OneMoreFarang

Let me guess, you are not one of them. But somehow you think you can make such statements about all of them. Did it ever cross your mind that maybe the geniuses are not the problem, but your limitations? Or, in easier words for you: "I don't understand this. You must be stupid". Nuff said.

It's easy. Go to your local MENSA meetings, and you will meet high IQ (>132) people. But there might be a small problem for you. To be able to go to those meetings you have to be MENSA member. You could try ...

Some time ago I read that in average the last year of every person's life (I think it was in Europe in general) cost the health service 20,000 EUR. In average for the last year of every person. That is a lot of money. And only for the last year, in average! So coming back to above post, often paying more money doesn't really save a life. It prolongs life a little longer. Let's say the farang spends his last 3 million THB on his health. Would it make sense that the family (any nationality) scraps together another million to prolong the life of one person a little longer? And then the family doesn't have any money anymore. Obviously there is no fixed rule, and maybe one operation for 100k THB is a life saver and the person will live 10 years longer. On the other hand, maybe that operation only adds 3 weeks more in a hospital bed. Is it smart to spend money that way?

I think an important part is that we know what we are doing and that we could stop anytime if we detect "strange" behavior. I.e. a few months ago, I looked from time to time at "shorts" on YouTube. I picked what I wanted to see. And then I clicked on something else I wanted to see, or I continued with my work at the PC or independent of the PC. Fine. And then somehow I clicked on a "Short", and after that was finished, I clicked "next" to see another unknown short, and next and next. Maybe I did this for 20min. And maybe the next day I did the same. And then, maybe a week or two later, I realized that I watched every day maybe 30 to 60 minutes shorts. And I did this without really seeing anything. Click, kind of watch, click again, watch a little, haha, click again. And I realized that is a waste of time. And then I didn't do it anymore, because I don't want to waste my time on that level. Obviously it is still kind of a waste of time to look videos at all or look or write in this forum. But normally I choose what I want to read and see. And as long as I make a conscious decision, then I think that is ok. The moment when it becomes a click, click, click routine, that is a problem. But if we realize that and then change our behavior then I think it's still fine. We/I learned something. If I would continue to watch shorts all the time, and not being able or willing to stop, that would be a problem.

My ex-boss used to say: manage your expectations. ????

Really? Imagine someone living in luxury with the perfectly designed mansion, the perfect temperature, perfect food and lots of servants. And then that someone goes to jail, because he is a convicted criminal. Yes, for someone who until last week was living a luxury life jail might be unwelcome stress. There is a solution: Get used to it!

I just had a look at your profile. You seem to be one of those gender activists. I guess that explains a lot. It must be difficult for you to exist in the real world. Good luck, you need it.

Where did you find that word? I have to admit I had to look it up. Do they teach you words like that in woke school, so that it sounds as if you are smart? I always find it amazing when some people don't understand comments and then they accuse the people who wrote the comments of being stupid. Who is stupid? The person who writes something which you don't understand or you, when you don't understand it?

That will work with some people, but not with all people. And then there is of course the one person, who must not be named, for whom $2bn is pocket change.

Ok, interesting. But to be fair, we can't blame IKEA for the termites.

If you want to "engage in substantive debate" then you could start with a civilized response. And adding all your woke terms doesn't help. I will block you now. I had enough of this nonsense.

I am not sure the typical PT voter will understand that rising the minimum wages will have lots of bad consequences. This doesn't mean I am against any rise. But people should understand that there are lots of consequences, and they won't like some of those consequences.

I stopped reading after your rant. "paternalistic boundaries" wow, do they teach you to use that term in woke class and how to do virtual signaling? Just looking at that picture above it's pretty obvious that she sells sex or whatever woke people call this these days. Action - reaction. That principle is well understood since centuries. But obviously the woke crowd has problems with the truth when it doesn't match "their truth". Enjoy your Lalaland.

No. It's similar to: Don't wear a bikini or skimpy outfit in the middle of the night in a dark alley. Because it might attract people which you don't want to meet.

Yes, from time to time. They are legal - at least in the countries where I consume them. I clearly wrote about illegal drugs. Making Alcohol illegal is no solution, see America's prohibition.

Ok, lets look at some more radical examples. There are some influencers and YouTube "stars" who get their likes and clicks because of stupid pranks. They make other peoples' lives difficult and they profit from their subscribers. If someone would harass those influencers, who harass other people for a living, do you think the police should protect those influencers? Should the taxpayers pay for protection for those people? I don't think so. Above is the same principle.

In principle I agree with you. But will voters remember all this in maybe a few years? Will they maybe vote for PT again because they promised extra money or something like that. If people (not only in Thailand) would make rational decisions, then the world would be a better place.

And guess who Yingluck will (try to) call...

Don't forget the work camps for corrupt officials who allow those dealers to operate.

a) I never used illegal drugs in my life b) I don't think I will ever use them c) I think they should be legalized, with conditions I would hope that people don't use drugs. But fact is, many do use them. And some people are addicted to drugs. They want their fix and they don't think about any consequences. Obviously, it would be good nobody uses drugs anymore, and there should be help available for people who want to stop. Apart from the drug users there are a couple of big problems with the illegal drug situation. Drugs are often sold "dirty". There can be any substances in any amounts in there and the buyer doesn't know it. That results is accidental overdoses, bad side effects, etc. And because drugs are illegal, they are expensive. And for that reason, they are a big business opportunity for organized crime and for corrupt authorities. The bad guys make a lot of money with drugs. And there is a lot of violence involved. Drug users are often criminals because they want their fix. They steal, they rob shops and people, etc. All bad. I remember reading an interview with a just retired police boos (I think somewhere in England). The police was at that time very successful. They confiscated a huge amount of drugs. Hurrah, we did it! The journalist asked the retired police officer what the consequences will be. He answered like this: Because there are fewer drugs available the drugs will be more expensive. And because users will need more money for their drugs, they will commit more crimes to get the money. So much about unintended consequences. I think drugs should be available i.e. in pharmacies or now like cigarettes which can't be promoted. And like mentioned above, there should be incentives for drug users to stop.

It seems you missed the part that the press conference of the guy who pretends to be out of politics is hosted in the head office of PT. Does it make it political? Of course. But obviously that is no surprise. I will never like him, but I would respect him at least a little if he would clearly state that he never stopped working in politics and that of course he came back to Thailand to work even more in politics (and for his pocket and his family). All his stupid excuses about grandchildren etc. are just that, stupid excuses.

I don't think he has a deal. He might have convinced many people to do this and that and he thought that he covered 100% of his way out of prison. And maybe he will come out soon. But sometimes you think you have to think about 100 things, but in reality you had to think about 101 things. And then at some time you find out that little thing, which you didn't think about, makes your life difficult. That could happen. I guess it is not likely, but it's not impossible that he will stay a little longer in jail.

It seems Jatuporn is pissed that he was a couple of times in jail, and the guy for who he went to jail will now possibly released early. I understand his point.

Possibly if she wouldn't be a so-called influencer then there wouldn't be a stalker. If she wants to be a celebrity, then I suggest she should pay for her own security. Should taxpayers' money be used to protect someone who deliberately puts themselves at risk? I don't think so.

I must have missed it in the article, does she work?