Entrance Price To National Parks In Phuket

[thaiwanderer]

its almost like its a foreign country!!!!

[pagallim]

I seriously cant believe that you think a foreigner who works and pays taxes in thailand earning a thai wage should then be charged more than a local thai person when they go to a local national park.

At what point does someone not become a guest and get treated as a local, if it was up to you i guess never. If after living somewhere for a few decades being married to a thai person having thai children, running a business that benefits the locals you still get treated as a rich tourist i think there is something wrong. I believe there are lots of people in this situation on this forum (although not me...lol).

You still make it sound like you've been imprisoned here and that you have no choice but to live here and pay taxes, you're here because your life is much better for being here, if it wasn't you would have gone home by now. People like you only look at things from your side of the fence, poor me I have to pay £4 to get in to a national park, poor me I'm being ripped off by all these Thai people trying to over charge me, Boo hoo. If your telling me that if you were born in a developing country you wouldn't milk tourists for everything you could, and that you would be so principled that you would be happy to make less money so the tourists weren't being ripped off then you're a lier or very deluded. If there was duel pricing say when American tourists went to England or vice versa then that would be ilogical and wrong but when one of the countries is as poor as Thailand it makes perfect sense. I guess maybe I'm just happier than others, I don't feel the need to moan about much when I'm in Thailand.

Nobody is disputing that for typical tourist facilities, there is a premium to be paid. The issue is the disparity (and blatant) between the charging system which discriminates between foreign visitors and Thai nationals. That's what people object to. If someone wants to pay 5 pounds for a hotdog in Trafalgar Square, that's fine, but the charge will be the same for everyone. I think that you summed it up yourself with your comment 'milk tourists for everything you could' which people (and particularly residents who already contribute more than their fair share to the local economy) find objectionable. Trying to cast comments about individuals ability to sustain themselves here does yourself no credit. I own my own home here, have 2 new cars, live very comfortably and pay my bills etc. Because I object to the double charging system shouldn't mean I'm classified as some form of drain on, or objector to the Thai economy (to which I've contributed millions of baht over the last few years). I also note your comment 'when I'm in Thailand' which leads me to suspect that you don't actually live here? I think you also need to understand the inherent system of corruption in this country, and realise that sometimes the premium that you're paying is not actually going towards the upkeep of national parks, ferries etc, but is sustaining individuals in their expectation of 'side benefits'.

[thaiwanderer]

I think you also need to understand the inherent system of corruption in this country, and realise that sometimes the premium that you're paying is not actually going towards the upkeep of national parks, ferries etc, but is sustaining individuals in their expectation of 'side benefits'.

you make it sound that money obtained through corruption, scams and rip offs is never depended upon (as if its only ever a bonus / a bit extra etc.)- unfortunately there is great and complicated dependence upon these

sure, a corrupt system is regrettable but where it exists it is not always the case that its proceeds are of no good inherent value

i fail to see how you can studiously avoid sullying your hands by supporting such a system in paying a dual price or whatever and with a straight face believe you are somehow removed from the corrupt system - you may not pay a bribe or whatever but that does not mean you do not benefit from corruption

as to 'equality' a farang making such comparisons without factoring in all the benefits of being a farang in the first place performs a greater intellectual charade

and particularly residents who already contribute more than their fair share to the local economy

I am interested how exactly you assess the 'fair share' - percentage of income and or assets? is it just a monetary figure? should aliens be required to contribute more?

'discrimination' of itself is not objectionable (unless perhaps you are on the receiving end or sympathise with those who are) and blatant discrimination is far more honest afterall

[WOOHOO]

Nobody is disputing that for typical tourist facilities, there is a premium to be paid. The issue is the disparity (and blatant) between the charging system which discriminates between foreign visitors and Thai nationals. That's what people object to. If someone wants to pay 5 pounds for a hotdog in Trafalgar Square, that's fine, but the charge will be the same for everyone. I think that you summed it up yourself with your comment 'milk tourists for everything you could' which people (and particularly residents who already contribute more than their fair share to the local economy) find objectionable. Trying to cast comments about individuals ability to sustain themselves here does yourself no credit. I own my own home here, have 2 new cars, live very comfortably and pay my bills etc. Because I object to the double charging system shouldn't mean I'm classified as some form of drain on, or objector to the Thai economy (to which I've contributed millions of baht over the last few years). I also note your comment 'when I'm in Thailand' which leads me to suspect that you don't actually live here? I think you also need to understand the inherent system of corruption in this country, and realise that sometimes the premium that you're paying is not actually going towards the upkeep of national parks, ferries etc, but is sustaining individuals in their expectation of 'side benefits'.

