Even More Dead Than Last Year?

[Lancelot]

What next? Visiting prostitutes is an act of charity?

Not really charity...

[Suradit]

I have not been in Pattaya for about 10 days. My observation is just the opposite of yours. Getting a sawng taeo was nearly impossible in going to and from JomTien. At 2nd road and Soth Pattaya the ques were long and often a shortly of baht buses because of all the tourists (mostly Russian). The malls were packed as were the beaches at JomTien. I would not judge the economy based on bar customers. Remember Pattaya is trying to tranform itself and maybe it is starting to work.

Yes. Not too many years ago Pattaya was truly dead aside from the few months qualifying as the "high season." Now both motor and pedestrian

traffic seems to be getting more like it is in Bangkok with the summer months only slightly less hectic.

It wasn't that long ago that Big C north was the only thing that could be called a mall, TukCom stood empty, Pattaya Tai east of the former Hollywood was like a ghost town and the beach at Jomtien was practically empty during the summer.

I guess it's nice to see all the economic development, but I miss having Pattaya being truly quiet for at least a few months of the year.

It's interesting to see the vast number of farang trooping to the Tuesday/Friday market on Pattaya Tai. Cheap new or used clothing apparently is now a "tourist" magnet. Changing demographics I guess.

[Awohalitsiktoli]

I have not been in Pattaya for about 10 days. My observation is just the opposite of yours. Getting a sawng taeo was nearly impossible in going to and from JomTien. At 2nd road and Soth Pattaya the ques were long and often a shortly of baht buses because of all the tourists (mostly Russian). The malls were packed as were the beaches at JomTien. I would not judge the economy based on bar customers. Remember Pattaya is trying to tranform itself and maybe it is starting to work.

Yes. Not too many years ago Pattaya was truly dead aside from the few months qualifying as the "high season." Now both motor and pedestrian

traffic seems to be getting more like it is in Bangkok with the summer months only slightly less hectic.

It wasn't that long ago that Big C north was the only thing that could be called a mall, TukCom stood empty, Pattaya Tai east of the former Hollywood was like a ghost town and the beach at Jomtien was practically empty during the summer.

I guess it's nice to see all the economic development, but I miss having Pattaya being truly quiet for at least a few months of the year.

It's interesting to see the vast number of farang trooping to the Tuesday/Friday market on Pattaya Tai. Cheap new or used clothing apparently is now a "tourist" magnet. Changing demographics I guess.

If you go back about 11 years, the Royal Garden Mall was there and fairly nice. There was a Big C and Foodland (no Tukcom, no Starbucks that I can remember). There was a McDonalds (always bad but good because it is sort of a mental break from Southeast Asia). I am not sure about Au Bob Pair, but I think it was there back then along with Pizza Company and Sizzler. There were a few nice hotels and loads of less nice hotels that were fine for most visitors. I can't remember traffic jams at all. At that time I think most expats were feeling good about Pattaya. They did not want to blow it up and create major changes. Then, the real estate invasion took place with the apparent mission of destroying everything and turning the area into a Puritanical Disneyland Skyscraper City built for only a few rich people. I think if a poll had been taken back then about what changes they would like to see, most expats would have said "some new condos," "some new western food place," and maybe renovate Royal Garden Mall, and clean up the beach and improve the infrastructure. They would not have said we want to see massive development all over, one concrete condo built after another side by side ad infinitum, a 100-200% increase in the price of everything, a huge influx of Russians and Arabs, traffic jams, air pollution, a rise in conservatism with an associated desire to kick out the vast majority of expats who are not "quality/rich" people, etc. Personally, I think the city is being developed for only a handful of people who have a major interest in real estate in the area. I think that is a huge mistake. I think it is ruining what was once a very relaxed, no-stress location to retire and visit and have fun.

[Rumcabal]

The "decline" has been going on for a long time. It is taking place in almost all sectors, contrary to real estate myth. An obvious problem is that there are too many hotels, restaurants, malls, etc., and too few tourists and long-stay expats to keep these places from going under.

