News Forum - Bangkok crackdown on street vendors: Pay up or pave the way

[Thaiger]

Bangkok City Hall is set to implement stringent measures aimed at regulating street vendors, targeting their income, enforcing tax compliance, and ultimately eliminating hawking on pavements. Bangkok Governor Chadchart Sittipunt announced these measures following a meeting focused on enhancing the orderliness of the city’s surroundings. New regulations for vending on streets and in other public … …

The story Bangkok crackdown on street vendors: Pay up or pave the way as seen on Thaiger News.

Read the full story

[LeReynard]

I miss the street vendors even if there were a bit too many of them in some locations. Since they've gone I don't see so much corn sold. Every vendor has a livelihood, that is grassroots capitalism. And concern for the little guy, and the grassroots, is socialism. I can't think of a political reason to hate the small vendors.

[rattlesnake]

50 minutes ago, LeReynard said:

I miss the street vendors even if there were a bit too many of them in some locations. Since they've gone I don't see so much corn sold. Every vendor has a livelihood, that is grassroots capitalism. And concern for the little guy, and the grassroots, is socialism. I can't think of a political reason to hate the small vendors.

The political motive is to tax everything and everyone based on the Western model. Sad to see Thailand in the hands of globalists (c.f. Thavisin's recent visit to France, during which he and Macron discussed Thailand's "integration" (I would say "dissolution") into the global market.

[Grumpish]

11 minutes ago, rattlesnake said:

The political motive is to tax everything and everyone based on the Western model. Sad to see Thailand in the hands of globalists (c.f. Thavisin's recent visit to France, during which he and Macron discussed Thailand's "integration" (I would say "dissolution") into the global market.

The global market exists, and Thailand is already a part of it, albeit on much smaller scale than China or India - so get over it. Protectionism and isolationism don't work any better than unfettered free trade, and crazy conspiracy theories about an unelected cabal plotting world domination (the WEF) are just that - crazy conspiracy theories.

[rattlesnake]

15 minutes ago, Grumpish said:

The global market exists, and Thailand is already a part of it, albeit on much smaller scale than China or India - so get over it. Protectionism and isolationism don't work any better than unfettered free trade, and crazy conspiracy theories about an unelected cabal plotting world domination (the WEF) are just that - crazy conspiracy theories.

Well that brings us to the difference between the signifier (what a word actually means) and the signified (what it is used to refer to in a given context). "Global market" does not mean the same thing in Macron's mouth as it does in Mohammed bin Salman's.

Given the current geopolitical shifts towards multipolarity, and events such as the recent China-Arab States Cooperation Forum (during which Chinese President Xi Jinping emphasized China's commitment to partnership for peace and stability, in line with the BRICS which now includes UAE and Egypt, with Saudi Arabia also invited to join), I am confident in the future and Thailand will follow whoever is calling the shots (and that will not be the collective West).

 

[SnapDragon]

Could Thailand pay for itself without tourism?

As BRICS develops in the future, a country's currency might well depend on what it has to offer. If, and it's almost a sure thing, that the Dollar US disappears as the world currency, countries will be free to print their own money. The value of those individual currencies will reflect what the country is offering. That could be resources, manufacturing ability, food etc. In Thailand's case it could be tourism.

Take away the tourism and what does Thailand offer?

[rattlesnake]

2 minutes ago, SnapDragon said:

Could Thailand pay for itself without tourism?

As BRICS develops in the future, a country's currency might well depend on what it has to offer. If, and it's almost a sure thing, that the Dollar US disappears as the world currency, countries will be free to print their own money. The value of those individual currencies will reflect what the country is offering. That could be resources, manufacturing ability, food etc. In Thailand's case it could be tourism.

Take away the tourism and what does Thailand offer?

Overdependency on tourism is a bad thing, as when the tourists don't come for various reasons, the country suffers immensely, without any recourse. Thailand used to have a good balance between tourism and domestic industries (rice exports of course, but also seafood, rubber and the automotive industry), which gave it resilience when people stopped coming here on holiday (such as during the 2011 floods or the 2014 coup). It just needs to strive to find that balance again IMO.

[Fanta]

That’s a shame. Street food is great and these people are low income earners. 

[TedG]

1 hour ago, SnapDragon said:

Could Thailand pay for itself without tourism?

As BRICS develops in the future, a country's currency might well depend on what it has to offer. If, and it's almost a sure thing, that the Dollar US disappears as the world currency, countries will be free to print their own money. The value of those individual currencies will reflect what the country is offering. That could be resources, manufacturing ability, food etc. In Thailand's case it could be tourism.

Take away the tourism and what does Thailand offer?

Like the Thai baht in Thailand? 

[TedG]

13 minutes ago, Fanta said:

That’s a shame. Street food is great and these people are low income earners. 

Bangkok has bigger fish to fry then to crack down on low-income people scratching out a living. 

[MrStretch]

How to kill an industry with short-sightedness.

All that's going to happen here is that people are going to be driven out of their small businesses, and the number of unemployed or underemployed will increase.

One of the great cultural draws to Bangkok is the amazing street food scene and has been so for many years.  They are just sanitizing the city and will eventually just make it like every other, without it's special flavor and inexpensive food for the locals, as well as the tourists.

Working on hygiene, making sure walkways are reasonably passable are all laudable goals.  Killing off a cultural icon in the process seems counterproductive.

[LeReynard]

1 hour ago, rattlesnake said:

Overdependency on tourism is a bad thing, as when the tourists don't come for various reasons, the country suffers immensely, without any recourse. Thailand used to have a good balance between tourism and domestic industries (rice exports of course, but also seafood, rubber and the automotive industry), which gave it resilience when people stopped coming here on holiday (such as during the 2011 floods or the 2014 coup). It just needs to strive to find that balance again IMO.

Tourism doesn't just mean holidaymakers, it also includes healthcare. And nowadays, digital nomads also.

[ChrisS]

"The 58 year old Chadchart clarified that vendors who legally occupied public areas for a year, with a monthly income exceeding 25,000 baht must vacate these spaces and seek to rent other areas to continue their business."

As these vendors are a cash business I suspect that no matter how successful these vendors are they will always come it at under 25,000 baht in their tax declaration.

"In line with the governor’s desire to maintain order and cleanliness on  Bangkok’s streets, he emphasised that street vending will be phased out over time in favour of commercial areas. Vendors will need to relocate and conduct their trade in commercial areas."

I get that these vendors need to be regulated to keep the streets traffic and foot traffic flowing and to ensure cleanliness and vermin control are happening but sanitising the city will make it just another modern city and less attractive to tourists and visitors.