I appreciate that you can argue your point intelligently, which is more than can be said for most, but I think we will have to agree to disagree. I knew before I made any comment that I would be alone in my opinion, it's happened before on the same subject. I fully understand that for people like yourself it is not a money issue but the principle, it's just a principle that doesn't register with me at all. I think it's probably because it's such a tiny amount of money involved that for me, life's too short to even think about it, and as I said I don't have any problems with any other purchases. All these people that are constantly moaning about being ripped off, I have no idea what they are buying or where they are buying it from, but it's not a problem I have. As far as I know it's parks, aquariums and zoos and such that have a double price and nothing else, and it's not as if you go to those places every day, so it's not something I'm going to let bother me. I'm well aware of the corruption in Thailand but I don't believe I'm being naive when I think a fair amount of money is being used for what it is intended. How long do you think places like the Simillians would stay as they are if they weren't being controlled to some degree. I have said many times before on other threads that I have never lived in Thailand full time. Living on Thai wages has never appealed to me. I do however spend up to eight months a year in Phuket and have done for quite a long time, my wife of nine years is Thai and my son is obviously half Thai, so I'm not talking as someone who only comes here on holiday for two weeks a year. Maybe it's because I have to spend some time in England every year that i don't take Phuket for granted like some do. England's a shit hole and when I step off that plane, I'm so grateful to the place that can make me so happy and give me such a great quality of life I don't feel it owes me anything, and I honestly believe , one day when I'm lucky enough to spend 12 months a year here I will feel exactly the same, I still won't feel that I'm a local. I'll always be a Farang lucky enough to live in someone elses country because it's much better than mine.

[WOOHOO]

as to 'equality' a farang making such comparisons without factoring in all the benefits of being a farang in the first place performs a greater intellectual charade

I wish I could have made my point as perfctly as that. Well said.

[pagallim]

I think you also need to understand the inherent system of corruption in this country, and realise that sometimes the premium that you're paying is not actually going towards the upkeep of national parks, ferries etc, but is sustaining individuals in their expectation of 'side benefits'.

you make it sound that money obtained through corruption, scams and rip offs is never depended upon (as if its only ever a bonus / a bit extra etc.)- unfortunately there is great and complicated dependence upon these

sure, a corrupt system is regrettable but where it exists it is not always the case that its proceeds are of no good inherent value

i fail to see how you can studiously avoid sullying your hands by supporting such a system in paying a dual price or whatever and with a straight face believe you are somehow removed from the corrupt system - you may not pay a bribe or whatever but that does not mean you do not benefit from corruption

as to 'equality' a farang making such comparisons without factoring in all the benefits of being a farang in the first place performs a greater intellectual charade

and particularly residents who already contribute more than their fair share to the local economy

I am interested how exactly you assess the 'fair share' - percentage of income and or assets? is it just a monetary figure? should aliens be required to contribute more?

'discrimination' of itself is not objectionable (unless perhaps you are on the receiving end or sympathise with those who are) and blatant discrimination is far more honest afterall

I understand the dependence on low level corruption, and the difference with the higher level of 'business benefits' that are prevalent in commercial transactions. However, the two sided aspect of leading a life here is in either accepting discrimination as a foreigner, or choosing to comment/protest. Hence the initiation of topics such as this. Not sure what you mean by corruption being of 'no good inherent value'. Maybe an explanation of the benefits of 'being a farang' would also add to the debate (and don't get me wrong on this, I live here because I choose to, and being critical of certain aspects of life does not necessarily mean criticism of Thai people or their culture, as I don't believe for one minute that the practices of 'farang' directed corruption as exists in Phuket, is as prevalent throughout the rest of the Kingdom - though we all know of other 'hotspots'). We are merely easier prey, which is borne through our naivety and ignorance (and being willing to believe in the honesty of others in many cases).

