wilcopops

this thread reminds me of the cartoon of someone looking at an ever increasing circle on the ground which in the end turns out to be the shadow of a massive falling rock.

1 hour ago, gk10002000 said:

Some bosses are smart and realize talent and ability.  Others, as mentioned in some posts are purely hiring eye candy or cheapest labor or people they want to just boss around and satisfy their egos. 

However in Thailand gender equality is barely accepted anywhere by employees who still cling to the old criteria of graft and nepotism....hence the hopeless government departments, education etc and the need to import high level engineers and managers from abroad.

6 hours ago, BritManToo said:

I know which one I'd bang!

...assuming you'd even be given a choice? And can you relate that to the workplace?

1 hour ago, JAFO said:

Being I work here in Thailand I see this all the time. While some spout its about sex and other things, it is just how the society behaves. They clearly do not want to pay more (No different then other countries). They also look at hire younger single women in office jobs as an opportunity to develop them. Also, consider what jobs are available. Most or service/office jobs and not many older women want that type of job and the hustle, especially with husband and children.

 

 

Pretty uninformed assessment of the situation........... Thais tend to look on employment in certain areas as gender specific, especially in industry and certainly discriminate against age.

3 hours ago, atyclb said:

 

thailand is sort of a special society.

 

 

there you have it - this poster of these pictures clearly is only interested in what women LOOk like - clearly they aren't going to get a job on merit.

It's not justt discrimination, it is sexism, mysogeny and and a whole lot of other things too.....as far as I can tell employers are free to openly discriminate against just about anything they want.

You only have to look at advertising to see how sexism is back in the 1960s - the job of "pretty girl" just about sums it all up.

merit in employment is virtually unknown in Thailand where they prefer nepotism graft and sexism over any consideration of how good they may be at the job.

10 hours ago, Just1Voice said:

Science? How about almost 60 years of riding everything from mini-bikes as a kid, to 600 -1,000cc motorcycles most of my adult life, including a trip lasting almost 4 years straight on a 650cc Kawasaki to every state in the U.S.? I would venture to say I've seen more bike accidents in my life than you can imagine.

QED theres the rub, someone who is completely unaware of how little they know....a very dangerous thing.

I doubt if you've heard of Dunning Kruger either.

11 hours ago, JaiLai said:

I see 'total dicks' going too fast on 'slow' bikes.

 

There is a lot of 'total dicks' on the roads here....

 

It's like a 'total dick fest'

As said completely erroneous way of looking at Thailand's road safety problems.

2 hours ago, overherebc said:

Yep, the problem being all those buses, cars and HGV's getting in the way. ????????????

the problem being all the brick walls and trees around the edge of the roads, which is why the race is no longer recognized as a Grand Prix and the death rate is so high...........this underlines the importance of the driving environment in road safety.

2 hours ago, Old Man River said:

Probably texting while driving.



Sent from my iPad using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

It appears in Europe there has been an increase in casualties in the last few years and texting is the main suspect.

On 4/19/2019 at 8:57 AM, overherebc said:

I'm referring to public roads and the driving public in general.

The original quote was made by Sir Stitling Moss or Jackie Stewart, not sure which one, so you really should direct your statement to them.

I honestly don't think you can compare track racing to normal driving/riding

IoM races are on public roads.

On 8/18/2018 at 9:17 AM, Just1Voice said:

For that much damage to that bike, and himself, he was seriously speeding. 

 

So you are prepared to write a crash report on this incident? I hope you have the science to back it up.

11 minutes ago, lust said:

Why does anyone care about strangers wearing helmets?  Take care of your business, not others.

We are not islands .... People who are injured when not wearing helmets have impacts on others.

Friends and family end up as carers or mourners....family income is lost.

The rest of us? ......well, we end up paying ever higher insurance premiums and taxes for the services these victims require.

Not wearing a helmet isn't an individual freedom or right, it impinges on others, friends, family and society. 

40 minutes ago, overherebc said:

I'm referring to public roads and the driving public in general.

The original quote was made by Sir Stitling Moss or Jackie Stewart, not sure which one, so you really should direct your statement to them.

I honestly don't think you can compare track racing to normal driving/riding

Attempts to boil down road safety to simple dichotomies is in the long run, counter productive.

It seems that some on thus thread don't understand the true purpose of crash helmets and their limitations. They are part of a plethora of measures to make roads safer.

