OneMoreFarang

She realized that it was not what we expected and she ended it. Good. I don't know if it would be fair to give him (part of) the money back. The situation that he married her right away is obviously bad. But let's assume for a moment that he and her have a wonderful online relationship. All wonderful, and they love each other, and they want to have sex with each other. And then? Could they have legally sex if they are not married? As far as I know parents could complain and a guy could go to jail for sex with a girl, even if she enthusiastically said yes. Thinking about that, marriage kind of makes sense. Kind of.

Why do you walk out? I am not a fan of no-cash, but if that is the only option, and if I have a credit card or use QR code or something like that, then I just use it. I ride motorcycle and now more and more parking areas in shopping centers accept only payment with QR code. 10 THB paid with QR. I think it is silly, and I would prefer to give them 10B or 20B cash. But that option doesn't exist anymore. So, I pay with QR. I get used to it. Accept it. Live goes on.

I am together with my gf since she was 16. And we live happily together since many years. In my case we started to communicate with a mixture of Thai and English. Not perfect, but good enough. Would she be happier if she would have worked a couple of years in a bar and then marry another guy? Maybe. But then, maybe not. We all make decisions in our lives which maybe work out, and maybe not. And if we change our mind(s), then we can separate, make other decisions, etc. About your comment and 16 is too young. How about if she would have had sex with one or a couple of the village boys? Maybe 16 or maybe 20? And maybe she would be pregnant from one of those guys. Would that be better? Because in real life this is what seems to happen all the time.

And if they are married, would it be illegal if they have sex? I think the parents have to agree for a 16 year old girl to marry. And I guess if they agree to that then that includes what married people do with each other. This is not about my opinion if it is right or wrong, it's about the legal situation.

To add one more option to my list above: What would happen if she wouldn't have married that guy? Maybe she would have worked in a bar, maybe she would have had sex with hundreds or Thais or hundreds of foreign guys. And maybe then she would have married one of her customers. Would that be better? Because that seems to happen often. The parents send the daughter to make money, lots of money, any way she can make money. Buy us a new TV and fridge and pickup and house, etc. Possibly she would have sex with 30 different guys a month. Would that be better?

I think there are a couple of issues to talk about: - Age difference, how much of a problem is it? Is it always a problem? Can it be that both of them like the situation? - Farang or Thai or other nationalities. How would the situation be different if an older Thai gentleman would marry her? - Money: Would the girl and the parents have agreed to the marriage if they wouldn't receive "lots of money"? - What does the money buy? If a guy marries a girl/woman and pays money, does that mean she will stay with him for at least time x? Does it mean that he is entitled to have sex with her every day? Any sex he wants? In above case: Would the parents have agreed to a marriage of her to a Thai guy if he paid enough? What if that guy would use her just for sex? I think there are too many variables. Some Thai/farang marriages are just fine. Some marriages with a big age gap are fine. Some young guys (about same age) also treat their wives in a bad way, i.e. they have sex with others. Would such a situation be better? In an ideal world she would meet a nice guy, they would fall in love, maybe wait a year before they have sex, then marry, have sex and children, no money problem, no other sexual partners, and would live happily ever after. But how often does that happen?

It's almost funny when the US politicians pretend they have a big money tree. Who will pay those 95 billion? They need to borrow 95 billion more to give it to other countries. And they do exactly that. Amazing. I wonder how long it will take before the American people will wake up and realize that lots of good things could happen inside of the USA if the US politicians would use the money inside their own country - or just not borrow more and more money.

Some time ago, when he was still in exile, I read an interesting article. It described the Thaksin cardboard effect. As long as he was far away many people thought about him as the big savior. They remembered the good things which he did. And many people wanted more of the good things. Now, that he is back, it's not so easy anymore. Now there is the real person, cheating and lying. And he can't pretend anymore he is far away and can't do anything. Now PTs failure is Thaksin's failure. And then there is of course the issue that Thaksin told everybody they would never ever work together with the generals - until the moment that was the only possibility to get part of the trough. I am sure lots of people won't forget that betrayal.

If nobody has a better idea, then I suggest visit Ban Mo in Chinatown. There are lots of electronic guys doing repairs on the street. I am pretty sure ask one of them and they should be able to tell you where to go, maybe around the corner, to get it done.

And then worry that cash could be stolen? I prefer to pay a little more and have peace of mind.

It's interesting how people react to my post. It is a lot better than it was years and decades ago. I live since almost 30 years in Bangkok in the same area and I know the smoke from years ago and now. Obviously, it could be better and should be better. But what is wrong about noticing that it is already better than before. If it would be as bad as 20 years ago for a day or two then I am sure you would all hope it would be like a week ago. And personally, I really don't care what tourists want. As far as I am concerned, they should all go to Phuket or some place like that.

Why have lots of cash at all? Someone invited banks, credit cards, etc...

What do you expect?

I don't consider myself to be part of that group. But the question makes sense. What if he or she decides that someone else shares their bed. Honey, sorry, not today, Noi will join me tonight. And then?

I have to admit I didn't see them in a long time. But maybe there is a difference between living in the middle of the city and somewhere almost outside of the city. 😉

I would love to see their definition of "questionable influence". We could start with legal and illegal activities. And only because they are not arrested doesn't mean they didn't do anything illegal. And somehow, I would be surprised if anybody who helped Thaksin is on the list of influential people, even if they are obviously influential.

No idea. For me, everything >50km from Bangkok is up-country and not really important. 😉

Somehow it seems you think those are completely different groups of people...

Only those influential figures from the others. Our own influential figures are obviously all good guys. 😉

RTFM!

I wonder what is the bigger problem: loopholes or not enforced laws? And why are laws not enforced? Maybe because of corruption? What's the point of fixing loopholes if the rich and influential don't care about the laws?

I agree. I guess one reason for not doing anything is that the politicians don't want to upset their rich supporters. And that is obviously not only a problem in Thailand.

I wrote the following before I realize the article above is only about Phuket. But the principle is the same. If they really would want to do that, then the list of influential people would include all MPs and many rich families. Because they are all influential people. The more important question is which influential people use their influence to do good things, and which influential people use their influence to get more influence, more money, get out of jail, and all those things. Please let us know if the Shinawatras are on the list of influential people. They should be on that list. They clearly use their influence all the time.

I don't know who did what. Maybe it was the Bangkok governor. Or maybe it was police enforcement of existing laws. There are multiple reasons why things might happen, and I think often it is not obvious why. Years ago, there were a lot more vehicles with black smoke, especially busses and big trucks. Over the years, the situation got better and better? Why? I don't know.

Did I write that anywhere? No! Someone above wrote the pollution doesn't get better. I pointed out that at least in Bangkok it is not as bad as it used to be. Can it be improved? Yes. Should it be improved? Yes. Can we acknowledge that there is already less pollution than in the past? Yes. Flooding is another issue. Yes, there still is flooding. But a lot less than decades ago.