When I talk about 'fair share', I'm referring to the purchases made (legitimate), fees paid, shops visited, and all the expenditure which adds to the local economy. Phuket is increasingly (at least in my mind) dependent upon the resident 'farang' to sustain businesses (supermarkets, tradesmen, the whole service sector), as this population provides the core turnover for the average small local business. The tourist market is a bonus.

I have to question your last comment:

'discrimination' of itself is not objectionable (unless perhaps you are on the receiving end or sympathise with those who are) and blatant discrimination is far more honest afterall

Is that seriously what you believe? There is nothing wrong with discrimination? In too many instances, we farang are on the receiving end of it, and the difficulty lies in understanding why, other than an ill judged opinion that we are stupid and accepting of whatever is put in front of us. For me, ultimately it comes down to personal honesty on the part of individuals who have the means or opportunity to exact personal gain from believing customers, and the value they place on their own personal reputations. Those that have integrity will find it hard, but survive. Those who don't may gain in the short term, but ultimately will fail big time. Only my opinion, like everyone else's in this forum of course.

[Peterocket]

Nobody is disputing that for typical tourist facilities, there is a premium to be paid. The issue is the disparity (and blatant) between the charging system which discriminates between foreign visitors and Thai nationals. That's what people object to. If someone wants to pay 5 pounds for a hotdog in Trafalgar Square, that's fine, but the charge will be the same for everyone. I think that you summed it up yourself with your comment 'milk tourists for everything you could' which people (and particularly residents who already contribute more than their fair share to the local economy) find objectionable. Trying to cast comments about individuals ability to sustain themselves here does yourself no credit. I own my own home here, have 2 new cars, live very comfortably and pay my bills etc. Because I object to the double charging system shouldn't mean I'm classified as some form of drain on, or objector to the Thai economy (to which I've contributed millions of baht over the last few years). I also note your comment 'when I'm in Thailand' which leads me to suspect that you don't actually live here? I think you also need to understand the inherent system of corruption in this country, and realise that sometimes the premium that you're paying is not actually going towards the upkeep of national parks, ferries etc, but is sustaining individuals in their expectation of 'side benefits'.

I appreciate that you can argue your point intelligently, which is more than can be said for most, but I think we will have to agree to disagree. I knew before I made any comment that I would be alone in my opinion, it's happened before on the same subject. I fully understand that for people like yourself it is not a money issue but the principle, it's just a principle that doesn't register with me at all. I think it's probably because it's such a tiny amount of money involved that for me, life's too short to even think about it, and as I said I don't have any problems with any other purchases. All these people that are constantly moaning about being ripped off, I have no idea what they are buying or where they are buying it from, but it's not a problem I have. As far as I know it's parks, aquariums and zoos and such that have a double price and nothing else, and it's not as if you go to those places every day, so it's not something I'm going to let bother me. I'm well aware of the corruption in Thailand but I don't believe I'm being naive when I think a fair amount of money is being used for what it is intended. How long do you think places like the Simillians would stay as they are if they weren't being controlled to some degree. I have said many times before on other threads that I have never lived in Thailand full time. Living on Thai wages has never appealed to me. I do however spend up to eight months a year in Phuket and have done for quite a long time, my wife of nine years is Thai and my son is obviously half Thai, so I'm not talking as someone who only comes here on holiday for two weeks a year. Maybe it's because I have to spend some time in England every year that i don't take Phuket for granted like some do. England's a shit hole and when I step off that plane, I'm so grateful to the place that can make me so happy and give me such a great quality of life I don't feel it owes me anything, and I honestly believe , one day when I'm lucky enough to spend 12 months a year here I will feel exactly the same, I still won't feel that I'm a local. I'll always be a Farang lucky enough to live in someone elses country because it's much better than mine.

Well, when you are next in 'shitty' england i will be happy to charge you triple the price for anything you may need as you are not a full time resident.