So Pattaya is 'declining' - ok gottcha. Yet in the very next paragraph you state -

Yes, the number of people living in and around Pattaya has grown over the years (this is happening worldwide).

So now Pattaya is growing. Your above statements cannot both be correct. It has to be one or the other - no?

As an aside populations are not growing everywhere worldwide. There are many countries with declining populations - Russia and Japan being just 2 that come to mind.

[Rumcabal]

Ad hominem abuse (also called personal abuse or personal attacks) usually involves insulting or belittling one's opponent in order to invalidate his or her argument, but can also involve pointing out factual but ostensible character flaws or actions which are irrelevant to the opponent's argument. This tactic is logically fallacious because insults and even true negative facts about the opponent's personal character have nothing to do with the logical merits of the opponent's arguments or assertions.

You didnt write this by yourself. I thought the writing style was different. Its just copied directly from wiki - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem

Why not respond yourself to the arguments put forth by jsixpack, instead of resorting to cutting and pasting.

[Awohalitsiktoli]

The "decline" has been going on for a long time. It is taking place in almost all sectors, contrary to real estate myth. An obvious problem is that there are too many hotels, restaurants, malls, etc., and too few tourists and long-stay expats to keep these places from going under.

So Pattaya is 'declining' - ok gottcha. Yet in the very next paragraph you state -

Yes, the number of people living in and around Pattaya has grown over the years (this is happening worldwide).

So now Pattaya is growing. Your above statements cannot both be correct. It has to be one or the other - no?

As an aside populations are not growing everywhere worldwide. There are many countries with declining populations - Russia and Japan being just 2 that come to mind.

Yes, the absolute number of people in Pattaya has risen over the past decade. Yes, Pattaya is in decline (in large part due to too many people). Does that make sense? By the way, it is possible for a nation's population size to decline due to a decrease in fertility rate while at the same time see an increase in population numbers in urban areas such as Pattaya. This is, in fact, common today and is accelerating. It is called "urbanization" or rural to urban migration. In Thailand you see this happening with poor people from Issan moving to Pattaya to find work. Thank you for the interesting information on Japan and Russia Most countries have not entered a phase of real population decline, only fertility decline. All that aside, I was wondering about this because I am curious if people are really getting what they wished for. I do not think so. I think the growth has become mindless and destructive:

If you go back about 11 years, the Royal Garden Mall was there and fairly nice. There was a Big C and Foodland (no Tukcom, no Starbucks that I can remember). There was a McDonalds (always bad but good because it is sort of a mental break from Southeast Asia). I am not sure about Au Bob Pair, but I think it was there back then along with Pizza Company and Sizzler. There were a few nice hotels and loads of less nice hotels that were fine for most visitors. I can't remember traffic jams at all. At that time I think most expats were feeling good about Pattaya. They did not want to blow it up and create major changes. Then, the real estate invasion took place with the apparent mission of destroying everything and turning the area into a Puritanical Disneyland Skyscraper City built for only a few rich people. I think if a poll had been taken back then about what changes they would like to see, most expats would have said "some new condos," "some new western food place," and maybe renovate Royal Garden Mall, and clean up the beach and improve the infrastructure. They would not have said we want to see massive development all over, one concrete condo built after another side by side ad infinitum, a 100-200% increase in the price of everything, a huge influx of Russians and Arabs, traffic jams, air pollution, a rise in conservatism with an associated desire to kick out the vast majority of expats who are not "quality/rich" people, etc. Personally, I think the city is being developed for only a handful of people who have a major interest in real estate in the area. I think that is a huge mistake. I think it is ruining what was once a very relaxed, no-stress location to retire and visit and have fun.

[Rumcabal]

Yes, the absolute number of people in Pattaya has risen over the past decade. Yes, Pattaya is in decline (in large part due to too many people). Does that make sense?

No I'm sorry but that does not make sense to me. It depends I suppose on what you mean by the word 'decline'. Decline in this sense clearly does NOT mean:

- Fewer tourists are coming to Pattaya

- Fewer companies want to do business in Pattaya

- Fewer people want to live in Pattaya

- Pattaya is physically shrinking in size

I think what you mean by decline is that the lifestyle expectations that you want has declined. Thats a different issue. On average what is beneficial to Pattaya, as a whole, may not suit certain individuals. Development has never benefited every single person, all the time. But it does benefit the majority. Why should development and modernization which have benefited the West be denied to Thais?

