To mkamionka: Perhaps comparable to a picnic in the west

[PaulVDV]

Thank you Mariusz,


I thought it was a nice place to visit with the wooden huts on stilts in the Mekong and the many colourful hammocks.

As far as I know, it was not a place where people spend the night and it was little visited by foreigners.
Cambodians with a little money naturally have a choice of better (for us still cheap) hotels to stay.

It rather seemed to me a place that served as a daytime place to stay.
You paid a small sum at the entrance (really minimal) and could walk around in all the huts and I suspect lying in a hammock was included.
You could also buy food (fried fish, ...) and drinks.

You might compare this to westerners who go picnicking in their country near a lake or in a park, bring a cloth (or carpet) to lie on and something to display the food on.
In Cambodia people prefer to lie in a hammock and for this place you didn't have to bring your own hammock.
Here dozens of hammocks were provided in the stilt houses.

Considered totally separate from this photo and place:
Yes, one does not have to have a well-paid job to travel.
Many westerners I met while travelling were not exactly the most wealthy in our societies.
I admit that I have also met travellers who lived so poor that I would never want it that way myself.
But there are many travellers who do not come at all from the financially better part of society and yet see large parts of the world, and who can even live with a certain comfort.

I don't know how it is in the UK but you can see that in Belgium too.
People with a similar job and income can still approach life in a different way and achieve financially more than some others.

Kind regards,
Paul