[WOOHOO]

Well, when you are next in 'shitty' england i will be happy to charge you triple the price for anything you may need as you are not a full time resident.

And yet another extremely unintelligent comparison. How is you charging me triple, in my own country, remotely relevant to this discussion?

[monkfish]

Err OK based on Thai logic ferang have to pay more cos they are earn more.

Cost of TNP is BT20 for Thai and BT400 for ferang.

Lets say the average salary of a Thai is BT10,000 per month then they must assume your average ferang earn's BT200,000 per month.

Well actually not to far off

[Peterocket]

Well, when you are next in 'shitty' england i will be happy to charge you triple the price for anything you may need as you are not a full time resident.

And yet another extremely unintelligent comparison. How is you charging me triple, in my own country, remotely relevant to this discussion?

Because you are saying that unless you are a local then its acceptable to be charged much higher prices.

Have you forgotten what this thread is about? Maybe its not my comment that is unintelligent? Keep up....

[thaiwanderer]

I understand the dependence on low level corruption, and the difference with the higher level of 'business benefits' that are prevalent in commercial transactions. However, the two sided aspect of leading a life here is in either accepting discrimination as a foreigner, or choosing to comment/protest. Hence the initiation of topics such as this. Not sure what you mean by corruption being of 'no good inherent value'. (see your comment about dependence on low level corruption as an example)

Maybe an explanation of the benefits of 'being a farang' would also add to the debate (i am not fully conversant with all of those benefits but there is a vast gap between the socio economic advantages most farangs will have typically benefitted from from an early age as compared to most Thais, equality and social mobilty are alien luxuries to most Thais whilst Farangs typically appeal to them as fundamental rights. )

(and don't get me wrong on this, I live here because I choose to, and being critical of certain aspects of life does not necessarily mean criticism of Thai people or their culture, as I don't believe for one minute that the practices of 'farang' directed corruption as exists in Phuket, is as prevalent throughout the rest of the Kingdom - though we all know of other 'hotspots'). We are merely easier prey, which is borne through our naivety and ignorance (and being willing to believe in the honesty of others in many cases).

When I talk about 'fair share', I'm referring to the purchases made (legitimate), fees paid, shops visited, and all the expenditure which adds to the local economy.

(These are merely purchases aren't they? Yes it contributes to commerce but not really a charitable donation or taxation is it? You are paying for goods and services. In any event you talked of 'more than' fair share also?

Phuket is increasingly (at least in my mind) dependent upon the resident 'farang' to sustain businesses (supermarkets, tradesmen, the whole service sector), as this population provides the core turnover for the average small local business. The tourist market is a bonus.

Dependence upon tourists and or longer stay aliens in its current form, things change and evolve, doesn't mean all Thais must bend over for every Farang because you want to spend a few baht. Would Phuket in its current form survive if all stopped coming tommorow? of course not the businesses that serve the current numbers are there because of the current numbers it doesn't mean 'Phuket' is dependent or would die. And I never get the catergorical imperative argument that if Thais do not do such and such for a particular farang that all farangs will stop coming tommorow. There is a balance between welcoming alien money and bending to their every whim. In any case, I can understand the sense in not (overtly and vicously) biting the hand that feeds but how many farangs genuinely get ripped off continually and face open hostility (that they understand) all of the time?

I have to question your last comment:

'discrimination' of itself is not objectionable (unless perhaps you are on the receiving end or sympathise with those who are) and blatant discrimination is far more honest afterall

Is that seriously what you believe? There is nothing wrong with discrimination? (Yes I do genuinely believe that, 'discrimination' is not a negative thing - it can be positive or negative depending on the reasons for it and its effect - all too often the lazy call things 'discriminatory' as if that alone justifies or explains their objection to it.

In too many instances, we farang ('We'?) are on the receiving end of it, and the difficulty lies in understanding why, other than an ill judged opinion that we are stupid and accepting of whatever is put in front of us. (Given the ratios as long as ENOUGH farangs accept it it doesn't matter if ALL do not)

For me, ultimately it comes down to personal honesty on the part of individuals who have the means or opportunity to exact personal gain from believing customers, and the value they place on their own personal reputations. Those that have integrity will find it hard, but survive. Those who don't may gain in the short term, but ultimately will fail big time. (Many have predicted Thailand's efforts at preserving its sovereignty and self determination as best it can will ultimately collapse for a long long time) Only my opinion, like everyone else's in this forum of course.

