Research reveals ugly side to Bangkok life

[Jonathan Fairfield]

Research reveals ugly side to Bangkok life

Visarut Sankam

BANGKOK:-- THE THAILAND Future Foundation has released shocking findings about life in Bangkok in its bid to encourage urban residents to push for change.

It's time Bangkok people seriously express their expectations and push for those involved to deliver," TFF executive chairman Sethaput Suthiwart-Narueput said.

He spoke after a study by the TFF showed Bangkok people spend three hours a day on commuting on average, and traffic problems are worsening.

"This is despite the fact that there are 37 agencies responsible for Bangkok's traffic affairs," he said.

Such unpleasant facts are acutely reflected in Bangkok being ranked 102 in a list of the 140 best cities to live.

This is in sharp contrast to Bangkok's status as the most popular city in the world to visit.

The TFF said that as people's quality of life was being affected by living in Bangkok, it undertook the research to urge people to pay more attention to policies relating to the capital. It wants people to create a "Bangkok agenda" that respond to their needs.

The research was carried out over more than two years, with it yielding 10 main facts.

Fact No 1: There are 37 units related to tackling the traffic problem in Bangkok. The Bangkok Metropolitan Administration is assigned with building and maintaining traffic lights, but the traffic police handle the task.

A Castrol Magnatec Stop-Start Index survey found that the average car speed in Bangkok is 16km/h.

'Public transport failure'

Fact No 2: More money is being pumped into public transport than is warranted given the number of people using it.

The Airport Rail Link is used by some 17 million people a year, and Bt33 billion is invested in it.

The Chao Phraya River and the Klong Saen Saep boat services serve more than 29 million people a year, but only Bt70 million is invested in them.

Fact No 3: There are more than 3,200 municipal officers in Bangkok city - 200 in the City Law Enforcement Department, and 3,000 in the district offices. The city occupies 1,568 square kilometres, which means there are two municipal officers for every square kilometre.

Fact No 4: Bt377 million is spent yearly on public relations for Bangkok projects including Bt30 million for the "Bangkok: The City of Happiness" campaign, and Bt20 million for "Love Bangkok, Build It".

Fact No 5: Living in Bangkok is too expensive for many people, forcing them to move to suburban areas.

Land and condominium prices in Bangkok rose 8 per cent in seven years, while the cost of public transport is more expensive than in Tokyo, Hong Kong or Shanghai.

Fact No 6: There is only 2.2 square metres of usable green zones per person, which is less than half the amount that BMA said there was. The BMA included in its figure private zones and even traffic islands.

Fact No 7: Some 97,000 people are city employees - two times the number in Seoul, and 1.5 times the number in Jakarta.

Each of those two cities has about a million more people than Bangkok.

Math test shocker

Fact No 8: Two-thirds of students in Bangkok failed the math test conducted by the Programme for International Student Assessment.

For the 2012 test, 65 per cent of students failed - a result equal to Mexico and Montenegro.

Fact No 9: Every office related to the running of the city was rated as "having very good performance", resulting in Bt2.3 billion being paid out in bonuses.

Another Bt200 million and Bt66 million were used to train city staff and send them abroad for study respectively.

Fact No 10: The money spent on building the new BMA office had reached two times the amount spent to build The Ritz-Carlton Residences project, which is the tallest building in Thailand.

Construction of the BMA has been under way for more than 20 years, with Bt9.9 billion spent at the time of the research.

Source: http://www.nationmultimedia.com/national/Research-reveals-ugly-side-to-Bangkok-life-30271979.html

-- The Nation 2015-10-31

[ClutchClark]

'Public transport failure'

Fact No 2: More money is being pumped into public transport than is warranted given the number of people using it.

The Airport Rail Link is used by some 17 million people a year, and Bt33 billion is invested in it.

The Chao Phraya River and the Klong Saen Saep boat services serve more than 29 million people a year, but only Bt70 million is invested in them.

