Many attractions in Thailand have dual pricing, with foreigner pricing in Arabic numerals (100 baht) and local pricing in Thai numerals (๒๐ บาท). The price differential is often 5x or more.

I was visiting some temples in Bangkok recently and was amused to find there was no dual pricing; rather, there was an admission charge for foreigners and no charge for Thais.

(I don’t mind this system actually, but if I were paying taxes in Thailand and still had to pay foreigner entry fees everywhere it might bug me.)

The train between Machu Picchu (Aguas Calientes) and Cusco had three classes, the lowest of which was restricted to Peruvian citizens and residents. To be clear, Peruvians were free to use the second and first classes if they were willing to pay, too, but only they were allowed to use the very cheap third class. If I recall correctly, the second class one-way was about US$35. It struck me as being a bit fancier (and unnecessarily so) than second class in a DB (Germany) Intercity Express.

My aunt and uncle took the first class as part of their far more expensive Peru tour, and were not exposed to the direct cost, but judging by the pictures, it was luxurious.

I knew I was being milked everywhere in Peru. It didn't bother me because extortionate prices in Peru are still cheaper than prices in my home country.

The only exception was where people insisted on being paid in American dollars. I'm not American so it never occurred to me to buy and bring American dollars to any country outside of the USA. We treat American tourists with a certain amount of eyerolling when they try to use their money in my country, but I have learned my lesson that it is a good idea to have an emergency stash of the currency of dishonesty when travelling abroad.

> good idea to have an emergency stash of the currency of dishonesty when travelling abroad

I recommend that you do some research about the economics of any country you visit. As you've already somewhat discovered, many places in Central America and South America will actually prefer payment in US dollars because the official government exchange rates from their local currency to dollars is extortionately unfair and not accurate to ForEx markets, this combined with high rates of inflation for the local currency and regular currency "resets" mean that people don't want to have their savings denominated in the local currency.

I don't know why you consider dollars to be the "currency of dishonesty", but all throughout the Americas, dollars are generally the highest valued currency because the US dominates economics and trade relations in the region. I imagine the same may be true in other parts of the world but they might preference other currencies rather than dollars (Ex: I found in some parts of Eastern Europe and Central Asia that Euros were accepted in preference over local currency).

Any time you travel to a new country, do your research in advance.

> I don't know why you consider dollars to be the "currency of dishonesty"

I was not trying to imply Americans are dishonest. I was trying to imply that insisting on the use of foreign currency like USD as the sole medium of exchange, or any other black market activity if it comes to that, is a dishonest way to make a living.

And sure, I understand why the black market exists from a socioeconomic point of view. I have learned my lesson about travelling in less advantaged countries. I witnessed stuff in Peru that would make suburban Karen's head explode with apoplexy, and it was just considered normal and expected stuff there.

> I witnessed stuff in Peru that would make suburban Karen's head explode with apoplexy, and it was just considered normal and expected stuff there.

Agreed on that wholeheartedly. Visiting Peru was an interesting experience for me as well, and one that was deeply sad in many ways. There's such a visibily stark wealth inequality in Lima that's immediately obvious as soon as you deplane that is usually hidden away in other parts of the world. Lima is an amazing world-class food city, but most of that is found within Miraflores district which is a far cry from the conditions of most of the rest of the city or in the pueblo jovenes on the outskirts of town in the hills. The same is found in other parts of Peru as well, and in a way I am very happy for it because it made obvious to me things I had been able to avoid or put out of my mind in my travels elsewhere and made me more aware of how different societies exploit people and the role of the West in creating and enabling those conditions, my own role as a traveler included.

Correct, I'm Canadian but when travelling anywhere out of the western world, stashing a few USD bills will be helpful in many ways.

It was more like $90 per person for one-way, 1.5 hour ride, of course it's fancy for that kind of cash. I guess all Machu Picchu prices were subject to 10% YoY growth pre-COVID since, you know, they don't make them anymore.

