Dear Sir

Unlike Trish Wilson of Australia (letter May 11th) I am a long time reader of the Pattaya Mail both online and during my frequent visits to Pattaya. But like her I am constantly amused (and annoyed) by the two tier pricing arguments that have ranged from entry fees to local attractions to the old favourite ‘how much is a baht bus fare’.

I never ceased to be amazed at the seemingly mean attitude taken by the complainers, 99% of whom are non-Thai nationals.

As Trish Wilson states in her erudite letter, two tier pricing exists throughout the world in one form or another. Many countries issue admission passes/subsidised transport fares and free medical treatment to their citizens and rightly so.

I only wish that all those whinging about the extra costs to visitors would just stop a few seconds and convert the money they are actually being charged back into their own currency for a moment, they would then realise just how good a value they are receiving in Thailand.

For a simple example the baht bus fare from South Pattaya Road to Big C is 10 baht for a non-Thai. The same fare here in London would be at least ฃ3.50 (baht 210) and a lot more if the traffic is slow. Even by public transport bus the fare would be 150 baht.

I have heard the argument put forward that some farangs working or living in retirement in Thailand cannot afford the extra 5 baht they are charged over the 5 baht fare the Thais pay. However, I never fail to see those same complainers propping up a local bar or being unable to tip their bargirl.

A plea to all visitors, please just work out the wonderful value you receive for your money in Thailand, compare the friendly service you receive from the Thais with the often moronic and couldn’t care less attitude you receive from so called ‘more economically developed countries’ then stop and give thanks to your God that you are privileged to be able to visit such a beautiful country, with wonderful people, superb weather and you will then count your blessings.

Greenwich, London, England

Sir,

I would like to take issue with the Australian contributor Trish Wilson (Mailbag, Pattaya Mail, Vol IX, no. 19) regarding her comments in respect of Thailand’s two-tiered pricing policy.

She writes that it is only fair as, ‘The Thai locals contribute in their taxes no doubt to their own national parks and therefore should have a reduction in price when going there. In our town we are issued a pass to get into our parks free, although a certain amount that we pay in our local rates...goes toward these passes. Then all tourists without these passes are charged to enter.’

Not just tourists but locals as well. Ratepayers in an Australian local area can obtain a pass that allows them to enter national parks for free as well as park their cars at the local beaches without paying. However, if you happen to be resident of an area, but are merely renting, then you cannot obtain such a pass.

I grew up on Sydney’s northern beaches and never owned any property in the area. Therefore, despite the fact that I had lived and worked in the area for most of my life and paid my Federal taxes, I could not, for example, park my car in the council car park without paying. Even if I produced my driver’s licence, clearly indicating a local address, I still had to pay. The Federal government apportions monetary grants to the State governments, which then hand out money to local councils. I paid my taxes, ergo, I was also paying for the upkeep of my local area by the local council, yet I was still discriminated against.

In England, museums in London exercise a much fairer two-tiered pricing policy. Everyone pays the same for entry, be they black, white or of indeterminate cultural heritage. The only exceptions are old-age pensioners, students and the unemployed, no matter whether they are male, female, white or black.

This, to my mind, is a far more justifiable system. It is not based on ethnicity but on affordability. After all, where is the justice in charging a foreigner - who may have scrimped and saved for a three week holiday - two or three times the price of entry to a tourist destination and then have that person witness a Thai national drive up in a brand new Mercedes-Benz and cough up the miniscule Thai price.

Thailand is now far more reliant upon, and geared up for, tourism. Making tourists feel second-class by imposing a form of pricing apartheid may eventually lead to a drop in tourism revenue, thereby disadvantaging the very people it is designed to help.

That some other countries impose similar two-tiered pricing policies does not make Thailand correct in doing the same. Surely the country would derive greater benefit and international kudos if it ditched this form of discrimination in favour of a more enlightened pricing policy based on affordability rather than ethnicity.

Dear Editor,

Two months ago Dr. Nightingale wrote in response to my letter on vegetarianism that laws should require that vegetarian food be properly labeled. How timely! Just recently three Americans filed a lawsuit against McDonald’s for putting beef fat in their ‘vegetarian’ french-fries. Another American filed a lawsuit against Wendy’s for mixing gelatin - which comes from animal bones and tissue, in a vegetarian dish. In Hawaii, I know of a least one Thai Restaurant which saturates the ‘vegetarian’ dishes with fish sauce, while a Chinese restaurant cooks ‘vegetarian’ food in chicken stock.

Once after ordering spaghetti and tomato sauce in Pattaya the restaurant added meat sauce. When I complained, they took the plate into the kitchen and hid the meat sauce under the spaghetti thinking I’d be too stupid to figure it out.

Meat eaters think this is a joke but it’s not funny to people who believe its an atrocity to eat murdered animals. It’s not funny to vegetarian Hindus and vegetarian Buddhists when restaurants make a mockery of their religious beliefs. It’s not funny to someone who is recovering from a massive heart attack and knows that consuming cholesterol may kill him.

Consumer fraud is no joke, especially when it violates other people’s religious and/or moral beliefs and puts our health in extreme danger. What kind of human being would think that’s funny?

Sincerely,

UK

Editor;

Nang Nual dining area over bay to be destroyed. What, again? Come on guys, I thought it was pretty funny the first time you printed this nonsense a few months back but I’m afraid if you keep it up I’ll find it hard to take the remaining content of your fine Weekly seriously. Having said that, it’s good to see your newspaper lighten up a bit with the occasional flimflam such as this.

As for the Nang Nual, I’ve got my table booked for July 3rd overlooking the bay.

See you there!

Pattaya