Xircal

21 hours ago, Khun Han said:

 

Xircal, you're missing the point: it's not just Siemens, GSK and AstraZeneca. I could keep on providing examples of businesses right across the spectrum who have re-committed to the UK. And you could no doubt keep on coming up with reasons why each individual business is a special case for not being too hampered by brexit. But the point is, all these businesses have rejected the brexit doomsday scenario, and have committed (often with big further investment) to the UK. And this can only be a vote of confidence and big boost for the UK.

 

The trade deficit is cited as the main reason for Sterling's overvaluation by the way, for which it's current fall in value seems to be the only thing remainers have as an argument for some sort of economic crash. Apart from endless speculation, of course.

I'm not the one that's missing the point, you are. You can thrust all the data forward you wish to try and convince myself and others that leaving the EU will be good for the country but the truth of the matter is that Britain is going to suffer once it leaves the EU and that won't be compensated by exports or by UK facing investment.

Britain doesn't have a strong manufacturing base and relies on imports to sustain its development. However with a weak £ inflation is going to rise due to the higher cost of imports and winter fuel costs will also serve to curb consumer spending.

You can stick your head in the sand and pretend its not happening, but it doesn't change the fact that Britain is in for a tough time especially when it actually cuts ties with the EU. Check this BBC report on the state of the economy published this morning if you don't believe me: http://www.bbc.com/news/business-37674169

If the prediction in the BBC report proves to be true the country could be looking at another credit rating downgrade which will only serve to make borrowing that much more expensive. That could translate into significant tax increases to pay for it all.

3 hours ago, Khun Han said:

 

Donald Tusk is hardly going to say "Make a list of what you want, and we'll do our best to help." Leading up to this major negotiation, is he?

 

GSK is a British-based multinational which talked about reducing it's investments in the UK pre-referendum, and is now upping it's investments instead, along with many other major businesses. Keep coming up with excuses as to why each of these companies are doing this, it doesn't matter, and the excuses start to get contradictory. The fact is, they're doing it, and the economy is only going to improve as a result.

GSK is a pharmaceutical business and in that respect it retains a 20 year monopoly on any new medication it creates. Therefore it's not really going to suffer much even if its products are subjected to a 10% import levy.

However, one of Britain's biggest exports to the EU is wheat and barley. In 2015 it supplied 80% of the wheat and 63% of barley consumed in the EU. That may change come Brexit since the EU may choose to import tariff free wheat from countries like the Ukraine instead: http://www.agrimoney.com/news/hard-brexit-could-turn-eu-to-ukraine-for-wheat-rather-than-uk--10025.html

Also, Britain imports much more than it exports and the latter only accounts for a third of the gross domestic product. I don't like to plagiarize so I'll refer you to this article which explains why this isn't a good thing: http://www.cafebabel.co.uk/politics/article/a-hard-brexit-may-be-harder-on-the-uk-than-may-realises.html

6 hours ago, JAG said:

 If for more than a couple of weeks this will kill tourism stone dead.

 

I completely understand and empathise with the Thai people. Many, no, most of these measures will not effect me personally,  but with several rival holiday destinations now in S E Asia,  if enforced this will be economic suicide, and will lead to significant misery and job losses. 

Yes, I think that's very true. I'm also beginning to wonder how it will pan out over the coming months. If the period of mourning declared by the PM is to be a whole year then I guess Thai girls will be forbidden from wearing skimpy outfits and disco music will be banned in the bars even if they're allowed to open.

If tourist numbers drop significantly, it'll be back to business as usual again come October next year. But if tourist numbers remain  relatively high then Kobkarn Wattanavrangkul who is the Thailand's new tourism minister may get her way and shutdown the sex industry for good: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/07/17/thailand-is-closed-to-sex-tourism-says-countrys-first-female-tou/

On 10/13/2016 at 8:31 AM, Srikcir said:

1.  

"getting bombed" -  American slang for getting really drunk.

http://onlineslangdictionary.com/meaning-definition-of/bombed

 

Yes, we know what it means, but will the police view it the same way especially now with the country's revered monarch having just passed away. We see constant reminders about toning down lewd behaviour and being respectful especially with a view to how people dress. Ignoring that kind of advice could mean spending your holiday behind a different set of bars than the ones you're used to.

On 10/13/2016 at 4:03 AM, Yann55 said:

'Travel advisories' are about as outdated and useless as public phone booths, embassies, pekingese dogs and Victoria Principal.

 

When it comes to influencing peoples' decision to travel or not travel somewhere, the Internet has totally overidden travel advisories, and mostly for the better.

 

The problem is though that if a travel advisory has been issued it invalidates any travel insurance which a tourist has taken out. Therefore in the event of a tourist sustaining injury even for a minor traffic accident he'll have to foot his own medical expenses. If it's something serious like losing a limb due to a bomb blast the cost can be astronimical.

