Tourism or Infrastructure

[lunar_eclipse_82]

---

Ok there are some presidentials who says promote tourism, others say promote infrastructure

which are you?


for me dili ko ganahan e promote ang toursim, lain lang basta dili lang kana, take Thailand for an example. diba daghan kaayo mga amerkano sa ilang nasod, pero ang nasod nila pobre raman gihapon, ni daghan pa ang prostitution..
so para nako the best remedy for our government is reform, strict laws must be applied for the government employess and officials. dako kaayo silag sweldo tapos ang ilang mga lihok. kuwang, dapat gani kanang law like death penalty para lang unta na nila.

[reptoid]

Tourism should have an infrastructure, a sustainable plan. Industrialization (in the traditional sense) is not compatible with ambitions to be a hotspot for tourism. We (as an island) can have one or the other, but not both!

Current schizophrenic policies born out of a fractured political system of local and central government (not to mention secret personal agendas) will forever keep us stuck in limbo, unable to make the necessary changes to enable the growth, development and employment either scenario (if adequately supported) would undoubtedly bring to Cebu.

[pinoyapache]

eco-tourism in tandem with agriculture is good for cebu.

[BananaQ]

We can promote both. Tourism needs infrastructure as well. Or do you mean to choose between tourism and industrialization? Why not do both? We have almost 100 million mouths to feed here, we have to use what we can, earn what we can.

Tourism isn't so bad, per se. It's true that Thailand has a lot of both tourists and prostitutes, but other countries that have lots of tourists do not necessarily have lots of prostitutes. France, Italy, Spain have lots of tourists, they're not known for prostitutes. In Asia, Malaysia and Singapore have more tourists than the Philippines but prostitution aren't so bad compared here. Please note too. Don't consider Thailand poor anymore, they're not as rich as other countries, but average GDP per capita in Thailand is like twice that of the Philippines already.

[raphz]

thailand is richer than philippines because of tourism, foreign investments and agriculture to name a few and thats because of good governance. they are much improving right now that the philippines in time will only see its smoke. they have invested billions of their money to infrastructure to improve mainly for foreign investments and tourism.

since our tourism and foriegn investments are already here then we have to developed our infrastructure to improve but unfortunately we do have a BIG PROBLEM OF GOOD GOVERNANCE HERE.

[cebu-future]

Ok there are some presidentials who says promote tourism, others say promote infrastructure

which are you?


for me dili ko ganahan e promote ang toursim, lain lang basta dili lang kana, take Thailand for an example. diba daghan kaayo mga amerkano sa ilang nasod, pero ang nasod nila pobre raman gihapon, ni daghan pa ang prostitution..
so para nako the best remedy for our government is reform, strict laws must be applied for the government employess and officials. dako kaayo silag sweldo tapos ang ilang mga lihok. kuwang, dapat gani kanang law like death penalty para lang unta na nila.

You absolutely dont understand the situation in thailand bro. Thais are one of the most happiest people in ASIA. That is why you can rarely see Thais that are working overseas as a helper an maid etc. They are financially well off than Filipino and the country is more progressive. Hapit na sila mahimo nga japan pero na biktima ra na sila sa crisis way back in the 90's. Thai baht is stronger than peso. Barato papliton thailand, that is why Filipinos buy there by bulk og dire ibaligya sa pinas. Most cars in the Philippines that are for sale gikan na thailand. Branded clothes that are available in Philippine gikan na thailand. Why are you so much affected with prostitution? Even without foreigners in this land, naa lang gihapon prosti. Remember ang tawo bisag naay partner, asawa, boyfriend etc mangita jud na lain. Kay lisod daw mokaon pirmi og the same nga pagkaon.

Going back to the question, it is great if we can have both. Tourism and Infractructures.

[Tarmac]

Tourism and infrastructure are not mutually exclusive. They go hand in hand. By investing in infrastructure you are also investing in tourism.

One of the major reasons why Thailand's tourism industry is so successful is precisely because of infrastructure. Phuket was nothing before, a sleepy backwater. Then the government invested heavily in its infrastructure--a modern expressway, roads, airport. Now it's become a world-renowned tourist destination.

Same thing with Bali. Our beaches here can beat those fabled Balinese beaches anytime. But they have the infrastructure needed to support the millions of people who flock to the island every year. We don't.

We could do more to invest in our infrastructure. More airports, better roads, better-maintained roads, ports, bridges, reliable supply of electricity, sanitation systems, piped water, etc... Infrastructure is this current administration's strongest suit, admittedly, but with even better governance much more could have been done.

What's best is that private investment is what generally gets tourism off the ground. Private enterprise will build the hotels and restaurants, operate the airlines, boats, cars, buses and other transportation services, employ, train and pay the tour guides and service staff, etc... The government only has to spend on infrastructure and the private sector takes care of the rest.

[gubaon]

singapore relies on its infrastructures as their tourist attraction
sentosa = more than 90% kai man made
singapore zoo = more than 90% kai man made
geylang, orchard tower, tanjong pagar, clark quay = 100% kai man made

mo suroy ug raffles ug orchard kai tungod pud sa mga lights sa building