In Java, Indonesia, it is similar for Borobudur (massive Buddhist temple) and Prambanam (massive Hindu temple). Since they are both UNESCO heritage sites that have a small army of well-paid local and foreign experts constantly improving the sites, I do not mind to pay 10x or 20x compared to locals. The same was similar for temples in Siem Reap, Cambodia (Ankor Wat and friends). I have heard about some "elite level" Indian religious sites than do similar, but will offer local rates for people who carry an OCI card (Overseas Citizen of India card).

Same was for Taj Mahal some... 13 years ago. Foreigner price (apart from few neighboring countries) was at least 10-20x the price of local one. Still, well worth seeing that marvel

Zero trolling: If locals pay 1 EUR and you and me paid 10 or 20 EU, is it so bad? I am can accept when the UNESCO world heritage site is top notch. Yes, 20 EUR is expensive, but so is the entrance fee for the Vatican Museum or Le Louvre (Paris). Real Question: Does Italy or France have a programme to allow low income students to enter these world class museums cheaply? It would be great if someone can comment about it!

Of course they have it, whole western (or more probably whole) Europe has significant discount for students and I think elderly too, for any kind of tourist attraction. But not 10 or 20x, more like 20-50% of full ticket.

they are very up-front about that, though, and my thai friends told me it's because their taxes support the attractions, which seemed perfectly fair to me.

Last time I was in one of the large, free museums in London (British Museum, Natural History Museum, Science Musem etc), a tourist asked me to read out / read simpler the words shown above the donation box. He then put £30 in.

I was surprised, as I'd never thought to donate to these museums. He pointed out that he didn't pay tax in Britain, and entry tickets to a similar museum at home would be around £30.

In Thailand there isn't dual pricing for food. But there is for entry to many venues. It is institutionalized by the government - for example, the entry fee to national parks for non-Thais is 10x the Thai price.

This is true, I just paid 50 baht at a temple yesterday and my gf didn't have to pay. And of course taxis might try to charge you more too.

But I meant for food the street vendors are incredibly honest. On several occasions I've given them money expecting no change (based on a price on the sign) but for whatever reason the price was different and they called me to give me change as I was walking away

This isn't even that uncommon in Western countries. For example Cardiff Castle has free entry for residents, but non-residents need to pay for entry (at least, that was the case when I was there a few years ago). The museum in my city in the Netherlands is €6 for residents of the city, and €13 for non-residents.

This is also true in many parts of the US (for tax-payer funded places like parks). The distinction is usually based on state (or town) of residence.

It is - many restaurants have two menus, one for locals in thai and one for tourists. Prices in the first one are sometimes twice as cheap. (I've lived on Koh Samui for 3.5 years)

It was certainly the case when I lived in Thailand, as I could read (the numbers aren't difficult and you get a lot of practice) and often anything with a published price up front would be different read in English than in Thai.

They have different prices for foreigner and locals in Thailand and Indonesia.

Plenty of places in the USA have the same. Disneyland is discounts for Southern California residents

https://disneyland.disney.go.com/offers-discounts/southern-c...

In Hawaii many business have discounts for locals

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discounts_and_allowances#Speci...

Your examples are more like colleges charging more tuition on out-of-state student, or tourist attractions charge lower price to locals, which are made public information. The context under this thread is talking about dual price that is deliberately taking advantage of information asymmetry, differentiation, or even discrimination based on social class and skin color.

The same in EU - e.g. in Italy, if you want to see a church from the inside, tourists pay a lot while the locals don't.

I can't speak for Rome because I have not been in churches there but for the rest of Italy, 99% of churches are Free Entry and the few very famous touristic attractions have a single fee no matter who you are.

Maybe you are confusing paying for a guide as tourist with paying to visit the church.

Free entry - but for those going for the religious service. That's not me. At least that's how it was all around northern Italy few years ago when I visited.

My experience in S. Korea is different, if you are a resident of a certain province (I don't know what is that in Korean) you get a discount on the local tourist spots even if you are a foreigner or a S. Korean. So if you're S. Korean and live in a different province you pay a higher price.

In Thailand I can tell you this isn't the case at 99% of places