JCauto

I've been amused by the survey fiction published by NIDA for years, but this one's a bit OTT. What's next? "NIDA survey finds 98% of Thai people would never charge more for Falang than Thai"? I'll put this with the "popularity of the current government" polls in terms of its accuracy.

I'll admit to browsing through only the first and last (page 6) pages of this topic, however I didn't see the main reason why Thai people don't speak English well (IMHO). That is quite simply that they don't want to lose face by making a mistake ("pood pid, seeah naa"). When I arrived as a volunteer I took 6 weeks of Thai language lessons and was astonished thereafter that even Chula or Thammasat university Masters grads would immediately stop attempting English when they heard my rudimentary Thai. When I asked why, this was invariably the reason given - you're not Thai, so you're not embarrassed to make mistakes and we don't care if you do, but we ARE Thai, and we ARE embarrassed to make mistakes speaking your language. Even after becoming friends and pressing them to use their English else it would never improve, this never changed. Admittedly this was a long time ago (late 80's, early 90's). I then moved to Cambodia and discovered I could hardly use my Khmer in Phnom Penh because the Cambodians were all extremely keen to improve their English since this was the ticket to NGO or UN jobs or selling stuff to Farang and thus the way out of poverty. They also had no "face" issues. Hence Cambodians tend to speak much better English than the Thai, at least in the major city. It's different in the countryside of course, but the same is true in Thailand for the most part.

You think they aren't already making millions out of the sex industry? Clearly the only thing preventing this from moving forward is that it would be TAKING away from what they are already making hence they have no interest in it.

I see an "inactive post" in this man's future.

Do I believe that everybody being vaxxed will kill off the virus? Yes, I do. Have you seen much Smallpox about lately? How about Polio? Why not? That you believe that nobody was developing mRNA vaccines before 4 months ago tells us everything we need to know about your knowledge and expertise.

This question or line of thought seems to be becoming relatively common even amongst some whom I know are otherwise sensible, so let's look at it clearly shall we? 1. Unvaccinated people are more likely to get the virus than vaccinated people. This is clearly true, and can be understood by the common person when you remember that those who are vaccinated and get the virus are classified as having gotten a "breakthrough" infection. That means that, despite the additional protection offered by the vaccine, it's not a 100% preventive and so even vaccinated people can get the virus. However, it is obvious that two identical twins - one vaccinated, one not - who are exposed to the same circumstances will have the unvaccinated one more likely to get the virus. Therefore, statistically, you ARE more likely to have the virus if you're unvaccinated with all other factors unconsidered. This is the main reason for restrictions. If you're a vector, I don't want you wandering around near me. In addition, if you DO get the virus, the unvaccinated are more likely to get long-haul COVID, have a longer time with the virus before recovery and have more serious impacts from the virus. This makes them a burden on the healthcare system and families who have to care for them and a higher risk because they're actively transmitting the virus for a longer period of time after getting it than the vaccinated are by virtue of their being able to recover more quickly and completely. 2. Unvaccinated people are more likely to behave with less caution in terms of getting or transmitting the virus. I would say that there are two camps of unvaccinated based on my observation. First are those who are genuinely concerned about the vaccine impacts on their personal health but who recognize that the virus is a serious health concern and take extra precautions (being especially careful about masking, avoiding crowds, maintaining social distancing etc.) knowing that they haven't got the vaccination to provide additional protection. Those people are not problematic because they're behaving in a way that protects themselves and others from what they recognize as a public health danger. With their behaviours and masking, they're not recklessly exposing others to the virus, although they're personally in more danger should they get infected despite their precautions. The second camp are the real problem - the "I know better than the scientists" crowd, the "muh freedumbs", the "vaccine-shedding", the "micro-chipping", the "sheeple" and the "whatabouters"...it's been a revelation to me that this group extends far wider and deeper than previously believed and includes people who ARE scientists and health professionals. However, as one who grew up in a medical family, it's actually not that unusual for health professionals to eschew what they know to be sound medical advice in favour of doing what they want despite the impacts. In these cases, there are usually two main reasons underlying those choices: (1) Political belief, (2) Personal convenience/pleasure, (3) Fatalism, (4) Susceptibility to conspiracy theory, and (5) Mental illness. These people have politicized a public health issue and are not willing to either consider other people's rights as being as valid as their own, or are basically of the opinion "we're all gonna die one day and this place is going to hell in a handbasket anyway" or have become influenced by deliberately targeted and malevolent social media to act as the "sheeple" they so despise. In addition, because of the politicization of the issue, these people are also now gathering with other like-minded individuals to promote their point of view, and of course not taking the pre-cautions to prevent transmission of the disease so are higher in actual exposure to the virus. These people are a real and present danger to the public. They are the reason for the restrictions and why, suddenly, after a lifetime of getting vaccinated, there are all of these internet experts "DoInG thEIr ResEARch" to tell us all about the science and epidemiology they haven't previously given a thought to for their entire existence. But of course without the grounding to understand a whit of it. The biggest problem is separating these two groups of unvaccinated people. Since there's no easy, obvious or scientific way to do so that is practical, unfortunately for the first group, they're going to have the restrictions imposed on the second group. Those restrictions are necessary to protect the rest of us who are complying with the public health mandates and practices. TL;DR: You are statistically more likely to be a danger to someone else in terms of transmitting COVID-19 if you are unvaccinated because your likelihood of getting the virus is higher and you're more likely to transmit the virus due to your views that have lead you to not get the vaccination. This is not universal behaviour among the unvaccinated, but in order to manage the virus practically, this group has to be treated uniformly in order to protect the majority of the population and, especially, the vulnerable.

As one of the billions of potential tourists who have been deemed "low quality", may I ask if that was the Thai Government's "inside voice" speaking again?

That's the sensible way to go about it. Don't talk to any of the thousands of actual expats who live in Thailand to find out how they might keep them here and attract similar sorts - have some senior Thai guys get together to figure out how to attract the sort of expats who don't and won't come to Thailand. Sure to bring about the expected result! Which is true, since the expected result is greasing of palms, drinking of expensive scotch and wine and cavorting about with attractive young ladies while "discussing" this difficult issue.

While you are correct in theory, in practice one tends to learn about sex from one's peers, generally in the single digit age bracket. These are not the most well-informed and experienced people to learn from. However, they're by far the most likely to broach the subject and expound upon it at that age. Parents have many delusions about their influence, it's actually less than you think.