jimmybcool

Yeah I have a few friends life there and confirmed.

Question is how long will her really serve? Time off for good behavior and the like chances are he will get out of jail some day. And he shouldn't.

I love the laugh when they first see how big it is. Good job catching it. Anyone know which condo building this is?

He shouldn't be breathing by the end of the week. I know the death sentence isn't popular among many but society merits vengeance and notice to others with similar intent we do not coddle perpetrators of such evil.

I have driven very little in Thailand. Usually have friends with cars to golf and in Pattaya I don't need a car. Funny story is the FIRST time I drove in Thailand (scary for a yank driving on that side and that chaos) I am driving a rental down second road in Pattaya. A car pulls out in front blocking my lane so I have to either swerve around him or stop until he moves. So I stop not being in a hurry. A few seconds later (enough time to see I'm stopped in broad daylight) a young thai guy on a motorbike rear ends me. <deleted>kkkkk I get out and look at bike, him and car. I ask him he OK? Car looks OK to me and I'm like OK no problem thinking I can drive away. He pulls up next to drivers window and knocks on it. I'm thinking he is trying to shake me down but when I roll down the window he reaches in the shake my hand and drives off. I guess he appreciated the fact I didn't react in anger or make a big deal of it.

But this was about road rage wasn't it? I mean it wasn't withholding payment or something. I get it. A person here earns 300 baht a day and someone tries to cheat them of 100 baht I might consider violence to collect. But road rage? Gotta just let it go.

I can not believe people let their emotions get this far out of hand. Can a young man get angry with all that testosterone in him and punch someone? Yes. One with limited control issues. But to kill them with a car? Well I suspect he has a very hard life ahead of him now.

I thought he did. 🤣

What is funny is the far leftist leaders of the world think they are centrist. Whatever. Viewpoint is everything and this reporters views obviously originate from the far left.

Are you talking about a national sales tax replacing income tax? If so I'm game except I don't trust the bastards to start it and then ADD income taxes back. LOL

I woke up wondering (yeah I'm weird like that) about insurance claims for this fire. What if one was escaping the fire, got blocked and to leave their car on the road. Then police/fire come along and bash the car off the road destroying it. What do they claim? Is it covered by random fire on the road (homeowners cover when miles from home?) or accident? Not like these people don't already have massive problems. And note many lost their jobs as the business they worked at is gone. And rebuilding won't be fast. There will be a shortage of labor and materials for years. I have massive sympathy for these folks.

Personally I am an advocate of setting a minimum level of income to survive which everyone gets to earn tax free. Over that then a flat tax as you mention. It means poor people aren't taxed until they emerge to middle class then they become payers and should recognize the value of controlled government spending.

What exactly IS a "fair share"? I hear the term bandied about but no one ever mentions the top 5% of earners pay the majority of income taxes. Most of the government’s federal income tax revenue comes from the nation’s top income earners. In 2021, the top 5% of earners — people with incomes $252,840 and above — collectively paid over $1.4 trillion in income taxes, or about 66% of the national total. If you include the top 10% — everyone who made at least $169,800 — that figure rises to $1.7 trillion, or 76% of the total https://usafacts.org/articles/who-pays-the-most-income-tax/ I agree with a tax structure that increases in percentage as one incomes rises but how much is enough? I mean the bottom 50% pay a total of 3% of collected income tax. At what point is it unfair to expect the higher income earners to shoulder all the cost? Do the bottom 50% not also benefit from living in the country?

Hmmmm. Politico. Quoted (spun) in MSN. Come on guys. How about reporting NEWS instead of guesses?

There are other proactive measures they could take such as controlled burns. Doing them when there is no strong winds is easy for a quality fire department and removes a lot of the fuel for these fires. This was easily foreseen. Here in Arizona our fire departments are busy year round preventing firestorms before they start.

I hate conspiracies and will await investigation. But I agree the number of fires starting at once is very suspect. They are looking into the sources.