That is the next point it is ROAD SAFETY, not just "driving".

Attempts to blame drivers and driving alone indicates that the proposer is unaware of the full range of issues that confront road safety.

Remember 94% of accidents are the result of human error....but one needs to understand what that actually entails..... it doesn't just mean huge gaffs or criminal acts, it includes tiny momentary diversions of concentration or even inappropriate reaction to anothers "bad" driving. These are things we ALL do on a daily basis......usually we get away with it.....but think back and you'll see how they could have gone horribly wrong.

Once human error has started the process, it is WHAT HAPPENS AFTER that is so crucial. By now events are not under control of the driver...things like road quality a environment kick in. Seat belts, crash helmets, vehicle construction, emergency services all play a part in your chances of survival.....will it be minor injury, serious injury or death?

57 minutes ago, colinneil said:

What a ridiculous comment, i had a very serious accident, left paraplegic.

Only part of my body unscathed was my head, due to me wearing a helmet.

It seems you are not thinking clearly....the comment is criticising the headline not crash helmets.....didn't think id have to explain that

Therefore we, conclude that wearing of helmets is a,waste of time?

On 3/25/2019 at 9:05 AM, Andre0720 said:

Some controls being done regarding helmets. Which should be the last priority.

 

But looks like never regarding speed, which should be the first priority.

 

Amazing Thailand....

 

 

QED

On 4/15/2019 at 11:32 AM, stevenl said:

"management makes no good use of the money as seen by the damage sustained by these parks."

There been a real change in the past years. The money from these marine parks is used to protect the marine life, and the general situation has improved considerably.

It most certainly has not improved the parks at all are you unaware of the danage issues and the fact thry are now legislating retroactively to reduce numbers as well as closing some areas.??

12 hours ago, jackdd said:

If you had a Thai ID card you would get the Thai price

You probably got a non-Thai ID card, which is basically the opposite of a Thai ID card because it shows that you are a foreigner and supposed to pay the foreigner price

So now its no longer about the dual pricing right or wrong, it is about how a handful of expats are managing to get into parks without paying the surcharge?

Seems to be a very egocentric standpoint.

10 minutes ago, natway09 said:

Have you guys lost your marbles...?

Many countries have free access to their attractions for their citizens yet charge foreigners (tourists) including Japan & NZ

Stop Thai bashing , just pay the 200 Bht & keep your blood pressure under control

A tenfold surcharge .please say where!!!!

8 minutes ago, Crossy said:

It really wasn't the best example (I'll try harder next time), it's only in my mind because I had a local pass years ago, I visited the stones a whole once.

 

It's a very good example of how to run your national heritage in a fair and responsible way..... it in no way justifies the policies persued in Thailand

19 minutes ago, Crossy said:

It took me a little time to find it, but for those interested the my stonehenge example:-

 

https://www.english-heritage.org.uk/siteassets/home/visit/places-to-visit/stonehenge/plan-your-visit/s1-1_3214_local-residents-flyer-stonehenge.pdf

 

This is free access for locals and discounts for certain groups - how is this the same as or even comparable to a ten-fold surcharge for foreigners?

4 hours ago, papa al said:

They [parks] can do what they want too.

THe fees for National Parks are the same nationwide and set by the DNP and Government...... the parks cannot charge what the like.

4 hours ago, papa al said:

In America, discounts for senior citizens, military, and disabled are common.

Pretty disgusting discrimination, right?.

????

as opposed to a ten-fold surcharge? Different thing altogether

I think some posters and the DNP don't realise the negative effect a ten-fold surcharge actually has.

To suggest that the "extra money" actually helps is far too simplistic.

With a comprehensive non-discriminatory pricing system based on product rather then nationality both income and visitors would increase.

With the present system a week long visit to a national park or multiple parks quickly becomes prohibitively expensive for a family of 4.

Entry is 1600 baht plus 130 for vehicle and any other expenses. If they leave the park and re-enter or enter another park they pay again...another 1600 plus etc etc...a so it goes...it really doesn't compare that favourably in the end with a weeks stay at a coastal resort.

This kind of cost (and attitude) drives people away....it does not help fund the parks.

Even the few parks, mostly marine, that get millions of are unable to manage their resources effectively and have had to take retroactive measures such as closing down altogether. The money they take is not seen by other national parks either.