If Pattaya is growing, physically in size and in population then by definition it cannot be in decline. If you want to see a city truly in decline, you should see what is happening to Detroit.

[Awohalitsiktoli]

Yes, the absolute number of people in Pattaya has risen over the past decade. Yes, Pattaya is in decline (in large part due to too many people). Does that make sense?

No I'm sorry but that does not make sense to me. It depends I suppose on what you mean by the word 'decline'. Decline in this sense clearly does NOT mean:

- Fewer tourists are coming to Pattaya

- Fewer companies want to do business in Pattaya

- Fewer people want to live in Pattaya

- Pattaya is physically shrinking in size

I think what you mean by decline is that the lifestyle expectations that you want has declined. Thats a different issue. On average what is beneficial to Pattaya, as a whole, may not suit certain individuals. Development has never benefited every single person, all the time. But it does benefit the majority. Why should development and modernization which have benefited the West be denied to Thais?

If Pattaya is growing, physically in size and in population then by definition it cannot be in decline. If you want to see a city truly in decline, you should see what is happening to Detroit.

I am glad you know that there is more than one meaning of "decline." The lifestyle expectations that many people wanted (probably the majority) were destroyed by the lifestyle expectations/actions that a select few (mostly associated with the real estate business) wanted. Unfortunately, now neither side is getting what it wants! So there is massive frustration all around--one one side expats longing for the golden years of the past, and on the other side real estate agents and speculators totally frustrated that they invested in a bad dream that will never come true. Many people do have sense enough to know that population growth is not always a good thing for cities. Unfortunately, real estate 101 teaches that it is always good for business I have stated my opinion. Nothing I said was contradictory unless you play with words. There is no need for me to respond further. I would, however, like to get some opinions from any person who is not a real estate agent and who has lived in the area for over ten years about what I said here:

If you go back about 11 years, the Royal Garden Mall was there and fairly nice. There was a Big C and Foodland (no Tukcom, no Starbucks that I can remember). There was a McDonalds (always bad but good because it is sort of a mental break from Southeast Asia). I am not sure about Au Bob Pair, but I think it was there back then along with Pizza Company and Sizzler. There were a few nice hotels and loads of less nice hotels that were fine for most visitors. I can't remember traffic jams at all. At that time I think most expats were feeling good about Pattaya. They did not want to blow it up and create major changes. Then, the real estate invasion took place with the apparent mission of destroying everything and turning the area into a Puritanical Disneyland Skyscraper City built for only a few rich people. I think if a poll had been taken back then about what changes they would like to see, most expats would have said "some new condos," "some new western food place," and maybe renovate Royal Garden Mall, and clean up the beach and improve the infrastructure. They would not have said we want to see massive development all over, one concrete condo built after another side by side ad infinitum, a 100-200% increase in the price of everything, a huge influx of Russians and Arabs, traffic jams, air pollution, a rise in conservatism with an associated desire to kick out the vast majority of expats who are not "quality/rich" people, etc. Personally, I think the city is being developed for only a handful of people who have a major interest in real estate in the area. I think that is a huge mistake. I think it is ruining what was once a very relaxed, no-stress location to retire and visit and have fun.

[tropo]

Ad hominem abuse (also called personal abuse or personal attacks) usually involves insulting or belittling one's opponent in order to invalidate his or her argument, but can also involve pointing out factual but ostensible character flaws or actions which are irrelevant to the opponent's argument. This tactic is logically fallacious because insults and even true negative facts about the opponent's personal character have nothing to do with the logical merits of the opponent's arguments or assertions.

You didnt write this by yourself. I thought the writing style was different. Its just copied directly from wiki - http://en.wikipedia....wiki/Ad_hominem

Why not respond yourself to the arguments put forth by jsixpack, instead of resorting to cutting and pasting.

I threw out the bait, and you took it like a hungry salmon.

