believe I'm being ripped off (I can do the things I want to do by using the Tube or the Metro). Thailand seems to be too dependent on tourism.

The shock administered to the country by the PAD's actions may be a good thing in the long run, not only because it has demonstrated that widespread venality and nepotism in government will be less tolerated, but that Thailand needs to be less dependent on the easy money that comes from smiling at tourists while you rip them off.

Thank you for sharing this, it is fascinating to see what you have managed to perceive from the current events. That extra little nugget about Pojamon spreading the baht around yet another in depth glimpse into what is going on.

Don't forget to pick up your copy of the Nation tomorrow so that you can share some more insights. Lets face it all those jobs lost, they should be back on the farm anyway tilling more rice to sell to the middlemen for export. Sufficency and obscene profit walking hand in hand in complete harmony.

[BeauKarl]

A temporary closure of the Airports will do nothing to deter many so called tourists.

The threat of bar closures would have much more impact.

Ain't that the truth

Me, the Mrs and little one will carry on going to Thailand to visit the wifes parents, no matter how difficult to travel. But if they closed the bars, she can go alone and i'll go to Benidorm

Bring the wife, at least my wife won't be alone when she comes to visit me while I'm taking care of my business