----------------------------------

But the boat services don't go to the Airport.

This comparison is ridiculous for a number of different reasons.

[RidgeRunner]

Fair comparison.

Bangkok invested 1,941Bt for every passenger that used the rail link.

Bangkok invested 2.4Bt for every boat passenger.

[ezzra]

So 37 agencies plus 1 now, telling us how horrible commuting in BKK is, another useless talking heads

telling us what we already know for many years now, a voice in the wilderness they are and shall remain

so.... where else in the world you have a traffic conditions left at the whims and pressure of local business

and powerful people where by they request the police to re arrange traffic flows to suit their businesses

and homes? only in Thailand....

[RidgeRunner]

My ex wives family built a hotel and was very successful so a politician opened one across the road.

Soon after, the road department showed up and put barriers at the turnoff so the customers were directed to the politicians hotel.

37 agencies, all willing to exploit their position for profit. That's the problem.

[ClutchClark]

Fair comparison.

Bangkok invested 1,941Bt for every passenger that used the rail link.

Bangkok invested 2.4Bt for every boat passenger.

We can all do the math.

Now subtract all the lost revenue from tourists who decide not to visit Thailand because they have no economical public transportation to get from the airport to town.

And for that matter the numbers you crunched mean nothing unless you also have the data of how much each system returns to the coffers in fares.

[RidgeRunner]

Fair comparison.

Bangkok invested 1,941Bt for every passenger that used the rail link.

Bangkok invested 2.4Bt for every boat passenger.

We can all do the math.

Now subtract all the lost revenue from tourists who decide not to visit Thailand because they have no economical public transportation to get from the airport to town.

And for that matter the numbers you crunched mean nothing unless you also have the data of how much each system returns to the coffers in fares.

Tourists are avoiding Thailand due to the costs of a taxi ride into town from the airport?

[clockman]

Lots of noses in the trough! What do you expect.

[ClutchClark]

Fair comparison.

Bangkok invested 1,941Bt for every passenger that used the rail link.

Bangkok invested 2.4Bt for every boat passenger.

We can all do the math.

Now subtract all the lost revenue from tourists who decide not to visit Thailand because they have no economical public transportation to get from the airport to town.

And for that matter the numbers you crunched mean nothing unless you also have the data of how much each system returns to the coffers in fares.

Tourists are avoiding Thailand due to the costs of a taxi ride into town from the airport?

I refuse to take the taxis since they are mostly on speed and drive recklessly but the speed of the rail is also a factor in my decision as well as the constant screw job attempted by taxi drivers. There are various factors but apparently there are 17 million other riders who also have reasons to choose not to rely on the taxis.

But its not surprising you failed to address the second part of my post about the revenues received from boat vs rail against investment. I guess that math gets a bit too tough for some.

[pookiki]

I find it strange that the current 'government' rails against populism when this article clearly shows a bloated civil service system that regularly doles out bonuses with no real evaluation. Real initiaitives are needed to utilize civil service personnel and to effectively serve the public (transportation in particular) and the children in the schools. It is possible and it is certainly needed.

Edited October 31, 2015 by pookiki

[BlindMagician]

'Public transport failure'

Fact No 2: More money is being pumped into public transport than is warranted given the number of people using it.

The Airport Rail Link is used by some 17 million people a year, and Bt33 billion is invested in it.

The Chao Phraya River and the Klong Saen Saep boat services serve more than 29 million people a year, but only Bt70 million is invested in them.

----------------------------------

But the boat services don't go to the Airport.

This comparison is ridiculous for a number of different reasons.

Apply your argument to the converse - the airport railink does not go to the same places as the boats do. Doesn't this show how ridiculous your argument is.

Big picture public transport management looks at how much is invested per target or actual number of people using that investment, ad well as other indicators, such as per transport km, etc. So not at all ridiculous.

[ClutchClark]

'Public transport failure'

Fact No 2: More money is being pumped into public transport than is warranted given the number of people using it.

