new2here

2 hours ago, overherebc said:

Immigration police, tourist police ( not the expat wallies who do it ) and plod on the stree, and in the cars are all police. No difference except a couple of badges.

That’s how it’s been explained to me too.  While they may have independent operating structures, reporting commands and such, from a legal jurisdictional basis, I’ve always understood that they (tourist police) have the same - no more or no less - statutory authority as other non-tourist police officers have.. again, from a statutory jurisdictional basis only 

22 minutes ago, lopburi3 said:

It appears to be a prisoner release program from reading actual article.   All 30 are reported to be former prisoners.  And it clearly states this program is ongoing and has been in effect for years now - nothing to do with any new policy.

I agree with sounds like the continuation of a rather established program whereby non-citizens who are convicted of a range of specified crimes in the US, are then later also subject to removal proceedings (to the county of their birth- in this case KH) on a post-incarceration basis.

 

Theres a fair number of mainstream and secondary level news organization reports on this matter posted on YT.

 

 

 
This is so obviously the right answer, it befuddles me that we seem to be considering only two option:
 
No vendors
Unregulated vendors
 
I broadly like and support street vendors, but think it would be very easy to require them to leave adequate space for people to walk, treat people on the sidewalk reasonably well, clean up after themselves, not sue the sewer system as their garbage cans, etc.

I think the reason that the solutions presented are largely “all” or “none” types is that, this is how sudden, reactive responses tend to go BEFORE they have the time/opportunity to be better thought out, more input gained and a decent amount of trialing completed... kind of the proverbial “knee-jerk” reaction if you will ... but I think if given the right amount of time and if involving the right people, I’ll bet a good win-win can be found.

For this reason, I tend to dislike the ever-so-famous Thai “crackdown” on this or that issue.... as they are rarely ever long lasting, don’t really provide for a meaningful long-term fix that all sides can agree with and usually only work when the immediate risk/fear of enforcement action is present.



Sent from my iPhone using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

In my soi near Udom Suk BTS, the BMA (I presume) has painted white boundary lines on the footpath, leaving adequate pedestrian room, where food stalls can set up six days a week, Monday being a day off for the traders and an opportunity for thorough cleaning by the BMA. There is no road obstruction and a useful service is provided. Can’t a similar system be set up everywhere?

While I haven’t seen that area you speak to, it sounds as if that’s a doable and reasonable compromise. I’m not against them, but do think there needs some measure of control, enforcement of rule (ie proper taxes and VAT collected and paid), insuring that the free right of pedestrian movement on public footpaths etc are not materially impacted ...

And what would the cash recount have shown if the cashier had put the difference somewhere else (like her pocket) rather than left it in the till?

Under that scenario it would balanace. No system will be 100% fool proof as your example tries to illustrate.. that said, I do think that 7-elevens use of a fully automated register system, combined with - what appears to me to be a pretty common policy/practice of giving you a receipt - is a pretty solid safeguard to most common forms of “cheat”.

But I cede that there can still be ways that a creative, determined cheater could exist...


Sent from my iPhone using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

I have to agree with the others, on the whole, the level of consumer rights rules and the system and process in place to enforce and protect them is just not of the same standard as that as perhaps in countries like the US Or regions like the EU. Right or wrong is a different conversation, but this is just to say that IMHO, on a comparison basis alone, you don’t have the same level of rights or protections here.

Could you move forward with legal action? Probably... but... before I did I’d want to first take a hard look at my case critically looking at the facts, what law, laws or company policies/warranties I have, what are the economics in play— then make a choice if the value is there for you to expend money to move forward.

IMHO, unless you have a pretty solid written warranty and documentation showing a failure, and the amount of money is material, I’d probably just move on or accept one of their compromise solutions.


Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect

Remember that at Passport Offices - not just an acceptance faculty, but an official US DoS Passport Office, it is possible to get a SAME DAY passport as well..

But they are conditions an applicant must meet and the expedite fee still applies. I’ve done this twice - once in Seattle and the last time in San Francisco... both times, I met the conditions, had all the correct paperwork and photos and fee (be sure to check not only the amount payable, but also form of payment accepted. I recall sometimes cash is accepted but only exact amounts only, etc)

The Passport Office won’t accept your renewal unless you can present all the required paperwork at the time of application. You can’t bring anything missing in the afternoon when your passport is ready. You’ve got to have it all at the time you apply.

