Government asks Tourism ministry to come up with some cheap travel insurance options to pull in more tourists

[wvavin]

The sad fact is Thailand's way of managing anything is not being trusted globally. 

[Arandora]

1 hour ago, Bill Miller said:

Why not a governmental scheme for a non-profit catastrophic insurance coverage for all visiting foreigners?
Make it 90-day units and renew at every 90 days reporting.
That would at least make the reporting schedule sort of make sense.

I am a visiting foreigner who stays for 4 months, first on a 90 day visa then exit and return after a few days on a 30 day Visa Exempt and don't do 90 day reporting. That isn't for visiting foreigners, it is for staying foreigners! 

And the first thing I do every year when booking is to renew my travel insurance with the requisite amount of cover for medical expenses in particular like the majority of responsible visiting foreigners do for whatever the period of their visit. Why should irresponsible visiting foreigners aka Tourists who do not take out insurance now think that probably more expensive insurance than they can get at home is a good idea?

The answer is compulsory travel insurance taken out at home before they are granted a visa or allowed to check in at the airport if on a Visa Exempt entry with Proof Of Onward Travel as they are supposed to (but not enforced in every country by every airline!) Chances of that? Do pigs fly over LOS? 

[Lokie]

Thats what I like about LOS, they do make you Smile.... ha ha ha ha ha ha............ 

[gbswales]

There is something that they could do which would have an enormous impact on tourism.  Legalise and Regulate the sex industry, at the same time restricting it to designated areas.

 

Like it or not many people come to Thailand for cheap sex with young looking males and females (NOT underage!) and regulating the industry would make it easier to stop the abuse of under 18's

Having regulation could help weed out the criminal elements, ensure regular health checks, make punters feel safer and provide better conditions for the sex workers.  Using designated areas means that the family tourists could if they wish easily avoid the districts so it would be a win for all types of tourism. I suspect that a cross section of all tourists are interested in this scene, if only as spectators!

 

It could be more or less self financing because sex workers would become legal employees paying tax and a huge amount could be saved by avoiding unnecessary court actions against citizens trying to make a living.

 

The only losers would be the police who would find one of their income streams dramatically reduced - meaning this will never happen!

[YetAnother]

9 hours ago, webfact said:

The government stated that they will not be paying any of the premiums themselves.

i see; so have anyone other than us pay it ; sounds like taxes

[YetAnother]

1 hour ago, Lokie said:

Thats what I like about LOS, they do make you Smile.... ha ha ha ha ha ha............ 

is entertaining;sadly, at times

[HiSoLowSoNoSo]

Trying to squeeze out more money from the tourists?

Maybe they need it,  interesting readings in The Economist today about Thailand https://espresso.economist.com/e22c686bc771d5872150738b15f3e533

[Dave67]

2 hours ago, saminoz said:

What happened to the "Like" feature?

 

I disappeared due to "Maintenace" either that or brake failure and slippery road

[ratcatcher]

44 minutes ago, gbswales said:

There is something that they could do which would have an enormous impact on tourism.  Legalise and Regulate the sex industry, at the same time restricting it to designated areas.

 

Like it or not many people come to Thailand for cheap sex with young looking males and females (NOT underage!) and regulating the industry would make it easier to stop the abuse of under 18's

Having regulation could help weed out the criminal elements, ensure regular health checks, make punters feel safer and provide better conditions for the sex workers.  Using designated areas means that the family tourists could if they wish easily avoid the districts so it would be a win for all types of tourism. I suspect that a cross section of all tourists are interested in this scene, if only as spectators!

 

It could be more or less self financing because sex workers would become legal employees paying tax and a huge amount could be saved by avoiding unnecessary court actions against citizens trying to make a living.

 

The only losers would be the police who would find one of their income streams dramatically reduced - meaning this will never happen!

Good points indeed. If only the Thai  sex industry was only used by tourists looking for "cheap sex".

The fact is that the real "sex industry," not that which is visible and colorful and controlled by benevolent Police departments in Pattaya, Bangkok, Phuket etc, but the huge underground industry frequented by Thais, is not likely to change any time soon. Every town in Thailand has a place/places where women are available for men's pleasure.

You cannot create "sex ghettos for tourists" and pretend the rest of the country is somehow free of this "blight).

[Dave67]

4 hours ago, malt25 said:

You think they understand irony ?

No, I don't, hence the constant failure to see it

[Bill Miller]

2 hours ago, Arandora said:

I am a visiting foreigner who stays for 4 months, first on a 90 day visa then exit and return after a few days on a 30 day Visa Exempt and don't do 90 day reporting. That isn't for visiting foreigners, it is for staying foreigners! 

And the first thing I do every year when booking is to renew my travel insurance with the requisite amount of cover for medical expenses in particular like the majority of responsible visiting foreigners do for whatever the period of their visit. Why should irresponsible visiting foreigners aka Tourists who do not take out insurance now think that probably more expensive insurance than they can get at home is a good idea?