The Airport Rail Link is used by some 17 million people a year, and Bt33 billion is invested in it.

The Chao Phraya River and the Klong Saen Saep boat services serve more than 29 million people a year, but only Bt70 million is invested in them.

----------------------------------

But the boat services don't go to the Airport.

This comparison is ridiculous for a number of different reasons.

Apply your argument to the converse - the airport railink does not go to the same places as the boats do. Doesn't this show how ridiculous your argument is.

Big picture public transport management looks at how much is invested per target or actual number of people using that investment, ad well as other indicators, such as per transport km, etc. So not at all ridiculous.

The comparison was made by the article. Perhaps you had better discuss the matter with them.

Secondly, and this is apparently beyond your grasp: it is not possible to determine if an investment is profitable or not unless you know both the investment and the retuen on thst investment.

The return has not been provided in the article--which would be the revenues thru ticket sales.

I can't help you any more thsn I have. I can only lead you to the water...the rest is up to you.

Edited October 31, 2015 by ClutchClark

[alfalfa19]

Many valid points and statistics here. However, the second half of this sentence: " Land and condominium prices in Bangkok rose 8 per cent in seven years, while the cost of public transport is more expensive than in Tokyo, Hong Kong or Shanghai." does not add up. Unless, of course, they are referring to the cost of building and bribes for construction. The actual cost to the rider is remarkably low in bkk compared to the other cities mentioned.

On an unrelated note, 8 years ago, I was working at the Golden Gate Bridge, for the toll collection system. 2 assclowns from the BMA were there on a paid tour, supposedly because the bma was thinking about emulating the GGB toll system, as they were due for some type of upgrade to the bkk expressway toll system. I was tasked with giving these guys a tour of the bridge. All they were interested in was sightseeing and girls.

[overherebc]

Why would you use public transport in Bangkok, no-one can see you driving your red plate car everywhere, what a loss of face would that be ???

Public transport is for the lower classes who can't afford a car or two. How embarrassing it would be to be seen getting on a bus when your best friend drives past in their Benz ( German Taxi) Good God you might drop your LV handbag.

[BlindMagician]

'Public transport failure'

Fact No 2: More money is being pumped into public transport than is warranted given the number of people using it.

The Airport Rail Link is used by some 17 million people a year, and Bt33 billion is invested in it.

The Chao Phraya River and the Klong Saen Saep boat services serve more than 29 million people a year, but only Bt70 million is invested in them.

----------------------------------

But the boat services don't go to the Airport.

This comparison is ridiculous for a number of different reasons.

Apply your argument to the converse - the airport railink does not go to the same places as the boats do. Doesn't this show how ridiculous your argument is.

Big picture public transport management looks at how much is invested per target or actual number of people using that investment, ad well as other indicators, such as per transport km, etc. So not at all ridiculous.

The comparison was made by the article. Perhaps you had better discuss the matter with them.

Secondly, and this is apparently beyond your grasp: it is not possible to determine if an investment is profitable or not unless you know both the investment and the retuen on thst investment.

The return has not been provided in the article--which would be the revenues thru ticket sales.

I can't help you any more thsn I have. I can only lead you to the water...the rest is up to you.

Er...no...you made the silly observation that the boats don't go to the airport. So I point out the train does go to...yawn...get it?

I am fully aware of all other aspects you try to ellude to. But you should know something about the fundamentals, one of which is investment per head. That's a fact. The original article won't have space to do a full roi, cash flow or other financial analysis report for you. So take it easy...just accept the indicator for what it is...an indicator, not a full detailed financial analysis. But I tell you what, ad you seem to expect that, why don't you research that for us, and post it. How long do you need to get the job done?

