OPINION

Booze laws a farce

Re: "New excise taxes set to rake in B12bn", (BP, Sept 17).

Authorities in Thailand certainly do seem to have a somewhat strange and illogical attitude to the level, and the way they in which they impose so-called "sin taxes".

If the proposed significant rise in the levy imposed on alcoholic drinks and cigarettes is really designed to raise revenue for the government, then it would be logical for it to remove the current ridiculous and singularly ineffective practice of prohibiting the selling of alcohol at certain times of the day, as to do so would enable the government to accrue a much higher tax revenue from such sales, 24 hours a day.

In any case, this current limitation on the sale of alcohol is not universally applied. Two days ago, while visiting Bangkok, I sat in a restaurant at 2.30pm enjoying a steak lunch, but was refused a cold beer to accompany my meal. A few metres away, however, there was a pub openly selling beer to its clientele, apparently perfectly legally -- or perhaps they had paid local law enforcers, or some other officials, to turn a blind eye to their illegal trade.

The very next day, I was refused a glass of wine at a restaurant owned by a chain of wine shops when having another slightly late lunch, and was told that I would also have to wait until 5pm to purchase 12 bottles of wine that I wanted to take home, upcountry. I was so irritated that I had to go all the way to another of their stores in a shopping mall, which I knew traded all day, to make my purchase mid-afternoon, without any legal obstacle being raised, let alone imposed.

Let's be grown-up and admit that prohibition does not deter the consumption of "sinful" goods and services, it simply makes it inconvenient for the consumer and the seller, and turns legal markets into illegal ones. Similarly, excessive hikes in indirect taxation on alcohol and tobacco products have been shown to be incentives for cross-border smuggling of such merchandise. After all, if it is apparently so easy for a high-profile and officially monitored politician to leave the country without being detected, then it should not be too difficult to ship a few ciggies and a lorry load of illicit booze into Thailand through one of its porous borders with neighbouring countries, should it?

In countries where corruption among officials is endemic, one might be excused of cynically suggesting that actively creating illegal markets in these perverse ways is intentionally and simply designed to provide further lucrative avenues for graft. But, of course, that would be sinful!

Disgruntled Consumer, in his Sept 22 letter, "Running from rivals", claims Thai rice is inferior, and that Italian and French loaves have disappeared from consumer outlets. I wouldn't even get into the further content of that letter. It is not worth refuting. The supremacy of Thai rice needs no defence. If Disgruntled Consumer wants Italian and French breads, I suggest he go to hotel bakeries where these breads are readily available. The major supermarkets and hypermarkets do not sell these breads anymore simply because of very low demand. Most Thais somehow prefer packaged white bread which they consider sufficient. Every country in the world practises protectionism for their own products.

I am loath to tell those who complain that if they do not like it here, go home. However, if the trains and buses run better back home, if there are less traffic jams back home, if medical care is better back home. If you can get your grocery products, your French breads and Italian breads more easily back home, if you don't get high blood pressure from eating rice back home and so on, then, as rude as it sounds, you don't belong here. Just go back home. Living in any country in the world other than one's own presents a new challenge. Many people are never up to it, and never will be.

Reading Disgruntled Consumer's letter online really left me swirling. Does this person expect to find all the comforts of his or her country in Thailand? If so, Disgruntled sure found the wrong place to live. This reminds me of the great Russian exodus to the Brighton Beach area in New York City years ago. Little Russia, or Little Moscow to some, was nirvana. Others who could not adjust to the culture shock, the lack of Russian food, the freedom to pick and chose, those who could not cope, simply packed up and went back home to Mother Russia.

I think Disgruntled Consumer should either learn to eat rice, (or locally grown potatoes), forget French or Italian breads, or, sorry to say it, go back home. Why remain disgruntled and complain for the rest of your life. Life is short. Don't be miserable.

Pintira Hannarong's citation of North Korea's "revenge" against US or its allies for bombing its country during 1950 to 1953 then killing 3 million North Koreans (PostBag, Sept 20) may be partly correct. The referred bombing could be one of the factors for its current obsession of developing nuclear weapons but not an overwhelming factor. Furthermore, the North Korea population then was at 9.5 million in 1950 and 8.9 million in 1953. Certainly, many were killed but not one-third of the population.

The most eye-opening explanations to date of why North Korea's obsession was in a recent article titled "Why North Korea went nuclear", in the Journal of the BBC's World Histories (October/November 17) written by Nicola Leveringhaus who explained the obsession and its development so clear, sharp and comprehensive.