Whatever the reason, this definition of "ad hominem abuse" is very good and should be required reading for all members.

[tropo]

Many people do have sense enough to know that population growth is not always a good thing for cities.

So what do sensible people do to limit the population growth of a city when it has reached what some experts considerer an ideal population.

No matter what you do, if a place is popular more and more people will come. You liked Pattaya enough to move here, so you're just as responsible for over populating the city as anyone else...or do you have special privilege because you came here first. At least the late arrivals will not complain as they obviously like the city in its current state.

"CALL SOME PLACE PARADISE - KISS IT GOODBYE".... The Eagles

[Awohalitsiktoli]

Many people do have sense enough to know that population growth is not always a good thing for cities.

So what do sensible people do to limit the population growth of a city when it has reached what some experts considerer an ideal population.

No matter what you do, if a place is popular more and more people will come. You liked Pattaya enough to move here, so you're just as responsible for over populating the city as anyone else...or do you have special privilege because you came here first. At least the late arrivals will not complain as they obviously like the city in its current state.

"CALL SOME PLACE PARADISE - KISS IT GOODBYE".... The Eagles

Late arrivals are at an advantage because they do not know what they missed. I do not know if the city can be fixed now. With Russians and Scandinavians and Indians moving in, it will become an even more difficult, expensive, stress-filled place to live. I think most posters assume that the people moving in are all "farangs." I wonder how many Thais are the cause of the overpopulation problem. It is possible that, over the past ten years, more Thais have moved to Pattaya than foreigners. Good quote by the Eagles and sadly true. I think we are simply wired up wrong to think all growth is good. Of course that is what the "global economic machine" wants us to believe. In the end, you get overcrowded, polluted, stress-inducing cities where "paradise" used to be.

[bobbin]

I think much of what has been written here regarding the decline/upscaling of Pattaya is true.

I nominate Ban Chang as the "New Pattaya"!

There are already many bars/bar ladies there. Nothing on Pattaya of course, but you have to start somewhere. And they have already started.

Just a little farther down the road, better beaches, some but not a lot of condos. Tesco, no traffic jams, very Thai.

Anything not available locally, easily solved by a quick run up to Pattaya.

How am I doing so far?

With all the attention on Pattaya, I figure we'd get a good 10-15 years before moving on to Klaeng.....or Trat. (forget Koh Chang, islands are so limiting)

[FarangBuddha]

I think much of what has been written here regarding the decline/upscaling of Pattaya is true.

I nominate Ban Chang as the "New Pattaya"!

There are already many bars/bar ladies there. Nothing on Pattaya of course, but you have to start somewhere. And they have already started.

Yes please you and all your quality friends and acquaintances please move down to Ban Chang. As you say, things are cheap and there are plenty of brothels there so you're all be right at home

[bobbin]

I think much of what has been written here regarding the decline/upscaling of Pattaya is true.

I nominate Ban Chang as the "New Pattaya"!

There are already many bars/bar ladies there. Nothing on Pattaya of course, but you have to start somewhere. And they have already started.

Yes please you and all your quality friends and acquaintances please move down to Ban Chang. As you say, things are cheap and there are plenty of brothels there so you're all be right at home

I see humour is not your strong point, Mr (priss....) Quality! :bah:

[tropo]

I think much of what has been written here regarding the decline/upscaling of Pattaya is true.

I nominate Ban Chang as the "New Pattaya"!

There are already many bars/bar ladies there. Nothing on Pattaya of course, but you have to start somewhere. And they have already started.

Yes please you and all your quality friends and acquaintances please move down to Ban Chang. As you say, things are cheap and there are plenty of brothels there so you're all be right at home

It's a perfectly good option and solution for all the whingers who feel Pattaya has declined and no longer offers the intimate, small town quality of life.

[bobbin]

pris·sy/ˈprisē/Adjective

1. (of a person or their manner) Fussily and excessively respectable.

With a explosive methane gas avatar and an almost scandalous cultural insensitivity in calling yourself Farang Buddha, I'm chuffed that you deigned to take note of my modest scribblings...so to speak.

