I’d answer, but I’m too sick from drinking the water this morning, plus I’m too strung out on dope. And it’s too fucking hot to make an effort. Late for my “massage” session anyway, so have to run. Toodles.
Cape Town is too dangerous. It should be nixed from the list.
My impressions of Bangkok are outdated - I was there twenty years ago, and haven’t been back - but then, at least, what most impressed me was the staggering disparities of great wealth and abject poverty. There was even then a lot of monied folks in Bangkok, existing alongside a huge influx of poor country folks.
Not unusual for that part of the world to be sure, but it seemed to me at least to be very extreme in Bangkok, and lead to what appeared at least to be a lot of exploitation of the latter by the former.
Cape Town is not that dangerous for tourists, unless they go into the townships without a proper tour guide.
The GINI Coefficient is a quite robust measure of income inequality. As you can see from the 2009 pictorial, Thailand has less inequality than almost all of South America and even slightly less than the U.S.A., though much more than that of Europe.
If you Google around, you will discover that Thailand having a Gini less than U.S.A. is very recent. Thailand’s inequality rose sharply a generation ago (due to the rich getting richer, rather than the poor getting poorer), but has fallen over the last 10-15 years. U.S., on the other hand, has a steady upward trend in Gini since the early 1980’s.
Rising prosperity is in clear evidence. In the rural area where I live, villages 20 years ago generally lacked running water and paved roads; electricity was a recent arrival; making an overseas telephone call sometimes involved a long bus ride; and only the very richest villagers owned pickup trucks. By now, a large percentage of homes have pickups, and cell phones are of course ubiquitous. 
Thailand has changed enormously just over the 30 years I’ve witnessed.
I’m surprised Florence got on the list ahead of Venice. Florence is nice, but Venice is something else.
Following on, Bangkok has now been named the cheapest international city for travelers. Daily expenses in the city based on TravelAdvisor criteria of the average cost of one night in a four-star hotel, an 8-kilometre taxi ride, a large cheese pizza and a dry martini, were just US$112. Also up there were Beijing (a city I personally enjoy), Sharm El Sheikh and Kuala Lumpur (another favorite of mine).
The most expensive international city was Paris at $429 a day, followed by Zurich, London, Tokyo and New York.
Detroit was robbed!
Literally.
Thank you, thank you- I’ll be here all week.
Hell, what about Worcester, MA , USA? It has all the amenities:
-South Street swarms with cheap hookers
-the downtown is recently remodeled
-good diners and chaep grub
Plus, you can get a room (with a fan) for $40/night!
Who the hell makes up these lists? How can you rate a city of 10 million (NYC), with some crummy asian burg?
And ralph124c brings his usual level of rigor and incisive analysis to the Boards.
New York City, NY, USA
City population: 8,175,133
Metro area: 18,897,109
Source
Bangkok, Thailand
City population: 9,668,854
Metro area: 24,900,000
Source
What is it that chaps your ass about Bangkok, ralph? The simple fact that it’s in Asia?
There’s a chain of blowjob bars in Sidney?
SYdney, GAH!
I would have voted for Sydney. I love it here and I think it’s an amazing place. You other Aussies don’t know how good you have it. 
If it was Brissie, welll…
Orchids and elephants.
Indeed. Bangkok makes NYC look like Mayberry.