The obsession originated with the grandfather, Kim Il-sung, driven by three factors: Security, prestige and economics. The drive was followed by the son and now the grandson. The writer is an expert on war studies and a lecturer at King's College, London University.

Re: "Tourism resilient despite baht", (BP, Sept 20).

Permanent secretary for Tourism Pongpanu Svetarundra said between January and August this year there have been 23.5 million tourists visiting Thailand, generating revenue of 1.2 trillion baht. My home calculator could not handle figures like this, so I resorted to asking Google how much each tourist spent while in the Land of Smiles. The figure of 52,000 baht per person was quoted.

Based on the fact that visitors from Europe are declining and visitors from China are on the increase, could there be a miscalculation on the part of Mr Pongpanu? Just how are these figures compiled? Could it be that the income box on the arrival card is the source?

Re: "Effects of tourism 'must be measured'", (BP, Sept 22).

I fully agree. It's not just an environmental problem -- Thailand has suffered a lot of negative effects from the tourism boom. It seems those in the tourism industry, including authorities, have sold everything we have for income from tourist business. We are proud of being one of the world's popular destinations, so we should consider the quality of our guests as tourists. Statistics say US and European tourists have a far higher spending rate compared with that of Chinese. Now, it is time to look at them by value of income and cost, not by plain numbers.

The vehement hate expressed by Myanmar Buddhists against the Rohingya, "Kill them all", is reminiscent of the German attitude toward the Jews in Germany during the rise of Nazism. It is disgusting. What is worse is the lack of intervention by world powers. History is simply repeating itself in another part of the world, at a later time.

When 400,000 illegal Bengalis -- who are known to the world as Rohingya -- fled across the border, mainly engineered by external Islamic forces to have this effect, without regard to their own people's sufferings, the world media hungry for raw materials for their news products, the human rightists and advocates who must show work to the donors to keep their jobs, quickly hooked on this and called it atrocities and ethnic cleansing. Many world-class leaders are also conned by the well oiled and very efficient overseas Islamic powers-backed media and propaganda machines.

Inept Myanmar military information handling (theirs outdated by 20 years), and some local thugs, looters and arsonists helped make this picture more plausible and played into the jihadists' hands.

The news and right activists say the illegal Bengalis have restrictions on getting married and on numbers of babies they can have; now the Bangladeshi officials at the border camps are fretting at the sizes of the families and fear for the population boom at the camps and started distributing birth control education and control items. One 40-year-old guy who has two wives and 14 children is cited to refuse these controls because of his religious beliefs.

When Myanmar makes laws that require people to have practise monogamy, everybody in the country regardless of race or religion must follow the country's law.

If one wants to have many wives and breed like bunnies, we respect their faith and will let them go to countries where they can practise their faith and religious belief freely -- though for most Myanmar, this is not a case of religion but a case of national security.

There are 3-4 million "Myanmar Muslims" in Myanmar, apart from the illegal Bengalis, who abide by local laws and coexist peacefully. There are more than 1,000 mosques all over the country.

I suggest the human rightists and the advocates take 10,000 Bengali refugees to their own countries, give them full human rights to take four wives and 40 children. Then these rightists will not be so scornful of Aung San Suu Kyi.

I suggest Mr Boris Johnson takes in 400,000 of these refugees to Britain because their forefathers created this problem to make themselves rich and make Great Britain great, instead of taking the moral high ground at United Talking place. Only then will justice be served.

Re: "Weapons buys need scrutiny", (Editorial, Sept 21).

It is quite obvious from a quick glance at any history book that the Thai military is free to do just about anything they wish. If things are not going the way they desire, a coup will be organised from which they will soon become a legitimate government.

That is followed by an amnesty absolving them from any crime or punishment for their deeds. This is the ultimate in power and its use, or abuse, whichever way you wish to see it. With this type of almighty power who do you think is going to complain about the misuse of funds to buy unused hardware? Considering they have the whole of the country's income to distribute, with no need to disclose their behaviour and no one to answer to, the purchase of military goods is but a small worry.

Deputy PM and Defence Minister Prawit Wongsuwon told reporters who asked him about the scandalous airship purchase to "ask the army", (InQuote, Sept 21). But he's the boss and should know how the army is spending taxpayers' money.

Well I had to laugh out loud watching the US First Lady (Flotus) lecturing the world about the dangers of cyber bullying. It would appear that she never discussed this speech with her husband (Potus), an undeniable expert on the subject matter.

They were even laughing in "Nambia".