[Soutpeel]

I think much of what has been written here regarding the decline/upscaling of Pattaya is true.

I nominate Ban Chang as the "New Pattaya"!

There are already many bars/bar ladies there. Nothing on Pattaya of course, but you have to start somewhere. And they have already started.

Yes please you and all your quality friends and acquaintances please move down to Ban Chang. As you say, things are cheap and there are plenty of brothels there so you're all be right at home

It's a perfectly good option and solution for all the whingers who feel Pattaya has declined and no longer offers the intimate, small town quality of life.

Where exactly are these brothels in Ban Chang ?....I have been living there for nearly 10 years and have yet to come across a single brothel never mind "plenty"....

[Rimmer]

Discussing the specific of prostitution is not allowed on the forum so it looks like Soutpeel will have to stay in the dark for another ten years

[Soutpeel]

Discussing the specific of prostitution is not allowed on the forum so it looks like Soutpeel will have to stay in the dark for another ten years

:lol:

[timekeeper]

Discussing the specific of prostitution is not allowed on the forum so it looks like Soutpeel will have to stay in the dark for another ten years

LOL

[Awohalitsiktoli]

It's a perfectly good option and solution for all the whingers who feel Pattaya has declined and no longer offers the intimate, small town quality of life.

And for small in number (but unfortunately influential) "blow up Pattaya, throw the poor scum out, and build 100000000 skyscrapers and a Golden Era will materialize crowd" who will never see their dreams become a reality in Pattaya, there are several boring places they can eventually go to moan about their financial loss and bad judgement.

[CHdiver]

I think much of what has been written here regarding the decline/upscaling of Pattaya is true.

I nominate Ban Chang as the "New Pattaya"!

There are already many bars/bar ladies there. Nothing on Pattaya of course, but you have to start somewhere. And they have already started.

Just a little farther down the road, better beaches, some but not a lot of condos. Tesco, no traffic jams, very Thai.

Anything not available locally, easily solved by a quick run up to Pattaya.

How am I doing so far?

With all the attention on Pattaya, I figure we'd get a good 10-15 years before moving on to Klaeng.....or Trat. (forget Koh Chang, islands are so limiting)

Maybe someone could Gate of Ban Chang and make a Theme Park out of it? Only Pattaya old hands are allowed to live there and everybody else could watch them going on with there habits, of course for a fee and with additional charges if you want to go and visit the "upstair Rooms" to watch the going ons there.

[Rimmer]

I think much of what has been written here regarding the decline/upscaling of Pattaya is true.

I nominate Ban Chang as the "New Pattaya"!

There are already many bars/bar ladies there. Nothing on Pattaya of course, but you have to start somewhere. And they have already started.

Just a little farther down the road, better beaches, some but not a lot of condos. Tesco, no traffic jams, very Thai.

Anything not available locally, easily solved by a quick run up to Pattaya.

How am I doing so far?

With all the attention on Pattaya, I figure we'd get a good 10-15 years before moving on to Klaeng.....or Trat. (forget Koh Chang, islands are so limiting)

Maybe someone could Gate of Ban Chang and make a Theme Park out of it? Only Pattaya old hands are allowed to live there and everybody else could watch them going on with there habits, of course for a fee and with additional charges if you want to go and visit the "upstair Rooms" to watch the going ons there.

I can see it now, An archway across Sukhumvit just by Lotus proclaiming Ban Chang as the new Extreme city by the sea, the locals will be overjoyed with that prospect.

[JSixpack]

Nothing I said was contradictory unless you play with words.

Yes, it was in fact contradictory just by using a non-standard definition of the word "decline." It is YOU who are playing with words by redefining the standard definition. HERE is what the decline of an urban area--in this case, Detroit--means:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/artanddesign/gallery/2011/jan/02/photography-detroit

What YOU mean by decline is that you don't like development. And in the course of expressing that dislike, you imagine all kinds of hostility to your preferred lifestyle. Trouble is, you're vastly outnumbered by those who LIKE what Pattaya is now and that's exactly why so many more, representing a great diversity, visit here now and WORK here now than before. And much development has also taken place for those who prefer your lifestyle as well.

