Sex Tourism

[Guest]

I really don't believe 6% of GDP is the low end of estimates of sex tourism. It isn't even close to that.

I never said - or even suggested - that 6% of the GDP is the low end of estimates of sex tourism. I was very clear that I was talking about tourism as a whole. After expressly stating that the 6% figure was on the low end for offical tourism figures, I added: "those figures [that is, the 6-9% figures] only cover money spent on hotels, tours and other "legitimate" operations rather than money spent in nighttime venues." I don't know how it could have been clearer that I was only talking about above-ground tourism figures. Giving you the benefit of the doubt, I will assume that this wasn't the obvious attempt at a strawman argument that it appears to be, but rather that you simply misread my post.

Well, my maid works for three people that I know of. Between the three of us, we give her 9.5k a month.

Your maid must be damn good. I pay my live in maid 6,000 and my Thai staff think she is overpaid. Not one of them pays more than 4,000 a month for a full time maid. Without showing your post to anyone in the office, I mentioned your figure to the staff in my office. They all thought it was ridiculously high. But my maid (and the maids employed by the people who work in my office) only speak Thai, and perhaps English speaking maids command a better salary, so for the sake of argument only, let's go with your figures.

 

As you admit, the NEP BG is still making three times what your highly paid maid makes (and I am confident your NEP figures are too low, but let's not quibble). An income differential of three times is significant, and my point about earnings goes to the fact that p4p allows a large number of people to make substantially more than they would otherwise make. If my employer trebled my salary, I would consider that substantial; perhaps you wouldn't.

 

In other words, even when the numbers are stretched and manipulated to make the difference as low as possible, the BG is still earning at least three times more. And I think we all know that the real differential is really much higher.

 

The larger point about all of this is that there is a much more important point than the precise percentage figure for sex tourism's contribution to total GDP. I don't know the number, I doubt anyone does and I don't see the need to speculate about the number to easily demonstrate the importance of sex tourism. The importance is demonstrated by two simple facts that are evident to anyone who has ever visited Thailand and employs a modicum of commonsense.

 

Fact No. 1: Sex tourism employs a large number of people. A simple walk through Pattaya, the lowers Sois of Sukhumvit, Patpong, Rachadipisek, Soi Thaniya, Patong beach, and many other places in Thailand demonstrates this simple fact.

 

Fact No 2: The large number of people it employs would earn significantly less outside the p4p industry. Even using your figures, the p4p worker makes three times what she would otherwise work. Using more realistic numbers, the difference is even higher.

 

I honestly don't see how anyone could deny these two facts with a straight face. Hence, the significance of sex tourism to Thailand's economy.

[shygye]

gummigut said:

Gadfly:

 

 

What can she earn IN Bangkok? Well, my maid works for three people that I know of. Between the three of us, we give her 9.5k a month.

 

<<burp>>

 

Gummy,

 

You are one cheap charlie. Some Thais give their maid a billion baht in stock.

[Guest]

I remember the article. Not different places. I preface mine because it comes from a BG who grew up there. But I have no reason to believe that she was playing me as there was no financial hook and a mate of mine (who dated her for 6 months) got the same story. But DEFFO the same place.

There was actually a series of articles generally about Farang men and Issan women. You may remember the series; I think there was an article once a week and the series ran to about four articles. There were also at least two other articles about this phenomona. You may be right that we are both talking about the exact same article out of about six possibilities, but I sure wouldn't know how you would know that given the number of articles written on the subject generally. In any event, the larger and more important point is the contribution Farangs make to Issan in terms of housing.

[Guest]

Considering that Thailand?s 2004 GDP is over 150 BILLION USD, are you saying that sex tourism is almost a 10 BILLION USD A YEAR industry for Thailand. That would make it a bigger industry then agriculture.

This is a very good point, but not for the reasons that might immediately come to mind. It is a good point because it demonstrates that absolute contribution to GDP is a red herring.

 

Agriculture is certainly important to Thailand: it employs about 55-60% of the population. You say that agriculture's contribution to GDP is less than one one-fifteenth of GDP ("Thailand?s 2004 GDP is over 150 BILLION USD, are you saying that sex tourism is almost a 10 BILLION USD A YEAR industry for Thailand. That would make it a bigger industry then agriculture"), and I will take that figure at face value. And yet, even though agriculture only contributes one-fifteenth of GDP (simple division using your figures), it is universally recognized as extremely important to Thailand.

 

In the case of agriculture, it is important because, among other reasons, it employs such a large portion of the population even if it only provides one-fifteenth of Thailand's GDP. Similarly, claims that sex tourism is unimportant to Thailand's economy based on low and always speculative (even when they are high) figures on contribution to GDP, also misses a much more important point. Like it or not, it is an industry that provides a large number of people who would otherwise have some of the lowest incomes in Thailand with much much higher incomes. That makes it important.

