retarius

I just checked out the article.....these are "levellised costs" here being quoted not the ac dual costs of what it costs they energy company to produce and sell a kWh.. They come from a mathematical model which is entirely dependent on the assumptions used. Levellised costs include the "societal costs" of fossil fuels. Who is to say what asinine assumptions are included in the model? I have done a huge amount of forecasting in my life for my sins. You have a draft forecast drawn up with a set of assumptions and if the numbers don't meet managements expectations, you change the assumptions...no one challenges assumptions they challenge the numbers. I ask have a lot of experience with cost benefit analyses of medicines. My company were pioneers in this field and I had the group in my bailiwick. What a crock....the outcome is predetermined, the medicine will show an excellent cost benefit despite its enormous cost, so the assumptions are rigged and the model shows a huge benefit in costs by using the medicine. It was so corny, I was convinced it would die in the marketplace but US insurance companies and Pharmacy Benefit Managers loved it. I saw hundreds of presentations of the published data and no one ever challenged the assumptions underpinning it. They were focussed on the numbers. I am suspicious that this group who published this, are dyed in the wool climate change advocates, and that the data are biased.

There is much misinformation on the web as we have been repeatedly told by people that wish to censor it. Also the CIA, the most evil institution on the planet has editors working inside wikipedia. You can find that if you search. Anyway, en example, I was just informed by a mate of you that China's energy is over 50% generated by renewables....I read data very recently on this specific breakdown showing over 50% of China's energy comes from coal, and less than 20% form renewables, and I was surprised at how high this is, seeing as China is the #1 polluter. So cynically speaking, the data selected in charts and presentations tends to support the narrative you are supposed to buy. So I have little faith in your charts. The main problems with fantasy technologies still exist irrespective of the data ie lack of reliable power for wind or solar, length of service much less than nuclear or coal reactors, and disposal of the materials at the end of their life....

You are entitled to your opinion about climate change and I'm entitled to mine. There has been nothing wrong with my education, so do not impugn it. I will admit it is 50 years since I was at university doing a PhD in radiation chemistry. My IQ puts me in the top 0.5% of people. I have zero interest in climate change and I will be dead before it affects me, so I don't care and I wouldn't be an early adopter of EVs to save the planet. I leave the planet saving to Greta and her pals. Democracy is the wrong system, anyway, to save the planet if planet warming is caused by industrial activities, and since the largest per capit are the tiny fraction of the planet in the greedy insane west, then I don't see a happy outcome at all. The scientist by the way are all driven by the same impetus....being a cheerleader is the way to big grants, so nay sayers or scientist that generate data supporting counter narratives are shunned. You are naive to believe whet they put out. The only green technology worth a <deleted> is nuclear, imvho and personally I wouldn't invest my money in anything else. Mini reactors is where my speculative money is invested. Of course nuclear has its own issues with waste, but that is a technology that already exists as opposed to the fantasy technologies you are talking about....fusion, Christ that has been coming since the Dark Ages. And yes I know the Yanks have claimed reproducible results of a lab experiment, personally I don't see it being a usable technology generating grid potential energy before the earth fries.

I think renewables are a fantasy for powering a national grid, the wind turbines don't work well enough due the the variation in the wind, they fail early, needing fixing or replacement and reportedly cause ecological damage and per KWH are very expensive to generate. Solar, again the technology is not as good as it is touted to be, and just yesterday there is an article in the Guardian touting a solar cell panel problem in landfills in the UK. Unless you go for the more expensive option of having rechargeable batteries in your house what do you do at night. And then what ecological damage occurs in involved in the manufacture of batteries (not to mention child labour) and we don't even know what awful ecological damage and costs will be to replace batteries at the end of their life....8 years for cars, so I'm not sure why it would be longer for a house battery. And in my experience manufactures use the up to argument when making claims so batteries will last up to 8 years.....it might be 6 in real life. I can't remember the figures for Thailand and can't be bothered to look them up, I can't imagine they will be much different than elsewhere when corrected for the launch date of the technology.