There is no need for me to respond further.

Cough.

I would, however, like to get some opinions from any person who is not a real estate agent and who has lived in the area for over ten years about what I said here:

OK.

If you go back about 11 years, the Royal Garden Mall was there and fairly nice. There was a Big C and Foodland (no Tukcom, no Starbucks that I can remember). There was a McDonalds (always bad but good because it is sort of a mental break from Southeast Asia). I am not sure about Au Bob Pair, but I think it was there back then along with Pizza Company and Sizzler. There were a few nice hotels and loads of less nice hotels that were fine for most visitors. I can't remember traffic jams at all.

So what? There wasn't a Tukcom. I had to go all the way to Bangkok every time I wanted a piece of computer hardware or software.

There wasn't a Central Festival where I could shop for a great variety of good quality stuff and enjoy a great diversity of better restaurants. And I know a little kid who's had many great times in the indoor playground there.

Instead of Northshore, there was merely a rusting steel skeleton.

At that time I think most expats were feeling good about Pattaya. They did not want to blow it up and create major changes.

Of course, but a vastly fewer number with VERY limited interests, as were the tourists. Let's look at one representative specimen tourist, Mr. Kevin, an Englishman, who's just fought over a bargirl and pissed himself:

What a fine time to remember!

Yes indeed. But what about that vast number in Thailand and throughout the world who would feel good about having more than just birds, beer, and bashing? They were being EXCLUDED by lack of facilities. Not good!

And since more development has taken place, many MORE memorable times for many more people have taken place. There was no "blow up," absurd exaggeration for displacing a few beer bars and utilizing some vacant land.

Then, the real estate invasion took place with the apparent mission of destroying everything and turning the area into a Puritanical Disneyland Skyscraper City built for only a few rich people.

Invasion? OMG. Pattaya now serves not JUST the ol' punter like yourself but millions more. And you still have plenty of what YOU like. MORE, in fact, as the development of Soi Buakhow and Naklua side streets didn't exist. No Puritanism exists that didn't exist BEFORE the development when Interior Minister Purachai started it EVERYWHERE, not just Pattaya. In practice, all that meant was shorter opening hours.

I think if a poll had been taken back then about what changes they would like to see, most expats would have said "some new condos," "some new western food place," and maybe renovate Royal Garden Mall, and clean up the beach and improve the infrastructure.

Thinking just about themselves, not the vast numbers elsewhere who might like to enjoy something in Pattaya, or about the vast number of jobs for poor Thais that would be created as a consequence. Selfish pricks, eh? Good thing nobody polled them or paid attention to them.

They would not have said we want to see massive development all over, one concrete condo built after another side by side ad infinitum, a 100-200% increase in the price of everything,

Actually, the price they would most be interested in, beer at a go-go, has decreased. Check out happy hour at Peppermint or Champion.

Otherwise, prices have pretty much risen with inflation and currency devaluation in the West--everywhere in Thailand, not just in PTY.

a huge influx of Russians and Arabs,

So bigoted, aren't we? Why can't they enjoy Pattaya too?

traffic jams, air pollution, a rise in conservatism with an associated desire to kick out the vast majority of expats who are not "quality/rich" people, etc.

That desire is SO pronounced that Soi Buakhow was built up JUST for them and a new beer bar complex being constructed as we speak. Meanwhile, Walking St., Sois 7-8, and the absolutely critical Soi 6 are going stronger than ever. What conservatisim? Soi 6 has a lot more katoeys than it ever had 10 years ago. Some of the shows on Walking St. are raunchier than ever before. Is that CONSERVATIVE?

Just a load of paranoid "victimization" whinging here.

Personally, I think the city is being developed for only a handful of people who have a major interest in real estate in the area.

As noted, Soi Buakhow and Naklua, lots more action there than ever before. That's developing ALSO. You keep ignoring that point just because you don't LIKE anybody else to enjoy Pattaya.

I think that is a huge mistake.

Yawn. Most of us living here NOW, a much larger number than 10 years ago, DON'T think so. And a significant number who DID live here before like it much better now despite the increase in traffic. Get it now?