(I too subscribe to the emotivist theory of internet forums - boo / hooray!)

At its heart other than not liking it what is really so wrong with dual pricing (rather than being personally objectionable)?

Edited June 17, 2009 by thaiwanderer

[billythehat]

I'll always be a Farang lucky enough to live in someone elses country because it's much better than mine.

Ridiculous statement.

Thailand is better than England?..yeah, right, dream on...

[Sir Burr]

Thailand is better than England?..yeah, right, dream on...

On a personal level, of course it is.

Would I live here otherwise?

[canineworld]

I love it when this topic raises it's head, as it does frequently, because I'm always the the only person in the thread that doesn't have an issue with duel pricing, and everyone gets very feisty. It's obviously something people feel very strongly about. To me it's quite logical. Phuket is in a poor country making a living from tourism and national parks are one of their best natural resources. Why wouldn't they try to make a few quid from them. You need to look at it the other way round. You're not being charged more than Thai people. Thai people are being charged less, because they, on the whole, are poor people. The prices are fairly proportioned with the two different incomes. Nobody has a problem when kids and old people are charged less for the very same reason. Once you have stopped worrying about other people, you need to ask yourself is this good value for money. As far as I'm concerned a couple of quid to spend a day in beautiful national park is fantastic value for money. If your argument is that you live and work here, then maybe you have a point, but on the other hand, nobody asked you to leave your country and come and live in a country where the economy is much worse. As far as Thai people are concerned you are still a Farang who has the ability to be very wealthy by Thai standards, so why should you pay less than any other Farang.

Totally agree. I have no real problem with the 2 tier pricing system either - although I'd suggest a 3rd tier. Local price (x), resident farang price (y) and tourist price (z). For those of us that live, work and pay taxes here and at the same time are helping the thai economy - perhaps we could benefit slightly from paying the middle bracket between the Thai's and the Tourists.

I don't for a second think this is a racist policy, it might be nationalistic (but I've got no issue with that either). I'd suggest most people who are offended by this policy are trying to get their head around an Pakistani in England (for example) being charged twice as much for entering a national park as a resident white englishman - you can see the headlines on that one.

But here's the kicker - that's England, this is Thailand....

[PatinBKk]

This topic will always have the yeys and neys for the pricing system and it is something we live with...I have taken the option never to visit anwhere even though as a resident and worker here I could probably get in at the cheaper price, but I just dot carry that documentation with me at all times.....what makes it so funny is the argument that Thais earn so much less...a lot do and that is a fact but these people cant afford a day trip to the national parks so never get to use them....the thais that do are the ones that have 10 milliaon baht houses and drive around in Mercs or Fortunas.....hence the argument for the yeys falls flat on its face.....as I have said, I have seen a U.K. student on a gap year that was £20,000 in debt and doing voluntary work here.....they were charged the full price while a Thai that drove up in a 2million baht Merc got in for 20 baht....is that fair......I do not think so especially as the student was helping out after the Tsunami......

[LiveSteam]

People always make comparisons, when it comes to this topic, where there is no comparison to be made. The U.K is flooded with immigrants coming from poorer countries because they can earn (or be given, more often than not) more money than they can get in their own country, so doubling the price for them isn't even close to being the same thing. For your comparison to make sense, the visitors to the U.K would have to be from a country where they earned, on average, ten times more than people do in the U.K. and of course that country doesn't exist. So you're just highlighting the fact that you're not looking at it from a logical perspective.

You must be a politician, in your reasoning then everyone should pay according to his or her individual income. The fact is this: a national government (Thailand) is teaching its okay to charge more for a non-Thai. I think it would be better to have donation boxes positioned around the park like they do in the Wats. It seems the Wats are getting enough money to take care of the grounds and the monks too.

LiveSteam

[LivinLOS]

And Thailands tourism markets is tanking.. Yet they scratch thier head and wonder why, blame it on swine flu or some other scapegoat.