The timeline process was the same in Seattle and well as San Francisco.. apply in the morning before lunch break and get it back same day, in the later afternoon before closing time.


Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect

I have only had this happen two times... and each time it was handled the same way.

The registers have an internal accounting - such that at any given moment, the register can print a report (on receipt thermal paper) and show on screen, exactly how much cash should be in the register. Every time a cashier does a “drop” like large B1,000 notes, the register accounts for this.. just like when they get cash from the safe as well.

So, when I said that I had been shorted X baht, the lead cashier pulled the accounting tape from the regifter and did a manual hard count of the cash in hand.

Each time the girls cash recount was spot on and when compared to the register tape report, reflected that I had indeed been shorted (one time it was by 20 baht and the second time, by 30 baht). Each time they were polite and apologetic and gave me the correct change.

An annoyance for sure, but given the reporting and ability to have real-time verified balances, I’d say the odds that any “on book” transaction was anything less than above-board, would be slim... it would be if something was paid for “off book” or without receipt, that is where I think this issue would pop up.


Sent from my iPhone using Thaivisa Connect

There are a few definite pluses...  in no specific order...

 

incliment weather — occasionally bags we wet when there is rain at the origin, destination or even transit points .  This tends to be more problematic when you fly smaller aircraft like the 737 where bags are “loose” loaded and not containerized.   So wrapping can help prevent or minimize weather damage 

 

bursting..: this tends to be more of an issue with boxes and other pieces that just don’t have the same “bursting” tension that a more traditional hard side or even soft sided bag might.  So you’d probably get some benefit to wrapping a box.

 

Theft ... IMHO, no bag is ever going to be 100% theft proof ... so, for me, the name of the game is “minimization” and to that end, I think wrapping helps make your bag less desirable than perhaps another not-wrapped bag might be.. again,  not guarantees, but I think it can help.

 

While I’m not a fan of loss of life period, I do think there is some measure of personal responsibility in that if you choose to get drunk and by extension, can’t control yourself, where you go, who you choose to interact with and how you chose to interact, then there can be consequences.  

 

I’m not minimizing the actions of the alleged stabber, but can’t also find a  wholly fault-free path of the deceased either.

1 hour ago, PhilAtUbon said:

I can’t confess to knowing the agenda of the Chief of the Air Force, two Deputy National Police Chiefs…

 

But if I can use Grenfell Tower as an example again, there was every make, model, colour and shade of political bods swarming around, pointing out just how devastating it was, and offering crumbs of comfort to those affected. I didn’t see every single news report, but I don’t remember any criticism of them.

 

Yeah Ok, I do appreciate that Thailand is a tiddly bit different, but a high-up Mucky-Muck coming to talk to you in a time of distress, can be a bit of a comfort.

 

This isn't combatative mode – as a few other postings - but just saying that every-day folk can be comforted a bit by seeing those in high positions appearing to take an interest.

I agree.  I think there’s some measure of public “optics” in play... I ALSO think there’s always going to be some “damned if you do, damned if you don’t” as well... there’s always some who will criticize and say that for the head of state or similar level folks, to come is a zero value-added scenario and maybe even a nett negative by way of diverting resources away from the event and to the high officials visit... and to that end, I think there’s some measure of truth to this... but... I also think that when in such role as a high official, “optics” matter and being seen there tends to send the right optical message...

In the end, so long as no meaningful amount of rescues reaources are diverted away, I think the PMs visit is the right thing to do — again given that he is a high official. 

I’ve held the belief that people at their most basic level respond to three basic “threats” or forms of punishment/adverse actions or whatever you choose to call it..

They are: a) loss of their stuff — call me money, assets or the like

b) loss of their freedom - call me inprisonment or the like and c) public embarrassment - call me loss or face 

 

to me, if the government really and truly wanted the issue fixed — quickly and correctly, I’d argue they need to start using a, b and/or c.

 

Start seizing major assets, imposing and seizing bank accounts for fines... start putting people into incarceration and start “naming and shaming” proven offenders, and I’d bet you see permanent fixes coming PDQ...  

 

Now, I’m not advocating the use of a, b or c here in this case.. but at the end of the day I do think that given the impact that something like the BTS has on Bangkok, that there is a real mandate that the government take action and start holding feet to the fire.  

