Andrew65

In the UK it's not allowed for persons who appear to be under 25 to appear in adverts for alcoholic drinks.

I believe that the total prison population of Thailand is triple that of the UK, a country with pretty much the same population. 250,000 V 80,000. I suspect a very large proportion of them are prisoners of the war on drugs.

Many years ago a Nigerian Embassy official stated that there were 1,000 Nigerians in prison in Thailand.

I'm guessing that because it's legal in Thailand these guys are thinking that it's ok to export it?

They will need a soap -on-a-rope!

In the UK employers instruct their shopworkers not to tackle shoplifters, mainly for their own safety.

I learnt many years ago that when in Pattaya it's best to lodge at least a km from where the nightlife is

As I have mentioned before I believe that in years to come Thailand will have to actively reduce the amount of overseas arrivals. It's geographically situated within 4 or 5 hours flying of where 3+ billion people live. Figures suggest that on the island of Phuket there is a ratio of 118:1 tourists/residents, increasing this will become unsustainable. Overtourism.

An old British friend tried getting a job as an English teacher in Vietnam (he's a properly qualified teacher). He was 58 at the time and thought that his age (too old) was what counted against him. I think the retirement age is 60 in Vietnam. He never got the job.

We have to pay a lot of tax for the health service in the UK. When I worked in Oz a condition of my work visa was that my employer had to show that they had health insurance for me, that doesn't happen in the UK.

Also I believe that in Oz you have to be resident there for the 2 years before pension age?

I'm a Pom and found the Ozzie Embassy much better to deal with than the British Embassy.

Thailand lies within 4 or 5 hours flying for 3+ billion people. At some point the sheer weight of numbers means that they're going to have to start restricting the number of arrivals, weeding out undesirables would be a good start. For me the late 90's early 2.000's were great, no worries about visa overstay, or drinking hours.

Many such people would probably be weeded out if they had to get a visa before travelling.

I think you have to have kids to be able to fully 'use' the system. Having none I get the bare minimum, or nothing.

I used to do exactly the same, I only carried cash when I went out, unless going to the bank. Why carry things with you that you don't need to, that will be a big hassle if they go missing? In 20 years I was never asked for ID on the street there either.

I'm a Brit who lived in Thailand and many years ago I had to go to the Australian Embassy for a work permit. IMHO it was a much nicer experience using the Australian Embassy than the British one, much lower fees too.

If she's only up for visa overstay she's only likely to do a few months in clink before being deported.

For many single mothers being on the dole would be the only option that makes sense. It can cost up to £16,000 per annum to keep a kid full time in a nursery/pre-school, almost as much as they're likely to earn.

British forces were involved in a low-level civil war in Malaya in the 1950's, but it was referred to as an "Emergency" rather than a war, apparently this was partly due to the fact that if it were regarded as a war it would've severely affected the insurance premiums of rubber plantations. The Falklands was referred to as a conflict, not a war, I think because there was no declaration of war. It's semantics. This is what I'm getting at, I didn't need a history lesson about Ireland.

That's true, but the IRA always thought of it and spoke of it as a war.

You'e quoted a comment that wasn't mine.

It's questionable whether or not the IRA were involved in a war, in the true meaning of it.

Bhairawa International Airport is in Nepal?

Where do you draw the line? Also, we can be sure that enemy combatants will be tried for war crimes, but not our guys?