21 hours ago, Khun Han said:

 

Re: Nissan. I would suggest you read the last three or four pages of this thread.

 

Siemens was used as an example because it's Europe's biggest. Plenty of other multinationals, such as GSK (which doesn't fit your parameters), have re-committed with even more investment.

 

"The pharmaceutical firm, whose chief executive Sir Andrew Witty backed the Remain campaign, said the UK's skilled workforce and competitive tax system helped drive the decision.

It said most of the products made at the expanded sites would be exported."

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-36901027

 

And the list is growing as companies realise that the UK economy is not going to tank as predicted by the scaremongers.

The problem at the moment is nobody knows what kind of deal Britain will get. Donald Tusk who will preside over all the Brexit negotiations has already stated that Britain is either in or out meaning that unless its prepared to accept free movement of people, it will mean the latter: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/hard-brexit-no-latest-soft-eu-referendum-donald-tusk-theresa-may-britain-a7360406.html

Now if you consider that the EU is a market 1½ times bigger than the US it's not difficult to envisage that if Britain refuses the accept the terms the EU will be offering which includes the above mentioned point then it's going to mean a complete divorce. If that's the way it ends up then being excluded from a market of 500 million consumers won't fare wel with investors since exports will be subject to punitive tariffs and mountains of red tape.

You mentioned GSK, but that's already a British company so it's logical to assume that they'll continue to invest in their own organisation. But how they'll fare when exports to the EU are subject to 10% import duty which will hit profits is difficult to say at the moment. Same goes for everyone else.

On 10/12/2016 at 9:23 AM, Sphere said:

 

A literary masterpiece....and a news scoop in one.....couldn't wade through water without getting wet!

Ever heard of Wellington Boots? They allow you to wade through water without getting wet.

17 hours ago, Khun Han said:

 

I take on board what you say about Kaeser. But, if anything, it re-affirms the soundness of the UK economy: Kaeser is ruthless, and isn't out to do the UK any favours. He's reaffirmed Siemens' commitment to the UK because it makes sound business sense, and for no other reason. More and more companies and institutions have done/are doing the same, the latest being Nissan.

Nissan? I don't see any evidence which suggests Nissan will continue investing in the UK if Britain pulls out of the EU lock, stock and barrel: https://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/sep/30/nissan-hard-brexit-compensation-new-uk-investment-tariffs

Companies like Siemens which you mentioned before will continue to invest in the UK since they'll want Britsh consumers to buy their washing machines and other kitchen equipment rather than a competitors. But any manufacturer with designs on exporting to the EU is going to think twice about any decision to invest in Britain if it means exports are going to be weighed down by tariff barriers.

4 hours ago, Naam said:

since when does business and morals go together?

Well, let's say that it's not in spirit with the sanctions that the EU imposed on Russia for its annexation of Crimea.

That said it won't be the first time Germany has placed its own self-interests before those of its Western neighbours in spite of rallying support for the sanctions the EU imposed.

Does Putin really think that after annexing Crimea that we're all going to just sit down and be friends again?

He's supporting Al-Assad not because he likes the guy but because he wants to protect Russia's only base in the Med in the Syrian port of Tartus. Russia signed a deal with Cyprus to allow its ships to use Cypriot ports, but other than those there are no other Russian naval facilities anywhere other than in Crimea. .

Western forces try to avoid civilian casualties wherever possible, but Russia doesn't and just drops bombs on any target it deems appropriate regardless of whether ISIS is occupying the area or not.

I suspect though that Putin is taking the opportunity to step up the bombing campaign while US attention is concentrated on the upcoming election next month especially considering all the controversy surrounding Trump.

Blocking a UN Resolution proposed by France and Spain to end hostilities in Syria hasn't done his stock any good either so he only has himself to blame for the animosity directed at both himself and Russia.

17 hours ago, Khun Han said:

 

I think the EU has rather bigger ambitions than those you attribute to it.

 

Yes, let's cut the crap: The USA got involved in the second world war because of the Japanese attack on it's home territory.Britain fought against Japan in the far east alongside the USA. Germany lost the European war it was fighting because it tried to invade Russia.

 

Whether or not Britain is still a member of the EU is irrelevant to the point I made about renewed commitment of investors. Here is what the CEO of Siemens, (Europe's largest industrial conglomerate ) Joe Kaeser, recently said:

 

“We’re here to stay,”

 

“The UK matters with or without being a member of the EU. The Brexit vote will not diminish our commitment to your country. Siemens will not leave the next generation behind, ”

 

“We never said the UK is in bad shape if it leaves the EU: we said the EU would miss a massive opportunity. Without the UK, the EU may never be able to stand up against superpowers like China and the US,”

 

Interesting, that last quote, isn't it? Joe Kaeser appears to disagree with your assessment of the relative strengths of Britain and the EU.