[Komerican]

Sorry, discriminating on someone based purely on the colour of their skin, is terrible and should be stamped out.

It's as simple as that.

Tuk Tuk drivers and tourist shops trying to make a fast buck from holiday makers is one thing.

Government condoned discrimination is another.

It's inhuman.

As a teacher in Phuket, please don't tell me that i'm rich compared to a great many Thai people. I'm not.

You only have to look at the number and types of cars on the road which i couldnt even afford the repayments on.

Then there is the issue of tax payments. Many so-called poor Thai people fall under the threshold for paying tax. Another large proportion cook the books and also dont pay tax.

I pay the full whack as an employee of a Thai company.

I speak pretty good Thai. I pay tax. I have a work permit and tax card. And i absolutely refuse to pay any more than the Thai rate.

I've never been refused either by the way.

My favourite infamous one is Wat doi suthep in Chiang Mai. Big BIG sign saying 'foreigners' which herds you into a ticket booth area, Thais - even Muslim Thais go in for free.

I stood my ground, said i was Budhist and paid tax here, and they let me in for free.

I will not tolerate discrimination in any form.

It has nothing to do with the colour of the skin. The fact that people can't see past the 'racist' angle is the problem. If I went to Romania or Moldova, two extremely poor countries, where the locals have almost the same colour skin as me, I would expect, and be happy, to pay more for an attraction than the locals did, even if I lived and worked there.And by your theory, Japanese tourists would pay Thai prices based on being the same colour! You chose to be a teacher in Phuket. You did not have this economy forced on you but chose it voluntarily. The simple fact is, in Farang money it is a very fare price for what you get, and most Farangs that are paying it have earned the money in Europe or America etc. and have no right to complain. Those of you that work here, your case is a bit stronger, but I still maintain you have no right to complain that you do not earn enough money to pay the full price when you chose to leave a country where you could to come and work here. You want your cake and eat it too!! Not to mention that the parks are run pretty well by Thai standards and the money is put to good use. Finally to use the word 'Inhuman' is a joke. You don't know how privileged you are to have the choice to live here or in a Western country, don't take it for granted.

I agree. It's not based on your skin color.

I am an Asian American and most of times people assume I am a Thai.

But as soon as I go to anywhere with double pricing they can smell me miles away and I don't mind, because, it happens in the States too.

I don't remember the last time I went to the Universal Studio in L.A. but last time I went there was discount for the California residents.

And what about state colleages and I am not talking about the foreign students.

If you don't like the double pricing, then, just walk away.

[pagallim]

Good debate, and clearly there are sincerely held beliefs in both sides of the fence in respect to discriminatory pricing. I genuinely think that if this policy was more open and explanatory, people could digest it more easily. OK, we're talking about national parks, and I agree with a previous poster that you don't see very many 'poorer' Thais in these venues, purely because typically four wheel transport is required. Please note that I say typically, I'm not saying it doesn't happen, and occasionally you see the laden pick up with 10 to 20 people in the back. I also agree with another poster that the National Parks in general are not particularly well maintained, with the more popular ones being a magnet for hawkers.

Whether you think that it's acceptable as a non-Thai to pay a premium for what are government controlled facilities, in the belief that it's in someway contributing to Thai society/environment/welfare, is debatable. However, the strength of my particular feelings is the message that it sends to other sectors and commercial activities that take the lead from ostensibly the government, in operating a legalised dual pricing policy, and then feel that what in reality is extraordinary and unfair, is in fact the norm and acceptable. Not sure of how many of you have actually been to national parks, but the ones that I've visited are not overly subscribed with visitors, so entrance fee policy is something of a moot point in terms of revenue. It's the principle that's cascaded down to the rest of the tourist environment that's more significant here.

Lastly, my previous comment with respect to farang residents already contributing more than 'their fair share' to the local economy, this comment was based on the typical expenditure of resident farangs, the facilities and services, shops and capital purchases (cars/houses), all of which pro rata are per capita far in excess of the local population. Don't forget, tax is exacted through VAT on most purchases, and whilst some of us are not required to pay Thai income tax, the businesses that we support through using them are. No business, no tax required.