The answer is compulsory travel insurance taken out at home before they are granted a visa or allowed to check in at the airport if on a Visa Exempt entry with Proof Of Onward Travel as they are supposed to (but not enforced in every country by every airline!) Chances of that? Do pigs fly over LOS? 

Then obviously you are already covered, and would not need to avail yourself of such a program.
There is no such thing as a "staying foreigner" vs a "visiting foreigner" in the regard of the Thai government. You can only get varying lengths of "permission to stay", unless you have the wherewithal and luck to win one of 100 slots for a permanent residency.

Edited July 31, 2017 by Bill Miller

[pattayadgw]

Thats a bit of a 'telltale' and 'bold statement' from the government... 'to increase tourism'..... when i thought TAT were head over heels with the influx of all these 'quality' tourists... NOT........... the place is like a ghost town :) and that's country wide!!

[bazza73]

2 hours ago, Arandora said:

I am a visiting foreigner who stays for 4 months, first on a 90 day visa then exit and return after a few days on a 30 day Visa Exempt and don't do 90 day reporting. That isn't for visiting foreigners, it is for staying foreigners! 

And the first thing I do every year when booking is to renew my travel insurance with the requisite amount of cover for medical expenses in particular like the majority of responsible visiting foreigners do for whatever the period of their visit. Why should irresponsible visiting foreigners aka Tourists who do not take out insurance now think that probably more expensive insurance than they can get at home is a good idea?

The answer is compulsory travel insurance taken out at home before they are granted a visa or allowed to check in at the airport if on a Visa Exempt entry with Proof Of Onward Travel as they are supposed to (but not enforced in every country by every airline!) Chances of that? Do pigs fly over LOS? 

See how you get on with your travel insurance once you have hit 70.

People assume if they have travel insurance they are covered for all risks. They forget the majority of insurers will put a lot of effort into rejecting a claim. They don't get to build those big shiny buildings in cities around the world by being open-handed.

[Arandora]

2 minutes ago, bazza73 said:

See how you get on with your travel insurance once you have hit 70.

People assume if they have travel insurance they are covered for all risks. They forget the majority of insurers will put a lot of effort into rejecting a claim. They don't get to build those big shiny buildings in cities around the world by being open-handed.

Both myself and my wife have turned 70 and have exactly the same level of cover including for Pre Existing Medical Conditions that we have had for several years. Every claim we have made has been successful including hospital costs incurred in Phuket when my wife was diagnosed and partly treated for breast cancer and repatriation costs to get us home for completion of the treatment, fully successful and now fully covered after our return. Also the full costs of our return to Thailand last November other than recoverable from various bookings when she had to have another none connected operation, again successful, again covered  when we returned in January having been given clearance from the op to fly. People who assume they are covered for all risks are their own worst enemies but the worst are those who don't take any insurance at all. 

[Peterphuket]

I think, it is not necessary....it is better that they provide more safety on the water, namel again a accident with touristboats in the Pangngabay.

That is many times more important.

But I think...it will be said to deaf people at the 'Holy' government!!

[Arandora]

21 minutes ago, Bill Miller said:

Then obviously you are already covered, and would not need to avail yourself of such a program.
There is no such thing as a "staying foreigner" vs a "visiting foreigner" in the regard of the Thai government. You can only get varying lengths of "permission to stay", unless you have the wherewithal and luck to win one of 100 slots for a permanent residency.

You have missed the point. The object of this programme is for visitors/tourists who should be responsible for their own insurance not the government or the Thai people. It is not meant for people who have to report every 90 days or shouldn't be. That is their responsibility. 

[Parsve]

To require visitors to have a travel insurance is not surprising in itself, most countries actually require it. "the weird thing is possibly the cause, that it currently costs the Thai health care too much with all the tourists who need medical care".

As far as I know, you get no medical care if you don't pay. As a farang you get to pay significantly more than the thai. The current system provides an income to the health care system, not the other way around (life-sustaining medical treatment can be given without payment, but nothing else). 

Regarding bombs and other woes, car accidents for instance, and the more is the principal functioning of insurance that they cover what you yourself caused, not the second person. Therefore, it might be a good idea to first make sure that all thai people had a liability insurance. 

As regards traffic accidents, one should look out for to what the law and the insurance companies are saying is different. The law says that you can rent/drive a car or a motorbike if you have an international driving license and not have OA view. In the latter case, you must have Thai driving license. Most insurance companies, on the other hand, says that the insurance is not valid if the driver does not have Thai driving license. 
 

Edited July 31, 2017 by Parsve
missed motorbike

[French mate]

18 minutes ago, Parsve said:

To require visitors to have a travel insurance is not surprising in itself, most countries actually require it. "the weird thing is possibly the cause, that it currently costs the Thai health care too much with all the tourists who need medical care".