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/siemens-boss-joe-kaeser-vows-to-invest-in-uk-in-brexit-u-turn-a7132236.html

 

And the world's biggest sovereign wealth fund (with over 70 billion Sterling in assets in the UK) has changed it's tune:

 

http://uk.businessinsider.com/norwegian-sovereign-wealth-fund-reevaluates-worth-of-uk-property-assets-2016-10

 

On price rises due to exchange rate: Foreign suppliers are in for a rude awakening (just as Unilever have, today.) Most goods and commodities in the UK are waaaay overpriced. That's where the 'rip-off Britain' cliche comes from. Foreign suppliers are quickly going find out the Britain aint gonna be milked any more, and will simply buckle down if those suppliers don't cut their cloth accordingly. Their halcyon days in the UK are over.

Joe Kaeser is a man without morals. After Russia annexed Crimea he even went so far as to meet with Putin to re-affirm Siemens  commitment to Russian profits despite international comdemnation of Russia's military intervention.

I don't place much credence on his opinion of the EU's future if he's the type of person that didn't condemn the unlawful Russian invasion of another country and still supports Russia's continued aggression. Don't forget Malaysia Airlines flight MH17 was shot down from within rebel held territory which wouldn't have happened if Russia hadn't annexed the Crimea.

But we can speculate about this till the cows come home. Nobody will really know what Brexit will bring with it come a certain date in 2019 and we'll have to wait and see what transpires.

17 hours ago, Khun Han said:

 

Frankly, neither of them. I'm glad I'm not American for this reason only. Clinton's the more stable of the two though. I think Trump's a psychopath (really).

He even went into the perfume business with a fragrance called "Donald Trump, The Fragance". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trump_fragrances#Donald_Trump.2C_The_Fragrance

Does that smell like his armpits I wonder.

31 minutes ago, Khun Han said:

 

Problem is: He is as dodgy as hell as a CEO of his companies. Why would he be any different as CEO of the USA?

Difficult to say but Hillary isn't without her own Pandora's Box. Just do a search for "Hillary Clinton controversies" and you'll turn up a few I'm sure.

Which of the two evils do you prefer?

30 minutes ago, Khun Han said:

 

Typical anti-British arrogance. We think that Britain isn't the centre of the world, but that we can stand on our own two feet, as we have done for many hundreds of years. Tell me again: how long has the cobbled-together EU been in existence?

 

Exchange rate!!! Exchange rate!!! Exchange rate!!! Some people seem so obsessed with the fact that Sterling is finding it's correct value away from the EU, that they are oblivious to the fact that the UK economy is currently booming. And if the current government plays it's hand right, the lower value of Sterling will help it to boom even more.

 

I've looked in my own backyard, and I see a growing economy, with foreign/multinational investors changing their tune about brexit and keeping/increasing their investments.

 

By the way, your link is to a rolling news feed. When I looked, it was announcing a settlement between Tesco and Unilever (details still unclear).

The EU has been around since 1951 actually, just six years after the end of the Second World War. Back then it was known as the EEC and was formed by six countries namely Belgium, France, Italy, Luxembourg, The Netherlands and West Germany. It's now a union of 28 (soon to be 27) member states with the goal of promoting trade without the constraints of exchange rates.

But pre-WWII Britain doesn't have much to do with post-WWII and if it wasn't for US intervention, Britain woud have been overrun by Hitler and we would be living in a different world now. So let's cut the crap about Britain standing on its own two feet shall we?

As for investment, the UK is still a member of the EU and will remain so at least until 2019. That may fuel investment in the short term, but don't be surprised when investors give you the cold shoulder when it becomes obvious that in the long term the British economy is about to fall off a cliff as more and more businesses move to the EU.

As for the exchange rate, the point I wanted to make is that it won't lift those people who voted for Brexit out of poverty as many were cajoled into believing. In fact the opposite is true and things will only get worse from now on.

Here's an alternative link to illustrate how prices are set to rise due to the falling value of the £ http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2016/10/13/prices-for-uk-packaging-set-to-rise-as-pound-falls-mondi-says/

27 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

Did you see the debate where the pervert trump explicitly denied ever actually doing what he bragged about doing on the tape? That answers your question as the WHY now. Duh! 

 

It doesn't answer my question at all. 30 years ago we didn't have video cameras, mobile phones and the like so anyone making an accusation now about something which was supposed have happened in that era will have to be taken on their own merit. To be fair on the accused the accuser and their own personal history needs to be examined in order to determine their own sincerity.

I wouldn't say that Trump is exactly what the US needs right now since he has his flaws and he isn't doing himself any favors trying to change the subject all the time when confronted with an embarrassing question. But certain individuals don't want him as President and are now engaged in this smear campaign to try and knock him out of the race.