[markg]

I agree. It's not based on your skin color.

I don't remember the last time I went to the Universal Studio in L.A. but last time I went there was discount for the California residents.

And what about state colleages and I am not talking about the foreign students.

If you don't like the double pricing, then, just walk away.

Bit contradictory and i think you may have missed the point. Universal having a discount for residents of the state is one thing....having a broad broom that says 'foreigners' have to pay more, is quite another.

It's discrimination based purely on the assumption that foreigners have more money than locals, and that it is condoned by the Government.

Discrimination on THAT basis is completely wrong.

Walk away? yes indeed. And in fact, last year when the government put up the prices for national parks, a great many tour companies did indeed walk away from it..................

As pagalim and other posters have said, it's not the size of the fee that is in dispute, it's the principle of the matter.

I earn an average salary in Phuket. Why assume i'm rich and charge me 10x the fee because i m white?

And it certainly is about colour. A friend of mine who has English parents, was born here, and has lived all his life here. He has a Thai ID card and passport (as well as a UK passport), he obviously speaks, reads and writes Thai like a native - he IS a native, except he is white. At one national park they questioned him extensively, called his ID a fake and asked him to sing the national anthem. He sang it, got back in the car and wheelspan out of there. He was very embarrassed.

Not based on colour? My arse !

[Valentine]

I agree. It's not based on your skin color.

I don't remember the last time I went to the Universal Studio in L.A. but last time I went there was discount for the California residents.

And what about state colleages and I am not talking about the foreign students.

If you don't like the double pricing, then, just walk away.

Bit contradictory and i think you may have missed the point. Universal having a discount for residents of the state is one thing....having a broad broom that says 'foreigners' have to pay more, is quite another.

It's discrimination based purely on the assumption that foreigners have more money than locals, and that it is condoned by the Government.

Discrimination on THAT basis is completely wrong.

Walk away? yes indeed. And in fact, last year when the government put up the prices for national parks, a great many tour companies did indeed walk away from it..................

As pagalim and other posters have said, it's not the size of the fee that is in dispute, it's the principle of the matter.

I earn an average salary in Phuket. Why assume i'm rich and charge me 10x the fee because i m white?

And it certainly is about colour. A friend of mine who has English parents, was born here, and has lived all his life here. He has a Thai ID card and passport (as well as a UK passport), he obviously speaks, reads and writes Thai like a native - he IS a native, except he is white. At one national park they questioned him extensively, called his ID a fake and asked him to sing the national anthem. He sang it, got back in the car and wheelspan out of there. He was very embarrassed.

Not based on colour? My arse !

I think in many cases it is purely racist. My recent experience when going to Phi Phi on a day trip, related to my business, highlights this. At the port in Phuket my foreman purchased the ferry tickets at a cost of Baht 150 each. When he went to buy the tickets coming back my ticket was double the price with the excuse that all tourists pay this price. I protested further & produced my work permit at which point the ticket seller exclaimed "I don't care, you are not Thai".

[JiveTalker]

Seriously, stop trying to justify this. It IS a racist policy, and I've been to Thai national parks with Thai friends who have been utterly embarassed by the practice. I've told them not to worry about it, as I'm used to it, but they've refused to go in. I work here, have a Thai work permit but it makes no difference. Sure, there will be the occasional person who will accept the permit, but most don't. It's an ugly practice, and just be thankful that not everyone thinks this is acceptable; be it Thai or foreign.

Just because you have more money than others doesn't make it any less of an issue.

[Peterocket]

Seriously, stop trying to justify this. It IS a racist policy, and I've been to Thai national parks with Thai friends who have been utterly embarassed by the practice. I've told them not to worry about it, as I'm used to it, but they've refused to go in. I work here, have a Thai work permit but it makes no difference. Sure, there will be the occasional person who will accept the permit, but most don't. It's an ugly practice, and just be thankful that not everyone thinks this is acceptable; be it Thai or foreign.

Just because you have more money than others doesn't make it any less of an issue.

It seems to me that people think its acceptable just because its Thailand. Either way its a small blemish in an otherwise great place in my opinion