No that isn't true. The market share of EVs fell marginally, so new personal buyers are not buying them at the same rate as ICE vehicles, it has nothing to do with prior purchasers....every product life cycle has existing purchasers, but it is highly unusual for market share to decline so early....when a new technology is introduced, you as a maker want the market share for your class to increase and for you to take an increasing share within an growing market. This is simply not happening.

\ The data I saw gave a 15.8% market share applies to the BEV segment. AS I understand it Toyota are the only large manufacturer making hybrids and basically own the PHEV segment. I didn't see any data for that segment. The plug in hybrids, are basically Toyota are they not? But the PHEV sector seems to have had a 50% growth in ,market share (5% in 2022, up to 7.5 in 2023 from the graph). We have been discussing EVs from BYD rather than hybrids. Now according to the EV plus hybrid data, it seems market share for pure EVs, like BYD, declined slightly, from a higher base that hybrids. Then it follows that much the growth in total market comes from hybrids. Toyota must be well satisfied at this result but EV manufacturers would be anxious. I must say I'm not surprised at this, I myself would buy a hybrid, but not an EV.

I agree, if the manufacturers' and governments' claims had been more realistic, there would have been less dispute, but when these folks stretch the truth to sell you an experimental product and whose net positive environmental benefits are unproven and have been exaggerated to sell more vehicles, it erodes trust. I certainly don't trust people who make unverifiable and unqualified claims, even outright lies. This is what is behind modern (global) mistrust of institutions, such as government, the media, corporations, politicians and authority in general....we now assume they are all lying and we are right 90% of the time. Yes, the economics of EVs will vary from country to country, depending also on the climate (warm or cold), cost of petrol, cost of electricity, how the electricity is generated and so forth. The one thing EVs have going for them is they don't chuck out filth and particles from an exhaust, however this is offset by how the electricity is generated and in countries like China (whose folk have bought EVs like madmen) most of their electricity is generated with coal...if a true analysis is done, maybe the atmospheric muck is increased by having electricity fuelling their cars, and the atmosphere might not improve. Ultimately the economics of EVs will depend on the particular features of your personal situation. What I read was that sales in the UK for EVs increased, but the rate of increased declined, which is of concern so early in the product life cycle, and that market share declined meaning that sales of ICEs grew at a faster rate in the growth segment. I didn't see the fleet vs personal sales data, but manufacturers with too much inventory typically discount heavily to fleets, which is another bad sign, if they are having to do that.

Where does the 'many' 'sadistic child abusers' come from? 'Many', in this context implies that a substantial proportion of teachers are sadistic child abusers....and sadism actually mean they derive sexual stimulation by beating children. This is patent nonsense. Where the hell do you get such information from, the few instances of a child punished overly harshly that have been reported over the years? The incidence of sadists, like pedophiles in society is extremely low (1 or 2% at most from memory and would never be classified as 'many' or a high proportion). There are brutes, bullies and abusive people in every institution, police, teaching, nursing, and many others. Indeed almost anywhere anyone has power they abuse it, even if it doesn't cause direct physical harm to others.

And what way is that.....don't tell us all you were in Uighur camp building BYDs. Tell guys what this substantive experience is or shut up.

I aged you a carefully reasoned argument that attacked your cherished (and stupid) view that children should never be smacked under any circumstances. You have no arguments to support your cherished belief, only emotional beliefs based on nothing at all. As I explained it is about 'outcomes', and in my opinion the previous generations methods of punishment produced superior results based on young people crimes (perhaps you missed the wave of youth stabbings in Britain). My opinions and the reasons for them, I have articulated clearly. And you can disagree, but where the hell do you get off calling me a 'sick b@stard' for holding my view, which is perfectly acceptable for people of my age and has had my, admittedly working class, my upbringing. By your self confession, your mum's method of upbringing raised you as a model and perfect citizen, who didn't even his kids, which is exactly what I am saying. Spare the rod and spoilt child. As I said earlier, your beliefs are of zero consequence, none at all. It is out ones that matter, not silly beliefs about harms done by spanking children discipline. So how did your kids turn out? I'm imagining that they are now in prison for GBH or some major crime having had no discipline although you will tell me they are model and perfect citizens just like you are. I think you are sick b@stard, and a hypocrite to boot.

