shadmo63

Many farmers won't be able to survive on the market price. He'll have to offer them something if he wants this government to stay the course.

Jobs in the cities?

The good General doesn't need votes like the pollies, although running the junta might cut into his retirement. The RPS has already cost the country 500,000,000,000 baht. That's 500 Billion if you can't count that many zeros. It's not rocket science. Of course the General gets all his best ideas by reading TV, not. I've read some silly things here but that's got to best. Pass me the bong, will ya?

I hope she is extradited and given life in prison for her heinousness behavior.

Unless of course you're being sarcastic?

"She's got a tongue like an electric eel and likes the taste of a mans tonsils. Woof!!"- Flash

(Please do not remove Scott. My favourite Rik Mayall scene ever from Black Adder - any fan would know it and love it)

I suppose not returning a wai is the farang equivalent of not shaking someone's hand when it's offered, which is an overt rude snub. But what's the wai equivalent of the awful soft dead fish handshake?

I hope she is extradited and given life in prison for her heinousness behavior.

I completely disagree. I believe in free speech and I think her punishment should fit her crime, which is actually not a crime in England or at worst a civil libel.

From the little I know the woman appears to be mentally unstable having ostracized all her friends and family, and has guaranteed herself that she cannot return to her homeland. The actions of a normal thinking person?

Good video. nice to know and don't look like a fool. ONLY!!!!!! the higher status thing is a load of sheit! they should abandon this crap of people believing they are of higher status. I will never submit to the idea of someone else feeling higher than me, exept maybe the king of thailand and the king of holland. For the rest FCK you with your false pretentions

judging by your post, most here are higher than you

@myluckythai - your exept line completely contradicts everything else you have to say.

Better get used to it,Thai society is built around respect for higher/lower older/younger pee/nong. It doesn't lower you to give respect; quite the opposite it shows you have a little bit of cultural awareness and sensitivity,...when in Rome... If you're gonna live here at a minimum you better get used to wai-ing the boss and the wife/gf's parents. Let me guess - you're an Aussie?

My understanding of sinsot/d comes from reading many years ago and had its roots in an agrarian society which Thailand principally was. The basis of paying sinsot was that a farming family could afford to bring in hired help to run the farm for a couple of years after the daughter left, and another sibling was old enough to take up the load. Incidentally, that's one of the reasons families were much larger many years ago, to provide continuity of the labor source, along with a much higher infant mortality rate.

I therefore can see that sinsot may apply in rural areas, although farming practices have changed a lot, and families are much smaller, but for it to apply when the girl's family are city folk, seems to be a little odd to me, and to continue this anachronistic practice could easily be interpreted as scamming a foreign man.

Having said all that, I don't condemn anybody who goes down that line, but reading many, many threads here, leads me to believe that it is a practice that continues to scam foreigners, particularly where some sucker is asked to pay for a divorced woman, some divorced several times, with a number of kids in tow, and in bad need of a rebore and sleeve, using a motoring term.

@F4UCorsair - Great post, I think you have nailed it. Enough said.

Hi first time poster ,

Wife and I have been travelling to thailand for holidays for years , and thought we might give thailand a try for an early retirement in about 5 - 7 years , we are both 51 , and were also looking at Krabi , inland from the beach by 5 or 10 mins by vehicle ,

We have little super , less than $100,000 . but have two houses worth approx $700,000 combined and a $200,000 mortgage on those ,

We should be able to reduce some of that debt in 5 years , and hopefully the houses will go up some ,

Would you think we may be in a suitable position to live comfortably , with perhaps one house rented and money invested ,

in the area of $2000 or 60,000 baht per month if it was now ?

Cheers

Yes 60,000 Baht sounds like a good amount to live on. I'd sell one house and buy a nice condo in Thailand.

You mean , lets turn the east into the west, no thanks.

You are aware, I suppose, of the history of Singapore, Malaysia, HK, Vietnam, et al? All comfortably ahead of Thailand, economically, socially, and educationally.

Singapore is an economic marvel but under a rigid notionally democratic system, Malaysia is restricted by Islamic laws - socially I'd go with Thai personal freedoms any day.

You mean , lets turn the east into the west, no thanks.

You are aware, I suppose, of the history of Singapore, Malaysia, HK, Vietnam, et al? All comfortably ahead of Thailand, economically, socially, and educationally.

Singapore is an economic marvel but under a rigid notionally democratic system, Malaysia is restricted by Islamic laws - socially I'd go with Thai personal freedoms any day.