[rodknock]

this article just proves the dog and pony show is all good and runing well in Bangkok and the rest of the country.

if you removed all of the graft paid on any public construction you would get the true cost.

why are bonusis paid to civil service workers, police and military??? what a joke.

i am sorry mister p/m but in your wildest dreams you will never get rid of corruption or graft in your life time. the best you could do is control it.

you do not have the b-lls to get rid of it. that would be rocking the good old boys club.

[ClutchClark]

'Public transport failure'

Fact No 2: More money is being pumped into public transport than is warranted given the number of people using it.

The Airport Rail Link is used by some 17 million people a year, and Bt33 billion is invested in it.

The Chao Phraya River and the Klong Saen Saep boat services serve more than 29 million people a year, but only Bt70 million is invested in them.

----------------------------------

But the boat services don't go to the Airport.

This comparison is ridiculous for a number of different reasons.

Apply your argument to the converse - the airport railink does not go to the same places as the boats do. Doesn't this show how ridiculous your argument is.

Big picture public transport management looks at how much is invested per target or actual number of people using that investment, ad well as other indicators, such as per transport km, etc. So not at all ridiculous.

The comparison was made by the article. Perhaps you had better discuss the matter with them.

Secondly, and this is apparently beyond your grasp: it is not possible to determine if an investment is profitable or not unless you know both the investment and the retuen on thst investment.

The return has not been provided in the article--which would be the revenues thru ticket sales.

I can't help you any more thsn I have. I can only lead you to the water...the rest is up to you.

Er...no...you made the silly observation that the boats don't go to the airport. So I point out the train does go to...yawn...get it?

I am fully aware of all other aspects you try to ellude to. But you should know something about the fundamentals, one of which is investment per head. That's a fact. The original article won't have space to do a full roi, cash flow or other financial analysis report for you. So take it easy...just accept the indicator for what it is...an indicator, not a full detailed financial analysis. But I tell you what, ad you seem to expect that, why don't you research that for us, and post it. How long do you need to get the job done?

You crack me up.

Meanwhile I will be at the beach.

[yellowboat]

Before there was the BTS or subway there was the river and the khlong. If you lived near one of them, your transport needs were better met than most in Bangkok.

Revenue for the airport express is B1.7 billion @ B100 a head. There is also the city link which was not mentioned and was built along side of it. It is usually full. It is rather inconclusive.

The river and khlong boats do an excellent job given their low investment needs.

[BlindMagician]

'Public transport failure'

Fact No 2: More money is being pumped into public transport than is warranted given the number of people using it.

The Airport Rail Link is used by some 17 million people a year, and Bt33 billion is invested in it.

The Chao Phraya River and the Klong Saen Saep boat services serve more than 29 million people a year, but only Bt70 million is invested in them.

----------------------------------

But the boat services don't go to the Airport.

This comparison is ridiculous for a number of different reasons.

Apply your argument to the converse - the airport railink does not go to the same places as the boats do. Doesn't this show how ridiculous your argument is.

Big picture public transport management looks at how much is invested per target or actual number of people using that investment, ad well as other indicators, such as per transport km, etc. So not at all ridiculous.

The comparison was made by the article. Perhaps you had better discuss the matter with them.

Secondly, and this is apparently beyond your grasp: it is not possible to determine if an investment is profitable or not unless you know both the investment and the retuen on thst investment.

The return has not been provided in the article--which would be the revenues thru ticket sales.

I can't help you any more thsn I have. I can only lead you to the water...the rest is up to you.

Er...no...you made the silly observation that the boats don't go to the airport. So I point out the train does go to...yawn...get it?

I am fully aware of all other aspects you try to ellude to. But you should know something about the fundamentals, one of which is investment per head. That's a fact. The original article won't have space to do a full roi, cash flow or other financial analysis report for you. So take it easy...just accept the indicator for what it is...an indicator, not a full detailed financial analysis. But I tell you what, ad you seem to expect that, why don't you research that for us, and post it. How long do you need to get the job done?

You crack me up.

Meanwhile I will be at the beach.

Taking the train or a boat? Don't forget your suntan cream.