Yet Bill Clinton was very much of the same ilk when it came to women and his affair with Monica Lewinsky which he categorically denied on US TV you might recall is well-known. Yet Clinton turned out to be a good president in spite of his shortcomings. So I really don't see the difference with Trump and how his own past should influence the way voters think about him now.

We're long past the era when potential presidents had to be squeaky clean with spotless souls. Voters have to look at him for what he can do for the US as a country, not for his sexual inclinations either back then or now.

27 minutes ago, Khun Han said:

 

The UK is not going to disintegrate. It will have to reform a little due to brexit. But the UK itself is very sound (and has been for several hundred years) and will still be around when the EU disintegrates (probably toward the end of next year).

Typical British arrogance. You think that the UK is the centre of the world and that Europe can't do without you. Did you happen to notice what's happening to Sterling at the moment?

It's wonderful for British businesses and exporters are falling over themselves with orders gushing into the country. All those fat cats at the top of industries are going to get super rich and will be very grateful to the Leave campaigners I'm sure. But ask the average man in the street if he appreciates having to pay 16-27% more for clothing, for meat and for anything the country imports and you'll get a different story. Ask holidaymakers what they think about the plunging FX rates as they plan their Christmas holidays abroad.

And ask the City what they think about losing their passporting rights to Europe if Britain hard exits which is going to cause massive job losses when financial houses and banks move to the Europe in order to continue trading. 

If you want to talk about disintegration remove your blinkers and take a look in your own backyard.

On 10/8/2016 at 6:08 PM, sanemax said:

 

  Then again, the E.U. may very well disintegrate very soon , the UK could then form a new Union, consisting of UK , Germany, France , Holland and Belgium . 

    

The EU is not going to disintegrate. It may well reform a little since lessons have to be learned from Britain's exit, but the organisation itself is very sound and will still be around after the UK 'disintegrates'.

It's one of the sad things about Thailand that trash collection doesn't exist in rural areas and instead the locals either burn it or dump it on the side of the road. Consequently, children grow up with it the way it is and take these habits with them when they themselves become adults and move elsewhere.

Looking at the picture I would imagine it's already become a health hazard and it might be worth talking to a lawyer to see if the local authority can be pressured to clear it all away. If the villagers do that collectively, it shouldn't cost too much I would have thought.

7 minutes ago, Fithman said:

 

That "gov.uk" advise is in error. British subjects only need a passport which is valid for the length of a proposed stay to enter Thailand.

 

Why do you think the FCO made an error? https://www.gov.uk/guidance/how-the-foreign-commonwealth-office-puts-together-travel-advice

On 10/12/2016 at 0:16 PM, mickeymiles said:

Ooooops sorry, yes a 3 entry tourist visa ;-) I just hope I can get another SETV when in runs out in Savanakhet, maybe :-)????

 

PS has anyone ever applied for a Myanmar/Burmese visa in London? The Myanmar webiste asks for only address in Myanmar, but I have read elsewhere that they require much more paperwork than this :-(  I am tempted to get a Myanmar visa in London, for 28 days if it is easy :-)

 

Cheers.

I believe you can extend each two month period for an additional 30 days at immigration at a cost of 1,900 baht a time. However, you do need to depart and then re-enter the country at the end of each period. It effectively extends your 180 days (3x60 days) to 270  days.

On 10/12/2016 at 11:44 AM, ubonjoe said:

Since you are from the UK your passport only needs to be valid for your length of stay for entry to the country. For those from some countries it is 6 months. 

Once in the country it does not matter unless you apply for an extension longer than your passport validity.

All neighboring countries require 6 months of passport validity for entry which means you wold have a problem if you need to get a visa or new entry by entering one of them.

The six months validity also applies to British subjects: https://www.gov.uk/foreign-travel-advice/thailand/entry-requirements

19 minutes ago, 55Jay said:

She did talk about that in the video.

Bit late though don't you think? To deride somebody today for something that supposed to have happened 30 years ago is spurious at best. 

10 hours ago, webfact said:

One woman said the White House hopeful grabbed her breasts and attempted to put his hand up her skirt on a flight three decades ago.

I don't agree with dragging up the dirt from 30 years ago. If the woman on the plane was so peeved by Trump's attention during a flight and thought it inappropriate she should have voiced her opinion then, not now.

47 minutes ago, halloween said:

Pardon me for living here for 16 years and travelling over most of the country by motorcycle. Now tell me that subsistence farmers won't appreciate a B400/m child allowance.

BTW the reason your post was deleted was that it was both aggressive and offensive. not even worth reporting, the moderators had already dropped one of your posts, or was it 2?

I'm quite aware of why the post was deleted, but I thought it appropriate in the circumstances.