My first Thai wife English teacher Isaan girl married 1992 no sin sod asked for, but we married and lived in Australia. Admittedly I'd never heard of sin sod back then. Current gf Lanna girl, Uni degree but 60 hrs/week factory job a bit offended when I asked about sin sod, but she gets a nice middle class life as a house wife in Thailand. So sin sod - 0 out of 2 here. Oh both divorcees early thirties no children. Yes I'm upgrading to a newer model. This time an only child (first wife one of 10 mostly nasty siblings) and pretty sure not an adulterer or a gambler like the first one. And she wants a house built on parents land in Chiang Rai province but I'll wait a few years and am closer to retiring before committing to that. I am pretty sure she's a keeper but - to be sure to be sure.

Do the flapping wings of a butterfly in the Amazon in January create a tornado in Kansas in July?

Arai wa?

Are we talking about "jai dee"? ใจดี. Pretty common I would have thought in and out of a bar.

Let's face it. The colonial powers are there to enrich themselves and nothing else. Canada, Oz and NZ can't be compared to an India, Burma or Rhodesia as they weren't raped of their wealth in quite the same manner. In those countries new society's were built from scratch in the image of Britain, rather than subjugating the local populace to meet their aims.

How so? There is no difference in what happened. Australia was very much raped for its wealth - it still is being (just ask the Aborigines in the Northern Districts being thrown off their land and forced into "settlement villages" so that the oil under their land can be got at!

). In all counties the indigenous people were subjugated where possible and removed (usually physically or by forced agreement) - this happened in Africa and it happened in America - and it happened in Canada - and it happened in Australia. Most of the worst stuff actually happened after independence in those countries - when Native American's were systematically wiped out (either by the like of Custer - or by seeding blankets with Cholera!) - in Australia the Aborigines were rounded up and shot in the early days, later there were attempts to breed them out of existence and now they are being...well watch the documentary above!

Britain tied to make each country it colonised into a British state - from the very beginning it used local people to run things under the Empiric rule (initially Maharajas then Indian traders, businessmen and civil servants). Not everywhere that people think was British Empire actually was - many were "owned" land un der British administration -

e.g. Ceylon (Sri Lanka): was not Empire for most of the time it was held by the British - indeed first it was a Portuguese colony (1619 - prior to that it was an independent kingdom of Jaffna, but Portugal held area since 1517), then after a hundred years the Dutch won it after the Portuguese Dutch War (1650s).

The British took it during the Napoleonic wars (because otherwise France would have as they controlled the Netherlands). 1796-8 (they took the coastal areas first then the rest of the island following the kings death - from ill health). It was held not by Britain, but by a British Company (I.e Privately) the infamous British East India Company. Britain planted Coffee which was successful until the coffee prices fell - then a disease wiped out all the plants within two decades. So they switched to tea. In 1843 Ceylon became part of the Empire (and thus subject to her laws - and slaves were immediately freed - last enclave of Britain to have slavery - although here were very few in Ceylon anyway as the British East India Company had other ways to get cheap labour - they made laws for free labour one in every six days for example). It was made independent at the same time India was - and again it was later that they had problems (firstly the Soulbury Reforms agreement was basically ignored). The Royal Navy was stationed there until 56 - and pretty much after they left it went to poop. Bandaranaike was elected and brought in very divisive policies like enforcing Sinhala as the only language legally allowed! He was very anti Tamil. He was assassinated by a Buddhist monk in 59. His wife took over as PM in 60 and defeated a coup attempt the same year. During her second term she instituted socialist economic polices, strengthening ties with the Soviet Union and China. Civil war in 75 due to the anti-Tamil policies and pro socialist stance. In 77 it changed tact with UF being kicked out of office and Jayawardene took office and created a constitution based on the French (also free market - first in S.Asia - and presidency - also modelled on France). And on it goes thought eh 80s with uprisings every other year or so. The war lasted 26 years - and only ended 2009!

Well subjugation and outright genocide aren't quite the same, are they? My definition of raping a country is taking its resources and wealth back to the mother country rather than it being used locally.

I can't remember the Australian aborigines ever being used to run things under the Empiric rule. I think that when a 50,000 year old semi-nomadic hunter gatherer society runs into a modern society (I use the word modern loosely) there is only ever going to be one outcome possible, and not a pretty one. 200 years later and the aboriginal problem is no nearer any satisfactory solution. At least by law they have rights these days, which is better than what the average Palestinian gets. Yes people judge us Australians harshly on our human rights record and rightly so in some respects - the white Australia policy was only abolished in 1972, but since then we've welcomed all and sundry. Despite how multicultural we are today there are still pockets of racism both overt and covert. Some paternalistic government policies like banning alcohol in certain communities and our current boat refugee asylum seeker policies are harsh in the extreme, but sometimes effective. Maybe if we came across the aborigines today for the first time we would do it better. A dirty big fence like in Israel/Palestine might be a good solution, not that I support that Jewish solution in any way.