[bibblies]

Is $10 billion that outlandish? Suppose the number of prostitutes - gogo girls, bar girls, massage, karaoke, brothel, etc - is 250,000 and that means each girl is "worth" $40,000 in productivity. At first, it seems unlikely (because not many girls make that much in salary) but then you have to consider other things. For example, would Thailand's bar takings be half of what they were without the associated girls? (Even in the West clubs sometimes let girls in for free to attract customers so the takings must be related). How much are the bar takings? And then consider things like bar fines (how many bar fines are paid per year in Thailand, I wonder?) and money for short-time rooms, Viagra and condoms. Would any of these revenues materialise without the industry? I doubt it. Taxi fares, airport taxes, hotel charges for sex tourists, double takings at restaurants and other places as these men take their new partners to places they otherwise wouldn't go to... Without even bothering with a back of the envelope calculation, I think the figure's likely enough. (Btw, I've just been watching a TV programme about the US porn industry which says that is worth $10billion too, so why not this?)

[Guest]

Khun Pasuk says the range of estimates on the number of sex workers goes from 65,000 to 2.8 million. She also describes an estimate of 700,000 as seemingly high, but not impossible. She wrote his in 1998: seven years ago. Whatever the exact number, it has certainly increased since 7 years ago. Your estimate on the number of sex workers is probably on the low side.

 

She also estimated the monthly income of go go girls at 50,000 Baht per month in 1996. That was back when the exchange rate was 25 Baht to the dollar. At current exchange rates, this sum amounts to over 75,000 Baht per month.

 

No, sex tourism isn't important to the Thai economy; of course not!

[-.-.-]

Gadfly1-

 

I think that you hit this correctly.

 

Bargirls have it far better off than they would at home as the options in life are few.

 

While I do not claim to be in the Mighty Mouse category of not paying much some great deals can be arraigned outside of the p4p scene.

[ThaiHome]

bibblies said:

Is $10 billion that outlandish? Suppose the number of prostitutes - gogo girls, bar girls, massage, karaoke, brothel, etc - is 250,000 and that means each girl is "worth" $40,000 in productivity. At first, it seems unlikely (because not many girls make that much in salary) but then you have to consider other things. For example, would Thailand's bar takings be half of what they were without the associated girls? (Even in the West clubs sometimes let girls in for free to attract customers so the takings must be related). How much are the bar takings? And then consider things like bar fines (how many bar fines are paid per year in Thailand, I wonder?) and money for short-time rooms, Viagra and condoms. Would any of these revenues materialise without the industry? I doubt it. Taxi fares, airport taxes, hotel charges for sex tourists, double takings at restaurants and other places as these men take their new partners to places they otherwise wouldn't go to... Without even bothering with a back of the envelope calculation, I think the figure's likely enough. (Btw, I've just been watching a TV programme about the US porn industry which says that is worth $10billion too, so why not this?)

 

I was talking about sex tourism only, not what is referred to the local Thai industry that few farangs ever see.

$10 billion huh? Think about that. What I try to do when people talk about such numbers is to put in perspective. One way do so with your $10 billion number is to say that every day in Thailand some 27 million US dollars (that?s 1,054,794,520 baht ) is spent by sex tourists. Now, I don't claim to be expert on the Faranag sex scene and only occasionally go out to NEP or such, but I have never seen anywhere near 1,054,794,520 baht being spent in one night.

As far as your $10 billion number for the US porn industry, that only comes to $40 per person, so it doesn't sound too unreasonable.

But 1,054,794,520 baht every day in Thailand by sex tourists? I doubt it.

You can do the same thing when talking about how many girls are involved. When I thing about large numbers of people, and since I grew up in Southern California, I think about how many people it take to fill up the Rose Bowl. I believe it is a nice round number like 100,000. So when people talk about 200,000 or something girls in the farang business, I try to imagine if all the girls in all the go-go?s and beer bars in Bangkok and Pattaya,, etc would fill up the Rose Bowl twice.

I don?t think so. It is a really big place

 

Anyway, this is an argument with no resolution., but it fun to talk about it sometimes

TH

[shygye]

I have seen more money spent in NEP than Gaysorn Plaza.

 

You are also forgetting the Malaysians popping across the border for

[Zorro]

I don't think there is much to be gained arguing over how much exactly sex tourism brings into the country.

Whichever way you look at it Thailand reaps a rich harvest from sex tourists. I don't think anyone really knows how much is spent directly or indirectly. There are many grey areas when it comes to sex tourism. There are guys with Thai girlfriends and wives who could still be considered sex tourists but their spending would never show up as money spent on sex tourism. There are thousands of guys working in the Gulf with Thai women who they plucked out of the sex industry and made them their wives or girlfriends.

Then there are all the bars and brothels who don't declare the correct amount of income. Sex tourists need hotels food planes etc so there is also that aspect.

Thailand also recieves a lot of income from all the Thai gals who work overseas in Europe Asia the Gulf etc that is a sort of reverse sex tourism if you like.

Many Thais are highly dependent on the sex industry for their bread and butter and it is unlikely that this situation is going to change any time in the near future.