Yes. For hurricanes. They are actually more devastating than wildfires. Cover more ground. I haven't researched and don't know if the state of Florida has a mandated insurance maximum rate that insurers must adhere to. I believe I have heard that is the case in California but if someone knows for sure feel free to correct me. I think one can still get coverage in Florida just not covering hurricane damage. Lucky me I live in Arizona. Biggest threat really is HEAT. So unless my house melts I should be good. 😃

SoCal is in a dry spell yes. Been happening since recorded time. Wet years. Dry years. Of course the climate change warriors will try to attach this in some way on carbon taxes and SUVs. As your article tries to do. Yes Virginia climate change is real. Has been for millions of years and will continue to be so. No denying climate changes. How much and who causes it is a matter for debate. But this disaster isn't relevant to that. This IS a matter of poor management. Smart people clear out buildup of dry tinder in areas where people live. Smart people plan for this. I live in the edge of the Arizona desert. Our fire teams are busy clearing out this stuff during off season when there are no fires and creating fire breaks. Just as a note that this was predictable all of the big insurance companies are pulling out of California house insurance market. They have been doing so since last year. The combination of potential catastrophe (like now), increased home building prices and state mandated premiums being held to a price they felt didn't cover their risk had them decide it wasn't going to be tenable. So it was foreseen by them. Sadly the political parties in power in California failed to see it. Or do anything about it. https://www.foxbusiness.com/lifestyle/ca-wildfire-backlash-state-farm-other-insurers-slammed-dropping-coverage

This is a problem that should have been expected. I am no expert on the situation but I am aware of some parts of California that do not allow property owners to clear dead brush or plant non-native fire resistant plants. And apparently no one thought to create fire breaks. It seems there are some folks that think they need to leave everything native. Well, native in the southwest included massive wild fires in the past so why would we think we can stop them if the means are there to start them? I seriously doubt their fire departments can handle this with the winds moving the fires so fast and so much dry fuel. I am familiar with fire danger having lived in Arizona for 20+ years. I watched a fire in 2005 from my front yard with the car packed and ready to go if the wind shifted. I expected it and didn't sleep getting up to have a cigarette every hour and watch the advance through the hills. Got lucky and had a light sprinkle came down at 3 AM which dampened everything and next day the fire guys got it managed. Yes we had a massive party for all the firemen the next month. Here we have no restrictions on clearing potential fire sources and do different management of undeveloped areas. I think it helps massively. Hopefully when this is over California revisits how it manages open land. Perhaps that will prevent a repeat.

I do not believe any foreign nation had respect for Kamala. Nor do I believe they respect Joe Biden. And frankly it isn't that important to me. What is important is that as President whoever we have makes smart decisions and stops trying to buy respect around the world. The US is no longer flush with cash and needs to stop pissing away billions of dollars on places that hate us, And it would also be better if nations that do not love the west (the west probably includes wherever you are from) are more afraid of our president than like him. Sometimes a little crazy is a good thing. Seems like it worked better ala N Korea and Iran. Heck even Russia was better behaved when Trump was president. Note before and after Trump Russia invaded Crimea Under Obama) and then Ukraine (under Biden). N Korea stopped missile testing during Trumps first 4 years. And Iran backed insurgents attacked Israel via Gaza and Lebanon under Biden. Hey, I don't know if Trump is WHY nothing happened then or if it will stop. But I suspect there is a better chance than the cackling DEI moron Kamala.

And..... I won't cum in your mouth.

I voted for Trump. And I knew going in there would be times when I shake my head. Still cetain I chose the better of two choices. Not really sure what his end game on these comments is. But, and there is always a but, his first term he did not instigate a single military action. Until he actually DOES it I'll withhold judgement.

Yes I know. And Trump was also not convicted in the senate two times. I hope this concept of using legal shenanigans dies with the last Trump administration. Democrats need to find a better way to make their case than lawfare against their political opponents regardless of how much they hate them. And I hope the GOP doesn't go down the same road now they are in power. Despite my belief that Biden (Joe, Hunter and others) sold influence I don't think it serves the country to chase after them now.

I see an area I might have been in error. In fact the House voted to impeach for lying in court (perjury) but the senate voted not guilty. They voted 50-50 guilty of obstruction of justice. So I'm trying to figure out who forced him to accept a fine of $25,000 and suspension of his law license plus barred from practicing in front of the SCOTUS? If not congress who had the power to levy those punishments?

Read my comments again. I said Clinton was impeached. - Correct I said he was found guilty of minor charges - Correct I said his crimes didn't rise to removal from office - Correct People seem to think impeachment can only end in removal from office or innocence. Where am I wrong. I give up on that Hawaiian dude who I can see just posts one liners to everyone so I feel like I am now part of the party here. Perhaps you can state precisely WHAT I posted that is incorrect. Unlike some here I am happy to admit an error if pointed out. I don't lose sleep over this <deleted>.