sandyf

6 hours ago, cornishcarlos said:

 

You telling me C-19 is not a political issue ??

 

 

They might make a little progress, just enough to placate the masses. Truth of the matter is, every one of the mentioned issues, kills more people annually than C-19 ever will.

You are quite entitled to believe what you want but covid-19 is a global medical issue.

By the same token you are also entitled to believe that the US is lying, there are no mass graves in New York, or that Italy is lying, the figure of 368/million has been falsified.

If however your interpretation is wrong, then the Italian death rate reflected globally would be in the order of 2.8 million deaths(7794 x 368), now what issue did you mention has that potential death toll.

Believing it will never happen provides very little protection and I for one am glad that those in charge take a different view.

8 minutes ago, FarFlungFalang said:

They also seem to be much more comfortable when they are in possession of what they perceive as facts as many facts seem to stem from over zealous imaginations. 

The most astute observation regarding this forum that I have seen.

5 minutes ago, cornishcarlos said:

You quoted me out of context....

Why don't governments attack these causes of death then..??

starvation, malaria, TB, suicide, mental health, RTAs, normal influenza etc etc they have the facts !!

I didn't quote you out of context. Governments do address the issues you mention but the unknown current problem is more frightening, a higher priority and in the public eye.

Many of the issues you mention are political problems rather than medical. Global medical issues are being addressed but maybe you have never heard of the flu vaccine programs. This last winter in the UK schoolchildren were brought into the program as research had identified them as superspreaders.

You are wrong to make out there is no progress being made in other direction, of course the level of progress will never suit everyone.

22 minutes ago, smedly said:

This thread is dominated by the "evil alcohol crew" the pure types that have never put a foot wrong in their lives 

Wrong again, the thread is dominated by Thai bashers. 

Had there been no ban, accusations of irresponsibility would be flying around.

20 minutes ago, smedly said:

so ban food as well 

 

If you want to believe that food interferes with rational thinking that is up to you.

19 minutes ago, cornishcarlos said:

Why ??

Possibly due to a lack of knowledge, it is new and unknown. People are much more comfortable when they are in possession of facts.

It is a common problem, the tank is corroding and not going to last much longer. My sister in law has the same model, think it is about 15 years old and been housed inside but has recently started to get leaks on the tank. She was quoted about 2000 baht for a new stainless tank but my brother in law has been patching it with epoxy cement, only delaying the inevitable.

I would suggest that you get a new tank and they will deal with the other issues at the same time.

Word of warning, the tanks corrode from the inside so the full extent of the corrosion cannot be seen. I had a smaller Mitsubishi and the tank went after about 18 months. I had noticed water around the motor mountings and was having a look when it decided to burst, I was very fortunate the jet of water missed my face by about 6 inches.

I had a stainless tank fitted and been ok for the last 10 years.

8 minutes ago, cornishcarlos said:

 

Exactly.... I'm in Singapore still, and while we are a little more relaxed than a lot of the Western countries, the reaction is still way out of proportion to the numbers !!

8 deaths attributed to C-19... Annual average from influenza is 600.... Someone is taking the p i ss ??

Take it you believe that prevention is not better than the non existent cure.

1 hour ago, Daveyh said:

My god, some of these posts are pathetic & beyond reason. This ban is for a very good reason ...... it's to save lives. We all know that the consumption of alcohol encourages us all to do things we'd never do when sober. This will help to stop the spread as people will be more likely not to be stupid & ignore the bans in place due to covid-19, especially during Songkran. Anything that will help combat this pandemic must be adhered to like it or not! Remember that you are a guest here, believe it or not your behaviour will help to encourage everyone to comply, plus improve relations between us & the Thai community. We are all in this together, support Thailand in their hour of need, everyone here is scared for their families, many are split & unable to travel. Show some compassion & those that have no regard for others stop thinking about yourself for once! Stay safe everyone.

Well said. Selective memory is spreading faster than the virus.

People should remember one of the worst incidents in the early days of the virus was a drunken party with people drinking from the same glass.

Songkran has always been an alcohol fueled celebration with bottles being passed around, a recipe for disaster in current times. The ban is quite appropriate but becomes a god given excuse to those that wallow in continual complaints against the administration.

1 hour ago, Baerboxer said:

Suggesting alcohol brings on depression is a nonsense generalization.

It is a left over from historical alcohol related problems going back centuries. "Mothers Ruin" and depression have always been interrelated.

