Bangel72

Perhaps a bit, my initial first day costs following a dog bite from soi 7 was over the 20k, direct injections plus cleaning. I could have shopped around a bit but after reading a few articles on rabies went to where I know. After that first trip was each of the series shots for both rabies and tetanus, doctor fee plus shot cost I think around 1k a pop. So base cost maybe closer to 30k, but then you have transport time costs so for me was close to 50k cost an expensive lesson that using jedi force to calm a dog down is very foolish or downright stupid. It was a partial street dog, so fed and a regular at street store. I did not go after costs from them but I suspect if they understood they had liability it might make them think twice about encouraging the dogs to be there. In the posters case, nobody should live in fear when walking or cycling along a beach, owner of place in my view has responsibility

Interesting turn around in the poll results. Earlier in month it was inferred most voters wanted regulation over criminalisation. Suspect that triggered a few more voters. might be worth looking for anomalies in voting. Some pro groups were asking customers to provide feedback via the and were open about this, guessing some anti groups did the same once it was felt the results did not match what they wanted.

Owners of the dogs are liable for bites I believe, even if they are only deemed unofficial owners. Tetanus and Rabies shots and even minor bite treatment can end up close to 50k. 50k fines every time might change things

Some families are likely doing it on a couple of thousand baht a month on the cheapest of cheap things with support from village and temple. Maybe an impact on long term health, mental growth etc that goes with being poor. When older and eating same food as family in can be cheaper as its often just some extra rice and chicken at the family meal that's not noticed, free local village school etc, no trips. 5k to granny seems common Now if its younger then they have special addition costs, if your goal is not the lowest amount but an amount that lets the family take care of the kid and keep it healthy. Lazada bought Milk 2k a month, semi-solid food packages 3k, nappies 2k, monthly transport to doc etc. So 10k a month to mother or family may be pretty close, accept risk they may go cheap and use money elsewhere so order direct for the kid where you can. Now if its more about sending support to someone else for your own kid. Consider the alternative, if the kid came to you what would be your costs. It's likely you'd have the above plus full time nanny costs above this so you end up closer to 25k. School cost can start later, though many schools have 3 year old entry options, pretty much day care. If you have responsibility and you want to take it seriously look for something between what it would cost to be with you and what the basic costs would be, potential win/win but keep an eye on any money you are sending so it going where it should.

Are you still in contact with anyone you had romantic or business interactions with prior to your marriage? This is likely just the same. In a lot of cases its friends with semi paid for benefits and that's fairly normalised here with a modern view of nothing wrong with that. The above maybe just falls into the category of ex's and that's then a discussion, you are uncomfortable with it and you'd rather they stopped blocked contact and you will do the same, I'd say most people would be okay with that. I don't have any ex's on my facebook for example, just not worth the hassle. If its still transactional then yep I could see that as being concerning for some. The 'John' reference could be construed that you view something in her past as fairly nefarious, trafficked and forced against her will with evil johns taking advantage for example. This is likely a bit more concerning, bit of stockholm syndrome perhaps and she may need help.

FYI the feedback survey is on a government site published in the papers for all to access and give their views. I'm a bit surprised by results as not that well publicized and had expected it to be gamed. The challenge with a referendum is that its been demonised for so long, you can see even by comments here that a lot of views are based on misinformation and decades of propaganda. Legistate rather than criminalize seems more rational to those who are a bit more informed, it can be abused and misused often again due to lack of understanding. If you whitey its not a good experience for example, couches to lie down on and drinking water can help with this rarity but if users have no understanding of this they can panic, rush off to hospital etc. Half the arguments against seem to be about smell, given the smells in bangkok, the sewers, the squid men, the street stalls, the pollution its a very weak argument that could really be discarded. However if that's the argument they could legistate water curing all weed, that would remove the smell factor and many would need to find another crutch argument against it. Education is key for sensible discussion on way forward and to reduce unnecessary risk and legistation to keep it away from kids as much as possible in the same way as other things children should be protected from that are okay for grown adults to determine on their own.

Wonder what strains he is growing "By then, any existing cannabis plants would have naturally died due to their short lifespan of 90-100 days." Some auto's will fit that period but I suspect some Thai strains can take 90 days just flower and then the same again in flower mode.

Best to ask at your seed shop. I started on auto's with 9 to 10 weeks between planting and harvesting. I started with three "quick one", "easy bud" and "royal dwarf" following a chat with a shop, alongside some dubious cheaper online seeds. Shop seeds faired much better, indoor grow, tent with okayish lights. Learned a load and had fun doing so, no big hitters there but for learning it was not a bad start and to get product (ready for curing) in a couple of months was major plus as did not have to keep them alive too long. Best of luck.

It's interesting that you need to remain in employment throughout the process, I ran into almost the same with my PR application. I was in the years where they did not give out the PR for about 5 years after application. Got the invite to go pick it up and happened to be between jobs at the time. I argued that it was based on 3 years tax when I applied and not when received to no avail, was given option pay 20k to sort it out and fastrack pickup to an hour rather than next day or they would have cancelled the visa associated with PR application and I would need to leave country same day. One to watch out for.