I wonder what the Chinese have actually done to you? Physically or economically? Or is your attitude based on all the western propaganda you have imbibed to prepare for the inevitable war with them and the US?

Not many open minds on these forums.

I'm not a fan of EV at the moment preferring to wait and see and too wait until the prices tumble as they do with all new technologies where there is intense competition. For the moment I think it is a hoax on mankind, a cop out on the hard decisions that need to be made about climate change (assuming climate change is not a hoax as well, and I thin the jury is out on that as well), and of course it affords a great opportunity for governments to reward their friends and donors by subsidising billionaires with tax payer's money. Also, I note that in the US and UK, EVs lost market share marginally last year, despite a rising car market and despite actually selling more cars that the year before, which is sending a shiver up the analysts who have been forecasting everlasting EV growth well into eternity. Losing market share this early in the products life cycle in key markets must be a worry, and whether it reflects dissatisfaction with EVs by previous purchasers or not, was not covered in the reports. Having said that, if I were to buy an EV, BYD would be my choice of EV. The reason is that, unlike most people I read on ASEAN NOW forums, I am not anti-China. Indeed I am pro-China. I think that the BYD small SUV (the one that looks like a Porshe Cayenne from the back) is to my mind, by far and away the most stylish of all EV vehicles. Teslas look out of proportion to my eye (too tall and not wide enough, at least the one's I've seen on the roads here), and they have an incredibly poor record of owner complaints (at least the data I have seen for the US, I have seen none for Thailand) and I'm sure the servicing of manufacturing defects in Thailand is poor quality. The other climate saving vehicle I would consider is a Hybrid from Toyota. I rented a Hybrid in the UK for a a few months when I was there.....it got 80 mpg, which astonished me. I doubt running costs of EVs would be lower that that of a hybrid, given the extricate price of electricity here, but doubtless there are some cheerleaders on here would tell me I am wrong.

Another one? Shouldn't Pattaya insist on slightly higher barriers on balconies of high rise buildings?

Can you claim the 5th in civil suits? Or do you just have to say, I can't remember. Prince Andrew was a bit stupid, but then again he never struck me as being the sharpest knife in the drawer...and a bit entitled. I'm glad his flirt with Virginia cost him a packet. There are calls in the UK for the Prince to be investigated, as I read today in the Guardian, which is not the most reliable of sources, being a propaganda outlet for the "woke" of mind. Again I'm confused about the need for an investigation, as clearly what he did, shagging a 17 year old babe, is not illegal in the UK, where the age of consent is 16. It would be a costly and unnecessary investigation.

Do you mean his brand is the land bridge? Or his brand is 'stupid and incompetent'?

Every time I stand in line at Tesco at the check out, I wonder at technology that is supposed to make life easier for customers and more efficient for businesses and I not that I am standing there for 20 minutes instead of 2 minutes, while some idiot tries to play for his goods with a telephone. I rage inside at the stupidity of it all. How did we all fall for this con trick....spend $1000 on a phone to find it doesn't make your life easier at all, or other people's....it simply adds to the frustration of life. Am I a fan of Ned Ludd? You betcha. I just had to spend time editing this short comment because the stupid app that checks spellings put 'staining' instead of 'standing', and it doesn't get red underlined as incorrect spelling, because the app put the wrong word in. Again useless technology....I can quite easily check my own spelling, but cannot check for red lines where they don't exist.

AIS SIM cards are valid for year.

I have a bridge to sell in London.

If this is correct, I will have no issues. Thanks.

Can Thailand withdraw from the DTAs? Would it pay the Thai government to do this? I always ask myself what are the possibilities?