My wife was 35 when I met her, I was 53 we lived together for 4 years before we married. We went to the Amphur, paid the money, 2 of her cousins came as witnesses. I paid no sinsod, I do however send her parents 3,000 baht per month. They are in their 70s have only the 700 baht per person pension to live on. I built my wife a house because I wanted her to have it, I have a registered lease because her siblings may not be as honest as my wife. I think you have a good heart and care for the woman, do what your heart tells you.

If you hang in there till you're 70 and she 34 you'll be ok again. And when you're 86 -> 86/2 + 7 = 50. PERFECT!!

I never tire of reading of these relationships built on financial rewards...what has love got to do with it?

Is that that you Tina?

Anthropologist John Townsend concludes "that men are susceptible to youth and beauty, whereas women are susceptible to status and security. These differences are part of a natural selection process where males seek many healthy women of childbearing age which will mother offspring, whereas women seek men who are willing and able to take care of them and their children."

So what's your problem? Nature taking its course?

But most of these old dudes have had a vasectomy?

What does that do for Mr. Townsends' theory?

I don't know. Do you think it would make men chase menopausal women instead of young nubile women? Ha ha ha not in Thailand where us older men are considered so hansum and can score women 36 years younger (or 17 years in my case). Have you heard the perfect age of a woman theory? - half your age plus 7. That's how old my lovely lady is. So Mr OP is only out by 11.5 years = 63/2 + 7 = 38.5 years.

Look at India to see what a mess was left behind by a colonizing power (yes, I'm a Brit and not proud of what we did there), 60 years on and it's still broken in so many ways

Funny - good Indian friend of mine tells me that the place would now be in much worse shape if the Brits had never shown up (and he's not an Anglophile). Yes, there were some nasty massacres (I've been to the site of the Amritsar Massacre), and decolonisation was a nightmare for people in the north. But his argument is that without the Brits as a unifying force in the 19th century, you'd now have a multitude of India-Pakistans instead of the improbably democratic and unified state of India. Don't forget that India is incredibly diverse in terms of language, culture, religion, and ethnicity, and a lot of these peoples have been at each others' throats for centuries. If those divisions were reflected in national boundaries, he argues, the subcontinent would be a mess. He also talks about the British did in terms of eliminating certain forms of slavery, sati (widow burning), and thuggery, as well as constructing the railroad system, etc etc. [And no, I'm not British nor an Anglophile].

Not just the 19th century - they were there for 400 years. I agree with everything else you say though and you capture it perfectly in the line "improbably democratic and unified state of India." Such a contrast to Thailand which on the whole is homogenous in language, culture, religion and ethnicity but improbably undemocratic. Maybe there lies the problem, not enough diversity. Thailand needs some other means of dividing people politically into more equal sides than the lopsided red-yellow divide.

Let's face it. The colonial powers are there to enrich themselves and nothing else. Canada, Oz and NZ can't be compared to an India, Burma or Rhodesia as they weren't raped of their wealth in quite the same manner. In those countries new society's were built from scratch in the image of Britain, rather than subjugating the local populace to meet their aims.

I never tire of reading of these relationships built on financial rewards...what has love got to do with it?

Is that that you Tina?

Anthropologist John Townsend concludes "that men are susceptible to youth and beauty, whereas women are susceptible to status and security. These differences are part of a natural selection process where males seek many healthy women of childbearing age which will mother offspring, whereas women seek men who are willing and able to take care of them and their children."

So what's your problem? Nature taking its course?

No doubt your gf pushes you to build a house. Just remember you will never be as important to her as her family. I'd take the renting advice for now and reassess again in 5 years time. 150kg wow that's big. I guess she'd weigh the same as one of his legs!?

OP (Keith) has your gf been married before? Any children? Is she 35+ as alluded to above?

If yes to ANY of these questions i would not even contemplate sin sod (it is not dowry, thats Indian).

If NO to all 3 questions then you can think about sin sod as a mark of respect to her family. 50,000 sounds very very reasonable.

Its a shame when you can not trust your wife or girlfriend. I understand as my first wife was an untrustworthy cheating stealing gambling adulterous liar, so now my first criteria in a partner is being honest and trustworthy to a fault. There are plenty of lovely goodhearted honest Thai girls who would never ever do the wrong thing like suggested. If I could not trust my lady I would not marry her, but that was a lesson hard learned.