[MockingJay]

Air pollution and related cancer they didn't even put in, because those numbers would have Bangkok completely empty in no time with 9 million people fleeing to the country side and islands...

[Bakseeda]

Really , as a "Farang" in Thailand....... Who gives a damn... When I travel in Bangkok , I know where I am going and I know how long it will take me. I love walking in many places in Bangkok especially around the Yawarat area... and of course Lumpini Park.. I lived for eight and a half years in Sathorn and pretty easy access everywhere .. Everyone and their dog knows that the Thai Civil Service is a joke, but that's the way it is. No Farang needs to live in Bangkok.. we do it from our own free will. But I do feel sorry for many Thais who have to live and work there... Thailand and Bangkok are here to be enjoyed... Happy Halloween to one and all... and please no-one dress as a taxi-driver.......

[VIPinthailand]

why people complain if have to drive 2 hours to go work.

they now live the American dream. this is what people want: House, car, TV and a garage full of junks.

they think it s free and could stay home watching TV all day.? they didn't see that this kind of American life will make them miserable and a debt slave... now suck it up... they are all screwed.

[sz1a]

'Public transport failure'

Fact No 2: More money is being pumped into public transport than is warranted given the number of people using it.

The Airport Rail Link is used by some 17 million people a year, and Bt33 billion is invested in it.

The Chao Phraya River and the Klong Saen Saep boat services serve more than 29 million people a year, but only Bt70 million is invested in them.

----------------------------------

But the boat services don't go to the Airport.

This comparison is ridiculous for a number of different reasons.

Apply your argument to the converse - the airport railink does not go to the same places as the boats do. Doesn't this show how ridiculous your argument is.

Big picture public transport management looks at how much is invested per target or actual number of people using that investment, ad well as other indicators, such as per transport km, etc. So not at all ridiculous.

The comparison was made by the article. Perhaps you had better discuss the matter with them.

Secondly, and this is apparently beyond your grasp: it is not possible to determine if an investment is profitable or not unless you know both the investment and the retuen on thst investment.

The return has not been provided in the article--which would be the revenues thru ticket sales.

I can't help you any more thsn I have. I can only lead you to the water...the rest is up to you.

The ROI on public transport is not ticket sales. It's however much more the people using the transport can contribute to the economy in terms of getting to work etc. Look at net contribution per passenger with and without the transport and you have a real ROI.

[Suradit69]

'Public transport failure'

Fact No 2: More money is being pumped into public transport than is warranted given the number of people using it.

The Airport Rail Link is used by some 17 million people a year, and Bt33 billion is invested in it.

The Chao Phraya River and the Klong Saen Saep boat services serve more than 29 million people a year, but only Bt70 million is invested in them.

----------------------------------

But the boat services don't go to the Airport.

This comparison is ridiculous for a number of different reasons.

Apply your argument to the converse - the airport railink does not go to the same places as the boats do. Doesn't this show how ridiculous your argument is.

Big picture public transport management looks at how much is invested per target or actual number of people using that investment, ad well as other indicators, such as per transport km, etc. So not at all ridiculous.

"Big picture public transport management looks at how much is invested per target or actual number of people using that investment, ad well as other indicators, such as per transport km, etc. So not at all ridiculous. "

You are sort of babbling here and your understanding of a logical converse wouldn't stand up to scrutiny.

[longtimeexP]

Unless something is done to control or curb the epidemic corruption in Bangkok / Thailand . This Country will slowly and for sure fall behind . They will do as they always did , get what they always got , and wonder why nothing has changed , it will be a result of their own self centred actions .THAILAND WILL FALL BEHIND . never be a leader . People at the top are not that clever , they don't look ahead . ( JUST GREED )

[Baerboxer]

Fair comparison.

Bangkok invested 1,941Bt for every passenger that used the rail link.

Bangkok invested 2.4Bt for every boat passenger.

We can all do the math.