My US accountants have told me that US SS payments made over here are exempt under a 1998 DTA. I have no tax withheld from my SS payment (ca 100,000 Baht paid monthly into a special Bangkok account which has no debit card and from which, funds much be withdrawn in person to prevent any fraud after death). I have a private pension which is the bulk of my income, but they will not pay it into any foreign bank, so that builds up in a US account. I have a 401k that I take out a sum annually, to pay alimony to my ex, and to pay all taxes for the year in question. I also transfer money from this 401K to give me extra spending money here. If I run short during the year, I have a transfer made from the account in the US that receives my pension. It is these two types of transfers I am most worried about. My accounts say they cannot tell me anything until they know what the new system will be, and which hasn't been announced yet. This is my own very simple system, but may run aground if the proofs of having paid taxes on the transfers are tied to individual transfers rather than the annual totals. Where I foresee difficulties is that I pay all of my US taxes in February following the tax year, (so in Feb 2024 I will pay for all estimated taxes for 2023) but have no receipt for it, except the 401K slip. I file my US taxes with the IRS on October 15th of each year for the preceding year. Thus, I will not have my total tax return for the US available until then, which would be the major proof that taxes had been paid on all of my income. My worry is that the Thai tax department may want their taxes much earlier than that, and find some way of making me pay. I will then be in. position of being a foreigner trying to reclaim Thai taxes paid from the Thai tax department. I NEVER WANT TO BE IN THAT SITUATION. We have to wait and see what system the Thai government come up with to make us pay this tax here. I have been told by commenters on here that 'the only way to do it is on an annual tax return'. I disagree with this because there is never 'only one way', and the Thai government might come up with some sort of scheme that robs me.

I have no dog in this fight. I went to school at a time when there was legal battery of children, with strap or cane usually. I once watched open mouthed a 7 or 8 year child being beaten by a teacher with fists on his back; and I also watched a 14 year old struck across the face with a metre ruler which broke and gashed a Y-shaped wound across the kid's face (all Catholic schools). It sounds bad now in our snowflake age, but a) it was not as bad as the treatment earlier generations endured and b) there was no pointed complaining to your parents at home, because you would receive another beating. I tend to look at the desirability of any given behaviour at the outcomes. It is pretty clear to me, but likely won't be to any snowflakes who buy into wokeness and other modern idiocies. But despite kids being beaten severely throughout history, there is no evidence of any harm being done to the kids, and kids who were beaten at school often support the practice. Britain's brightest and best who built the Empire, brought the world the industrial revolution and so forth, were all sadistically beaten at British public schools (ie private boarding schools like Eton and Harrow) and it was considered that the practice was virtuous and made men of them. It was common when I was a teenager to get a bit of a thumping from police if caught doing something 'dodgy', even for doing nothing, just to keep you in line, and I had a couple of experiences myself....it was called having received a 'clip around the ear' I tend to think that children are pretty robust and can handle a bit of violence from adults, be they parents, police or teachers without having any life long harm done to them. One has to see the results of the beating to determine whether this bump on the forehead has destroyed the kid's brain or is a simply bump that will go down in a couple of days. So perhaps it is best not to judge the teacher at this stage. I don't know whether there are any laws against hitting children in Thailand, I know you cannot smack children in the US or UK and they usually enforce their laws on the rest of the world, but I cannot recall ever having seen a child hit here by parents in the 15 years I have been here; but my wife has tales of being regularly hit with a stick on her legs as a child. Please note that I am not espousing the return to daily Victorian canings for kids. But. equally I don't see that the prohibition on beating kids has achieved much when I see the violence in today's society, and I'm not appalled by this incident or supportive of lynching the teacher for a loss of patience, as I imagine he was concerned about damage to the computers in the computer room where the kid was practising his Takraw.

On the new taxing of international transfers, I was told by two US accountants over here that the US has an agreement signed in 1998 that prevents Thailand from taxing US SS payments. Does anyone know if this is correct?

I'm an American and I vote. I will never in a million years vote for this corrupt, woke, anti-democrat, who hires incompetents to mask his own cognitive failure. We need laws to stop people like him ever getting elected. The worst President we have had in my lifetime.