I think it is ruining what was once a very relaxed, no-stress location to retire and visit and have fun.

Yeah, so move to Bang Chang as suggested in the thread. But anybody can still lead a very relaxed no-stress life in Pattaya same as before except that the commute time to a favorite beer bar might be a few minutes longer.

[tropo]

I think it is ruining what was once a very relaxed, no-stress location to retire and visit and have fun.

Yeah, so move to Bang Chang as suggested in the thread. But anybody can still lead a very relaxed no-stress life in Pattaya same as before except that the commute time to a favorite beer bar might be a few minutes longer.

You'd wonder where people live who come up comments like you can't relax anymore in Pattaya. Perhaps they live in Walking Street. I live 1 km from Walking Street and it is extremely relaxing and quiet. I'm hardly aware that I'm living in such a busy resort until I get down to the main roads.

[Awohalitsiktoli]

I think it is ruining what was once a very relaxed, no-stress location to retire and visit and have fun.

Yeah, so move to Bang Chang as suggested in the thread. But anybody can still lead a very relaxed no-stress life in Pattaya same as before except that the commute time to a favorite beer bar might be a few minutes longer.

You'd wonder where people live who come up comments like you can't relax anymore in Pattaya. Perhaps they live in Walking Street. I live 1 km from Walking Street and it is extremely relaxing and quiet. I'm hardly aware that I'm living in such a busy resort until I get down to the main roads.

It is amazing how sensitive real estate people are to even small doses of reality. Clearly your response is designed to bury the following reality: Pattaya is no longer a relaxed, no-stress, traffic-jam free, inexpensive, crime-free place to live in. Those days are gone largely because of a "development for the few" plan that is destroying what was once a really good place. Having said that, there are far worse places to be. Pattaya has a convenience factor that is hard to match (but the traffic is chipping away at that). There are fun things to do. I just do not like its current trajectory and think it is a mistake--a mistake that will be obvious as time goes by. I also think YOU are upset/angry/frustrated and stressed out to the max (your posts clearly reflect this). Your dream is not surfacing precisely as you envisioned it. You are having a hard time coming to grips with that fact. One wonders why people who hate a place move there and then complain and complain about everything, eventually wanting to destroy it all to create a "conservative, clean, neat, orderly, expensive, Puritanical theme park" that suits YOU. Because your costly dream will never surface, you guys must be some of the most frustrated people in Pattaya, and yet all you can do is talk about the "whiners." Get real!

[Ulysses G.]

Pattaya is no longer a relaxed, no-stress, traffic-jam free, inexpensive, crime-free place to live in.

It has not been since the 1960s.

[Rumcabal]

Nothing I said was contradictory unless you play with words.

Yes, it was in fact contradictory just by using a non-standard definition of the word "decline." It is YOU who are playing with words by redefining the standard definition. HERE is what the decline of an urban area--in this case, Detroit--means:

http://www.guardian....ography-detroit

What YOU mean by decline is that you don't like development. And in the course of expressing that dislike, you imagine all kinds of hostility to your preferred lifestyle. Trouble is, you're vastly outnumbered by those who LIKE what Pattaya is now and that's exactly why so many more, representing a great diversity, visit here now and WORK here now than before. And much development has also taken place for those who prefer your lifestyle as well.

There is no need for me to respond further.

Cough.

I would, however, like to get some opinions from any person who is not a real estate agent and who has lived in the area for over ten years about what I said here:

OK.

Cheers JSixpack you responded better and more eloquently than I ever could have.

However I also think that the time you spend writing your logical arguments is a waste of your time. Thats why I refused to respond. Why bother?

You are just trying to educate old Dinosaurs who dont listen to your points and instead scream 'Real Estate Agents, Russians, Decline*, Bait, Salmon, Want it all to myself, Change - No Good..etc....'

*Note: May or may not mean actual Decline

[LennyW]

I think "Awohalitsiktoli" is a failed real estate agent, reminds me of ex smokers who keep banging on about how bad smoking is.

[Rimmer]

One post deleted another edited, calling members names collectively or individually is against forum rules.