As far as I know, you get no medical care if you don't pay. As a farang you get to pay significantly more than the thai. The current system provides an income to the health care system, not the other way around (life-sustaining medical treatment can be given without payment, but nothing else). 

Regarding bombs and other woes, car accidents for instance, and the more is the principal functioning of insurance that they cover what you yourself caused, not the second person. Therefore, it might be a good idea to first make sure that all thai people had a liability insurance. 

As regards traffic accidents, one should look out for to what the law and the insurance companies are saying is different. The law says that you can rent/drive a car or a motorbike if you have an international driving license and not have OA view. In the latter case, you must have Thai driving license. Most insurance companies, on the other hand, says that the insurance is not valid if the driver does not have Thai driving license. 
 

And its funny when you think how easy is the Thai driving licence to get, compared to the foreign one.
This say you can convert your international driving licence in a thai one without much hassle and even with a touris visa (but not with a visa exempt)

[YetAnother]

9 hours ago, Dave67 said:

You mean it's not going to be quality insurance?

hahaha; can you imagine all those non-thai-speaking folks, all stressed out in a thai hospital, public one , doubtless, trying to cope with thai insurance ?!

lame brain plan

[YetAnother]

am i missing something here ? increasing the cost and complexity and stress will INcrease tourism ? am not convinced this was ever a real problem anyway (supposed huge losses at the hospital levels);

at a practical level, say some guy from the maldives comes in (not english , mind you) and HAS adequate insurance, are the thai immigration folks going to got thru his docs to verify that ? guarantee, they will demand (the thai way) that he buy EXtra ins; he will be pissed and everyone walks away unhappy

[bazza73]

2 hours ago, Arandora said:

Both myself and my wife have turned 70 and have exactly the same level of cover including for Pre Existing Medical Conditions that we have had for several years. Every claim we have made has been successful including hospital costs incurred in Phuket when my wife was diagnosed and partly treated for breast cancer and repatriation costs to get us home for completion of the treatment, fully successful and now fully covered after our return. Also the full costs of our return to Thailand last November other than recoverable from various bookings when she had to have another none connected operation, again successful, again covered  when we returned in January having been given clearance from the op to fly. People who assume they are covered for all risks are their own worst enemies but the worst are those who don't take any insurance at all. 

 I don't have insurance in Thailand. I have had self-insurance for the last 8 years, i.e. a bank account earmarked for medical emergencies. I have top level private medical insurance in Australia. Flight cancellations - have never had one.

So I guess I'm one of the people you classify as the worst. Over 8 years, I've paid  nothing to health and travel insurers here. How much have you paid in the same time?

[Arandora]

24 minutes ago, bazza73 said:

 I don't have insurance in Thailand. I have had self-insurance for the last 8 years, i.e. a bank account earmarked for medical emergencies. I have top level private medical insurance in Australia. Flight cancellations - have never had one.

So I guess I'm one of the people you classify as the worst. Over 8 years, I've paid  nothing to health and travel insurers here. How much have you paid in the same time?

Missing the point again. This insurance is cheap travel insurance options to pull in more tourists and to repeat my comment that doesn't apply to you "but the worst are those who don't take any insurance at all." 

.

[Thechook]

12 hours ago, saminoz said:

What happened to the "Like" feature?

 

It's been removed

[Salerno]

13 hours ago, saminoz said:

What happened to the "Like" feature?

 

 

1 hour ago, Thechook said:

It's been removed

 

 

Edited July 31, 2017 by Salerno

[Thian]

Are there also other Asian countries pushing for travelinsurances or is it only thailand?

 

Maybe they could start making the whole country a bit more safe by teaching the thai about responsability?

[Grumpy Duck]

19 hours ago, Dave67 said:

Another occasion when I wished the "Like" feature was working

It seems to have neen changed overnight from the old like to a heart icon in the lower right corner. You can even select an emote

[bazza73]

8 hours ago, Arandora said:

Missing the point again. This insurance is cheap travel insurance options to pull in more tourists and to repeat my comment that doesn't apply to you "but the worst are those who don't take any insurance at all." 

.

I'm making a different point to the one you are making.

[gk10002000]

19 hours ago, lonewolf99 said:

Most tourists ( I always do) have holiday insurance - what is needed is the operators and businesses  to have proper insurance - Snorkeling trips, jet skis, ferry boats, coach companies, parascending operators, taxi companies, zip line rides, fair ground rides, parachute rides, car rental, motorbike rental.......have I covered everything that kills and maims tourists here  ? If I have not please add to the list..... 

Add Tour buses, Aircon buses, 

[darren84310]

Why not just add a few hundred baht to visa costs..... 20 million tourists should be able to cover the small % who need help. 100 baht should do it for those who don't get proper cover.

[UPDEHSOI]

On 7/30/2017 at 9:27 PM, over it said:

You've shot yourself in the foot, again. Travel insurance won't increase tourist traffic.

 

A good exchange rate, cheap whores, and no scams will. 

Okay, tell me where I can any two of the three...and I'm on me way.