In 1720, the mutiny act was passed which stated that anyone who was distilling alcohol wouldn’t have to house soldiers in their home. These factors massively encouraged local gin production, so much so that in 1730 the number of gin shops in London exceeded 7000 which was one in every three public houses. By 1733, the average person was drinking 14 gallons of gin per annum, approx. 1.3 litres of gin per week. 1 in 3 structures in London produced or sold gin. At approximately 160 proof, this gin was highly intoxicating, not only was it strong but it wasn’t being sipped like a gin and tonic, in some cases it was being drank in vast quantities some were drinking around half a litre per day.

The gin obsession was blamed for misery, rising crime, madness, higher death rates and falling birth rates. Gin joints allowed women to drink alongside men for the first time and it is thought this led many women neglecting their children and turning to prostitution, hence gin becoming known as ‘Mother’s ruin’.

https://www.spiritofharrogate.co.uk/news/why-was-gin-nicknamed-mothers-ruin/

2 hours ago, gomangosteen said:

We lived in Sa Kaeo 2010-11 and weekly this dog pickup truck would pass through collecting stray dogs.

Never knew where they went, just 'away'. Either northwards, or east across the border to Cambodia I don't know.

Understand collections stopped soon after 2011.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/ricky-gervais-and-dame-judi-dench-back-campaign-to-stop-thailand-dog-meat-trade-9818198.html

Yes they can be a bit of a nuisance, I get them regularly and been stung a few times cutting the hedges and shrubs.

They will leave on their own in a couple of weeks.

13 hours ago, joecoolfrog said:

The measures taken make no sense whatsoever unless the authorities know that infections and deaths are well in excess of the official numbers.

Garbage. It is all about preemptive containment rather than any numbers.

Taiwan, which is not part of the World Health Organization (WHO), decided to screen all passengers from Wuhan starting on Dec. 31, the same day it learned of the then-unknown virus in the Chinese city.

https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/04/09/taiwan-is-exporting-its-coronavirus-successes-to-the-world/

16 hours ago, The Koenig said:

How do you rationalise these numbers, when there is no testing being done, unless you pay for it?

And how about not many people being able to pay for said tests?

How do you believe anything the Thai- government feeds you?

It may come as a surprise to you but a test does not prevent someone from dying.

It is very easy to rationalise the numbers - are the queues at the crematorium any longer than normal?

Images have emerged of coffins being buried in a mass grave in New York City, as the death toll from the coronavirus continues to rise.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-52241221

10 hours ago, Tony M said:

Is it really necessary to "substantiate" the use of the term lawful to you ? I think most people actually understand the term lawful as being "within the law".  Any decision in an immigration application must be within the law, in accordance with the published immigration rules, and that is also what lawful means in this decision. The refusal notice contains no reason(s) for refusal that fall(s) within the immigration rules.  It is therefore unlawful.  If you are unable to understand the meaning of the word lawful, as opposed to "reasonable", in immigration decisions, then I can indeed see why you have a problem with clarity. 

 

Why do you say that the post was distorted ?  It is a true copy of the refusal notice (subsequently revoked by the UKVI because it was unlawful). I'm happy to post the refusal notice here, with personal details redacted. So what are you alleging was distorted ?

 

You say that I was trying to make out that someone "got one over on the system" ?  What are you talking about ?  You sound like we should accept the "system" as the way things have to be, and that it is okay for ECOs to make unlawful, or even (to use your words) unreasonable decisions, and that we shouldn't try to get poor decisions revoked "because it tries to get one over on the system".  This was posted as an example of poor, and unlawful, decision-making by an ECO, and you still seem to be arguing for the ECO.

You can make all the excuses you want but it is fairly certain the next time an application is completed the answers will be given a bit more consideration.

Reality is the application created doubt and the subsequent refusal, a well prepared application would have avoided the problem in the first place.

The decision making process may well be flawed, but that does not make it unlawful, misinterpretation is another matter altogether.

5 hours ago, Tony M said:

It's interesting , though, that you and others are arguing for the ECO, when the ECO was plainly wrong in his reasons for an unlawful refusal.

You are wrong on both counts. i am not arguing anything for the ECO, I am arguing against a post that was distorted and lacked clarity, and still does, while trying to make out they had got one over on the system.

You have still not substantiated the use of the term "unlawful", "unreasonable" maybe, but then that is UK immigration in a nutshell.

3 minutes ago, White Christmas13 said:

I suggest you look at Indonesia

Why?

Indonesia has 1 death per million of population, Italy has 302 and the US is at 50.

Thailand is 0.5 deaths per million of population, both Thailand and Indonesia have a lot of catching up to do.

9 hours ago, meshborg said:

the acceptance of falsified figures is quite staggering on this forum

For those that wallow in falsified figures, it should be noted that about 70K of the 95K global deaths attributed to covid-19 are in just 5 countries, Italy(18K+), US(16k+), Spain(15K+), France(12K+) and the UK(8K).

