Air Travel – If I travel outside of Bangkok, can flights to neighboring countries be cheaper than Don Mueng?

If I, as a resident of Bangkok, have to fly to a nearby country outside of Thailand, I will probably do so from there Don Mueng Airport in the north of Bangkok, from which the flight prices (at least in my experience) are significantly lower than from Suwannaphum ( "Suvarnabhumi");
The differences can reach thousands of baht.

But I wonder if there could be an airport outside of Bangkok where airfares to nearby countries (Laos, Cambodia, Vietnam, Myanmar) are significantly lower than in Bangkok.
For example, if you go somewhere outside Bangkok with a 3-hour bus in 150-200 baht, you can save 1500-2000 baht with a Don Mueng plane ticket.

If you drive outside of Bangkok (within a 3 hour drive, probably by bus), can flights to neighboring countries be cheaper than Don Mueng?

Air travel – Which airport has direct flights to most countries?

When watching videos of a person who was in each country, he mentioned that it was easier for him to see new countries because the airport nearby had so many flights to other countries. That made me curious:

Which airport offers direct flights (without a stopover) to most other countries and how many?

Although it only makes a difference, let's rule out domestic flights in the event that an airport also serves as a domestic airport. Flights must be scheduled regularly, although they can be seasonal and can be booked for individual passengers to prevent airline chartering and private flights.

Bonus question: same, but for a group of airports serving a single metropolitan area? In which metropolitan region are there airports with direct flights to most countries? In terms of choosing a home base for visits to many countries, this could potentially be a more useful metric.

Blockchain – How do I maximize the amount donated in 2.5 billion Asian countries?

Do you want to maximize fundraising in 2.5 billion Asian countries? ? One of the largest former COOs on the exchange is on our team !!

✅ We offer STO, ICO AND IEO
Fundraising & PPM
▪ Digital & road shows
marketing
▪ Asian tycoons parties
▪ Community relationship
▪ Coin list
*. Secret solution

⭐️ Together we have more than 500,000 ETH &

▪️Website: https://www.asiatoken88.com/? Lang = de
▪ Email: admin@asiatoken88.com
▪ WhatsApp: 852-68990402

Why can't the "largest country in the world" provide basic services to its citizens when other countries can?

I know that Americans hate to admit it for some reason, but it's just a historical fact: the reason social democracies exist in Europe is because of the Soviet Union. Most countries with universal health systems adopted them between the 1920s and 1950s as a direct response to the rise of communism in Eastern Europe. Adopting a social democratic policy as an "alternative" to communism to avoid the collapse of western capitalist countries would offer similar things that the communists offered, but within a capitalist society.

The Soviet Union had universal health care that more than doubled the life expectancy of its population. General education, including the university, which eliminated widespread illiteracy, and universal housing made it one of the few countries in the world where homelessness, etc. was ever eliminated, relatively poor country.

Together with the superpower of the world and the second most powerful country in the world as well as the neighborhood to Western Europe, they had an enormous influence and communist parties became commonplace in Western Europe. The Scandinavian countries that Bernie always points to were the ones most influenced by the Communists. Finland literally had a failed communist revolution like Russia, although unlike Russia, the Reds lost in Finland and thus followed the path of social democracy and not socialism.

The reason for the existence of social democracy in Western Europe was that the capitalist governments compromised with the extreme left and instead formed left-wing liberal governments. Instead of risking the overthrow of the entire capitalist system, the rich oligarchs made huge concessions and gave the workers the same benefits that the Communists offered, making the Communists less influential and people less concerned about overthrowing their government and to make the West more stable.

If social democracies in Western Europe gained popularity in response to Eastern European socialism, the collapse of socialism in Eastern Europe should also lead to the withdrawal of these social democracies and a return to neoliberalism.

And that's exactly what we've been experiencing all over Europe since the 1990s. The trend towards mass privatization and the dismantling of these social democracies has been going on throughout Western Europe for several decades. The Finnish government has collapsed twice recently because mass privatization has been massively suppressed. The UK was also in the trend of mass privatization. Royal Mail has recently been fully privatized. We now know that plans to privatize the NHS are in the pipeline.

This is the big elephant in the room that Social Democrats like Bernie Sanders and his followers ignore. They ignore (1) the reason why the social democracies came into existence and are therefore unlikely to be created successfully, and (2) ignore the fact that the social democracies to which they refer as replicating are currently falling apart.

Capitalism will not fix itself by going to rich oligarchs and asking them to be nicer, please. Social democracies were created by pressure from the left, the communists who tell the oligarchs that they will roll their heads. Social democracy was a concession, a middle ground between socialism and neoliberal capitalism.

People like Bernie want to go to the negotiating table and demand the middle ground first. That said, Bernie is likely to reach midfield of midfield if elected. It will neither get the strong reforms it is pushing for, nor will it likely stop the right trend that the world has been in since the 1990s.

Does a Schengen multiple-entry visa allow later entry to other Schengen countries without going through the issuing country?

You can easily enter any country in the Schengen area (25 countries). For example, see this unofficial Schengen Visa website. I've done this personally.

From personal experience, German immigration does not really agree with this idea. In Frankfurt they refused to allow a friend to enter the country because she had received her visa from the Italian embassy. Still, after a few tears, they let her in. Moral of history: Yes, you can enter any Schengen country with your Schengen visa, regardless of the issuing country.

How can I attract tourists from Europe to hikes in East African countries?

I am passionate about getting to know the cultures of the world and I also teach my own. Half a year ago I thought I could do that by taking walks in the city where I was born and grew up. So far, it has been fine for visitors from African countries. My challenge is to open up the European tourism market. I've posted digital flyers, a website, and even some of my European friends about my business, but it doesn't seem to work. I need help.

Maybe the US should not wage a war against second and third world countries that want to control their own resources?

This is exactly how the US has built and maintained its position as world power No. 1 over an incredibly long period of time. They will continue to do so because that's where their wealth is based. The US is a land controlled by the rich, for the rich, and the rich will not magically give up their wealth to be "human."