 I cede that this is Thailand and as such things operate differently, but in the end, I think that if they really were to started laying down the law, imposing substantial fines, tossing company employees in jail and naming/picturing those found to be negligent, you’d see action.

 

2 hours ago, Samui Bodoh said:

While I understand the desire on the part of some to see the death penalty used, especially for the most heinous of crimes, I do not believe it is rational to use it in Thailand because of the Police, the Legal System and the Judiciary.

 

The Police. Is there anyone here who will express high confidence in the abilities, honesty and professionalism of the police? Anyone?

 

The legal system. Inside the legal system, there are clerks who handle evidence, there are CSI technicians, there are administrators, there are court clerks and translators (as required), etc. Is there anyone here who will express high confidence in the abilities, honesty and professionalism of all these people? We all deal with Thai bureaucrats on a regular basis; anyone want to express that confidence?

 

The Judiciary. We have all seen several... dubious decisions by the Judiciary over the years, especially where there are High-Sos and/or money involved. Is there anyone here who will express high confidence in the abilities, honesty and professionalism of the Judiciary? Anyone?

 

If a society wants to have the Death Penalty, then it must have an incredibly effective, honest, professional and competent Police Force, Support People in the Justice System, and Judiciary. Can anyone argue that these things exist in Thailand?

 

Utilizing the Death Penalty in Thailand is madness. Unfortunately, the entire Justice system does not yet rise to the level of competence required to be able to assert that an innocent person would not be executed. And, until you can confidently assert that an innocent person will not be executed, you should not and must not use the Death Penalty.

 

 

I agree.. given that the death penalty is finality - and can’t be reversed or even compensated if in error - BEFORE I would sanction its use, I would want very good assurances (recognizing that no system will ever be or can be wholly infallible) that the system from which it is a part of, is transparent, fair, equatable and that the rights of all parties are equally represented.

 

As an outsider to the Thai judicial system, it is my option only that the system here just does not rise in my mind, to a point where I’d feel comfortable that the death penalty was applied after a fair, transparent and equatable system has been administered.

If he had already exchanged the funds into THB and paid his car loan bill, then I’d either ask the bank/finance company to reverse (aka “claw back”) the payment under the grounds that the funds used were obtained thru criminal acts... or... Id move to seize the car itself, as it is (in part) proceeds from the commission of a crime, sell it at auction and return the victim her assets and any fines also deducted from the balance.

9 hours ago, baboon said:

But did his family not have the right to say goodbye to him, despite the wicked nature of crime he was found guilty of committing?

He has now paid for what he did. Will you also deprive his mother of a decent funeral and laying his remains forest, for her own closure if nothing else?

I tend to agree. While I must agree that HIS actions lacked any compassion for the victim, that does not then (in my kind) mean we, as a society, can’t or shouldn’t extent a minimum amount of compassion to the convict, while still upholding the chosen judicial punishment.

I just don’t see this as an all-or-nothing situation.  I also don’t agree with the notion of withholding names of the convicted as to me, if society is going to impose what arguably is the most extreme form of punishment on an individual, then I think for transparency purposes, it should be known who was subjected to said punishment.

 

5 hours ago, ZeVonderBearz said:

Hide the 2 baht in the price of the coffee/tea but offer a 2 baht discount to those who bring their own cup. Everyone loves a discount. 

 I agree.  I think there’s more than one way to get to where the business chooses to be: either policy and/or financially...   so, I think from a consumer point of view, it’s always better to offer a discount than it is a surcharge.. EVEN IF that’s a discount off a now-higher price.. while there will be some measure of vocal “push back”, to idea of a discount off a now higher price, I suspect in the end, the nett result will be better than by going with the surcharge off the previous (lower) price... only because I’ll bet that in the subconscious mind of the typical consumer, the love of a discount still exceeds the hatred of a price hike.

On 6/10/2018 at 1:01 AM, Dick Crank said:

Or you could take it a step further and make it a level playing field, progress!

... so wouldn’t go THAT far, as I do think that first opportunity should go to  any qualified national before a equally non-national...  

 

I’m not against the use of non-national labour per se, but I do think that as a matter of domestic policy that first opportunities should go to a countries own nationals before being open to others... but I don’t support hiring a national who happens to be less qualified over that of a higher qualified non-national, just because the former is a citizen and later is not...  I think the “best person for the job” is a good axiom and tends to produce improved results.