Thailand is just one of the other 190 or so relatively insignificant falsified figures.

The UK and Thailand have similar sizes in population so there should have been well in excess of 8000 deaths in Thailand, after all didn't millions of Chinese come flooding into Thailand Dec/Jan.

The Chinese are queuing up at the crematoriums to collect the ashes of those that have died, the Thais must be doing it under the cover of darkness.

Ref for figures https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/#countries

10 minutes ago, Tony M said:

The applicant and sponsor didn't give the ECO a reason to refuse, and the ECO didn't give any lawful reason to refuse the application. The amount of money in the applicant's bank is irrelevant. The sponsor had already said he would pay, and the ECO agreed, in the refusal notice, that the sponsor had enough money to do so. That is why the UKVI overturned the refusal decision when the ECO's unlawful reason for refusal was pointed out to them. 

You are making an argument without the full information.

The OP stated the sponsor had agreed to £2000 but did not state what the full cost of the trip would be. It would not be unreasonable for the ECO to assume the applicant would be required make up the difference, so the decision cannot be seen to be unlawful. You have conveniently overlooked this sentence "or if you would have any finances available to contribute to the cost of this trip."

The appeal was probably based on the sponsor willing to pay the full amount of the trip and on the basis of being able to do so the refusal was reconsidered.

As posted previously the safest approach is for the sponsor to commit to all costs involved. In 9 applications I have never submitted any financial information regarding my wife.

3 hours ago, VocalNeal said:

Is it also near mountains? My wife wants to live near mountains so we are trying to reach a consensus.

You could have a look at Laem Sing beach near Chantaburi, nice beach area and only about half hour from Namtol Phlio national park which is a bit of a mountain area.

http://park.dnp.go.th/visitor/nationparkshow.php?PTA_CODE=1010

Although I have been to the beach many times only been into the park once, struggled to get up to the viewpoint far less the waterfall, only for the fit and healthy.

13 hours ago, Captor said:

Is the hospital in Chon Buri? How big or modern would you say it is? Would you go there for a stroke, hearth failure or cancer? That is what will come to us when getting older. I would like your opinion about the hospitals in the area.

The hospital i was referring to is the university teaching hospital in Bang Saen,

http://buh.buu.ac.th/buh61/,  there is no university in Chonburi.

Although I live in Chonburi I first went to Bang Saen in 2013 when I hurt my back and more than satisfied with the treatment, currently being treated for a cardiac condition. If I had a suspected cancer problem I would go to the cancer hospital in Chonburi, it's about 20 minutes from Bang Saen. 

There is a fairly large government hospital in Chonburi but only been as a visitor, not for treatment. My wife is not keen on it, says they are a bit quick to cut off limbs, take that for what it is worth. There are other hospital in Sri Ratcha but I don't know much about them.

On 4/6/2020 at 10:16 PM, jimmjam said:

Will have a look at bang saen.

Cheers.

That would be my suggestion. i have lived in the area for about 12 years and having seen a fair bit of Thailand would say it is one of the better locations. It is well placed with Bangkok and the airport within a couple of hours.

Unlike Hua Hin the town is very easy to get about with or without a vehicle. There is a baht cab service that runs between Chonburi and Bang Sean beach,and also one along to Sri Ratcha. The hospital is part of the university, right in the centre and on the taxi route. They have recently opened a new building, it's where I go and very clean and efficient. Fairly large mall virtually across the road and there are a variety of shopping centres not far away in Chonburi.

Being a beach resort it is fairly popular with people from Bangkok but only really gets busy at holiday weekend and when there is some event on, such as the Bang Saen Grand Prix. The beach stretches for about 3km and visitors tend to stick to the centre section, quiet areas can always be found at each end and it wouldn't take long to find the roads that bypass the busy parts.

Good luck.

2 hours ago, RedPill said:

I read an article about a Chinese lab, back in 2015, fiddling around with a corona like virus, to make it fit to humans. I'm just not sure whether these are true stories or made up?

Many medical institutions around the world have been investigating the coronavirus since the SARS outbreak in 2002.

There was another coronavirus outbreak in 2012, MERS, but no one mentions that one as a bit difficult to pin it on the Chinese.

Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS) is a viral respiratory illness caused by a coronavirus (Middle East respiratory syndrome coronavirus, or MERS‐CoV) that was first identified in Saudi Arabia in 2012. Coronaviruses are a large family of viruses that can cause diseases in humans, ranging from the common cold to Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS).

https://www.who.int/csr/disease/coronavirus_infections/faq/en/