Now subtract all the lost revenue from tourists who decide not to visit Thailand because they have no economical public transportation to get from the airport to town.

And for that matter the numbers you crunched mean nothing unless you also have the data of how much each system returns to the coffers in fares.

Tourists are avoiding Thailand due to the costs of a taxi ride into town from the airport?

I refuse to take the taxis since they are mostly on speed and drive recklessly but the speed of the rail is also a factor in my decision as well as the constant screw job attempted by taxi drivers. There are various factors but apparently there are 17 million other riders who also have reasons to choose not to rely on the taxis.

But its not surprising you failed to address the second part of my post about the revenues received from boat vs rail against investment. I guess that math gets a bit too tough for some.

In the last 25 years, I reckon that I've had problems with less than 5% of the taxis I've taken, including to and from both airports, short journeys and long journeys.

That is mostly refusals to go somewhere, not wanting to use the meter, and having to go out the way and fill up or going the long way round until told.

Not once can I recall one single taxi driver who gave the impression of being on drugs, including alcohol or drove particularly recklessly. Some drive quicker than others, some more carefully, and some more considerately. But none, IME recklessly.

Guess you must be unlucky.

[mmh8]

surely with 37 units devoted to traffic, corruption costs could be decreased by just having one unit headed by our glorious leader. This would reduce 37 sticky fingers down to 1

[gemguy]

All things considered, relative to the magnitude of logistics involved, to operate and maintain a city with a burgeoning population of around 12 million people I personally think they are handling it pretty well...all things considered and everything entailed.

Of Course it could be better as that can and often is said about the logistical administration of any large city of over 1 million people while those living in what is considered a large city of say 1 to 2 million people often bitterly complain about traffic matters and a host of other social problems existing in their thought to be, considered to be large city.

They would have to come to a city like Bangkok and experience the Bangkok "experience" first hand and come to realize that a city of 12 million people is a whole different level of logistics concerning the orderly, or as orderly as can well be expected, administration of such a large city.

There is plenty of room for improvement ...like what is said in the OP...but all things considered they are managing the city well enough by any standard.

Just saying

Cheers

[tigermoth]

Fair comparison.

Bangkok invested 1,941Bt for every passenger that used the rail link.

Bangkok invested 2.4Bt for every boat passenger.

We can all do the math.

Now subtract all the lost revenue from tourists who decide not to visit Thailand because they have no economical public transportation to get from the airport to town.

And for that matter the numbers you crunched mean nothing unless you also have the data of how much each system returns to the coffers in fares.

At the main airport if you are a first arrival in Bangkok you have no idea you have to go downstairs to get a taxi which will cost you approx 300 baht to get into the city. You are accosted by signs and persons offering limo transportation which costs up to 1000 baht or more. The train service is not used by many because it does not connect with any stops of significence or the existing sky train.

[tigermoth]

All things considered, relative to the magnitude of logistics involved, to operate and maintain a city with a burgeoning population of around 12 million people I personally think they are handling it pretty well...all things considered and everything entailed.

Of Course it could be better as that can and often is said about the logistical administration of any large city of over 1 million people while those living in what is considered a large city of say 1 to 2 million people often bitterly complain about traffic matters and a host of other social problems existing in their thought to be, considered to be large city.

They would have to come to a city like Bangkok and experience the Bangkok "experience" first hand and come to realize that a city of 12 million people is a whole different level of logistics concerning the orderly, or as orderly as can well be expected, administration of such a large city.

There is plenty of room for improvement ...like what is said in the OP...but all things considered they are managing the city well enough by any standard.

Just saying

Cheers

What a load of BS. The traffic lights alone are one of the worst managed as has been stated elsewhere, some timed to benefit wealthy owners of hotels or shopping malls, i.e, the emporium. In almost all countries the timing of lights is a lot different to here where the red light is often on for more than 2 or 3 minutes. In most cities it rarely exceeds 30 seconds so traffic keeps flowing even at a slow pace.