17 hours ago, Kohsamida said:

In fact, You're right! They called me back and said the entire consignment is being destroyed!  Yeah, right; Some Customs official is having Christmas early. That s*cks!  If you get something confiscated in the airport, they don't take your luggage!  Oh well. live and learn, I guess.

That’s usually how Customs sees things - as a single consigned shipment for purposes of entry, declaration and clearance processing - so if any part of it is “prohibited” then the shipment itself is classed as “prohibited”...

 

I’m not aware that Thai law explicitly allows or disallows for the shipment to be effectively ‘divivded’ per se - so that the prohibited items can be sized by Customs and the balance continues onward.  But given that shipments are manifested, move and clear as one single unit and not on a per-item basis, their reply is not surprising.

 

2 hours ago, imjmn said:

Allowing foreigners to work in those positions 'reserved' for Thai citizens would bring more knowledge and different practices into the Thai industry and make them more competitive on the world stage. MHO.

 

MJ

I agree.. I do think that as should be the case with all nations - that labour rules should give first “opportunity” to any national/citizen of that country over a non-citizen — but if after such chance is given to all qualified nationals, IF there is still a shortage of required talent, then I think opening it up to non-citizens is beneficial and I agree that by doing so, you also tend to get the benefits of a wider range of work styles and product.

To me, I think the issue of overcrowding is always going to be one that is company v. passenger... the company always wants to operate each and every train at 100% load... by contrast, passengers want the lowest load possible .. so there’s always going to be a push-pull so to speak. Just like airlines- no one likes a full cabin... but that’s how airlines make money, by having full cabins and not by flying empty seats.

 

to that end, i can’t see any justification at present to add more capacity, be that added train frequencies or carriages - outside of a very few limited hours in the AM and PM peak periods.

 

where i DO think the bts is off mark is on the facilities side - as mentioned earlier, the number of coin-only ticket vending machines, number of currency/coin vending machines and the number of turnstiles.  It’s here I think at some stations the ridership has now outstripped the processing capacity rate.

 

What id like to see is: 1) the ability to add value/credit/trips to a stored value card at a kiosk or vending machine (much like the MRT does) and 2) current to coin change machines. To me, that’s a good use of tech and one that will reduce the number of human tens actions that station staff must handle - thus leaving them to handle issues that really require a human to facilitate.

Most Countries have restrictions placed on the individual .
Its quite normal for each person to be judged by what hes carrying .
It would be nice if you could just read the story, without resorting to Thai bashing 

I think this is a part of the problem.. while I think there is no credible argument that the limits are calculated and expressed on a per person basis- what is not equally clear is on exactly how the commodities are to be physically carried and/or presented.

To me, to attempt to sidestep the whole issue, I’d post conspicuous notice that all items in one persons possession at the time of entry into the customs channel shall be construed by customs and excise, to be the sole property of that single passenger for purposes of duty free allowance calculations. Therefore any redistribution of goods should be done before entry into the customs channel.

This keeps it simple — allowances are expressed per person and what you have with you as a single person shall be how your individual compliance is measured.


Sent from my iPhone using Thailand Forum - Thaivisa mobile app

I agree that only properly licensed vehicles should be used - that’s a fair statement... and to that end, IF it is that Grab is using people/drivers whose vehicles are not properly licensed with DLT for commercial use - then I think that’s a fair complaint.

 

However, I think the underlying “trend” here is not in the drivers favor — that is the introduction and expanded use of “tech” in their line of work...

 

So, while I think in the short to even medium run, the use of tactics like legal maneuvering, the tacit/expressed or overt use of violence or similar threats by the “traditional” taxi establishment may slow the growth of Grab and Grab-like services, in the long run I don’t see that as stopping what really is an unstoppable movement.

 

I do agree that in the transition from the current old-model to new-model of taxi hiring services, there will be some who are simply “left behind” or victims if you will, by obsolescence, however that in and of itself isn’t going to stop the movement.

 

Smart folks would do what they have to to get “in front” of the trend and not rely on the government to stop or limit what really is (IMHO) a trend that is fundamentally unstoppable — only regulate-able at the very best.  

 

I also agreee with an earlier comment about “public optics” in that if there weren’t so many reports (and “so many” is if course subjective and subject to mainstream media exposure) of taxi operator abuse - be that fraud, theft, violence, I think in the court of public opinion, they’d have a much more solid ally and that, IMHO, would translate into what action the government takes, or not.