The main routes seem to be either be married or better married with Thai children or permanent residence. I'm PR, it was based on 3 year tax returns in Thailand - last time I checked I think for citizenship they wanted at least 5 years as PR first. So this route if you don't already have the tax returns its about an 8 year process. I suspect the marriage route also needs the work permit and 3 year tax returns but likely a shorted route. Points system based - Job, income and length of time on a house book can make up almost half the points so that's likely why many will say work permit, tax returns and PR are key but there are other points available. For UK, I doubt its possible even if they wanted you to give up UK citizenship and dual citizenship seems to be accepted. If you continue to pay national insurance or have paid enough then NHS in my understanding continues, I pay about 27 quid a month, should also mean UK pension is also still an option. As others suggest there are likely other options to achieve your goals

Its highly unlikely to happen but some sort of code of conduct for both bars, their staff and security could be beneficial for tourism. I was on 6 recently with a crowd of ten bar hopping, no problems at all. Difference potentially was just a heads up for the new guys, keep an eye on your bills, ask how much everything costs, clear your bills regularly, if you feel your being scammed, remain calm, pay your bill and move on. Most issues tend to be communication ones. They should put that guide on big signs on soi 6 in my view. Drunk people are idiots at times and some are downright unstable, bars know this their staff and security should to and be trained in how to guide these customers accordingly. Some bars and staff may choose to see this idiot element as cannon fodder then get in their face and aggressive when misunderstandings happen like its an actual surprise when its clear that's exactly what's going to happen. In no way am I defending the customer but the bars, their staff and the security are supposed to be the professionals and perhaps harsher punishment of all three could make a difference before someone does get killed. There are many bars on that soi that do seem to get this and are safe fun places to go, would be good if the others could all get on board but its a shame that punishment may be the only incentive.

Lets get those coffee addicts too, hate the smell and you can see that mental impact when they dont get their morning fix. Then sugar, fizzy drinks, meat, fatty food, sweets and cake, damn cake get that too. The reality is all of which likely worse than cannabis when used by your normal average user and almost none have the potential health benefits. With the exception of coffee I like all the others, I'm aware of the potential harm of each and try not to overdo them and I teach my kid the same and the potential impact of each. I agree with added steps to protect children and the vulnerable that may not have had the opportunity for good parenting and reasonable judgement but to start banning all of those on the basis they can all be harmful seems fairly harsh. Work to help society, to give people opportunities and education and support to leverage good judgement and find life in moderation is surely a more reasonable approach. Banning is tried tested and failed way of dealing with things.

Is a three month deposit not illegal in the first place? I though the laws changed a while back so it was one month max?

Cannot advise on the scammed part. I did PR about 15 years ago, I used a friendly lawyer. Quite a bit of paperwork gathering particularly tax returns and three or four visits to CW. He invested a reasonable amount of time with me but mostly it was for the meetings and the fact the it was spread over a number of years then as they had stalled the acceptance part. Not sure what going rate would be for paperwork coordination we had two prep sessions and say 3 meetings at CW - those could easily be half days but I likely well underpaid, maybe 20k plus a couple of small envelopes to speed things up as was the norm then, note I finalised it on my own as I had lost touch with lawyer 4 years later. Coincidently the cost of the PR if you are not married was around 200k. Note there are long periods that they cannot do anything at all, the application process which is really just submitting the application has a small window Nov/Dec each year I think then its a case of sit and wait till they get back to you. This may be a factor in the sense that its not progressing. It may be the same now, when my application 7.5k I think was received I immediately received a visa, this was a PR pending visa that I needed to renew every 6 months for free, that bit was straight forward did not need lawyer. In my case it meant I had a 7.5k visa for around 4 years till they finally approved and gave me PR. They are much quicker now but it was an odd backdoor to a visa whilst your application is processed even if you end up being rejected

Lets pretend for a moment this is a serious question. On one side there is an argument, he's a grown adult and he's action rationally and just needs a family chat to make sure he's okay, happy and put some of the family concerns to rest once you understand its part of his self exploration cycle. The other side is that it is something that verges into the realms of addiction, like drugs or gambling where he has changed his view of the world that there's nothing wrong, everything is good yet at the same time become blind and vulnerable to potential downsides. Addictions come in all forms, I'm a strong advocate for example that gambling addiction should be given the same warnings and treatment as crack addicts. The impact on their life, there finances and the families can be just as devastating. Putting those two together in same risk category is hard for many people particularly fun gamblers who may not have the preposition at all of becoming the addict that others become, alongside this its legal for most countries so support groups are voluntary and in some countries no support exists, the reality is when it is an addiction the impacts and risks are the same and should be treated accordingly. If some struggle to put those two in the same category its going to be a massive jump for many to put Thailand visits into the same category for the same reasons. Addicts though are often the same no matter what. When I had a family member go on a gambling addiction run due to trauma, it was acceptance of harm they could potentially do to people they loved alongside the transfer of all finances to control of the matriarch that got them back. Each case will be different but transfer of finance control away from someone if they are believed to be caught in the throws of an addiction is key and something to consider. Lets hope though in this case its on the one side rather than the other.