richard_smith237

I agree with all of this... But are the accidents happened at 7pm when Mum is returning with food from the market ?... Or are they happening at 3am when Bob or Somchai is wrecked out of his brains and speeding ? Because, if its the latter, Bob or Somchai will find other ways to kill themselves - and thus, all the good intentions and fantastic road engineering in the world will not prevent their deaths when the ride head on into another car after failing to navigate a bed while speeding etc... That said - I am in 100% agreement with Kwilco's earlier comment and your comments above that the drainage ditches and utility poles are a lethal hazard, had they not been there the motorcyclist would still be alive - until his drunk riding behavior and speeding dictates otherwise. Thus: Stupid people will still find a way to kill themselves no matter how great the roads are - In aggregate, the accident and fatality rates can be reduced, but this also requires societal shift in attitudes towards road safety, not just 'better engineered roads'...

There's no need to be so hard on yourself. Your pontifical abilities are right up there with the best of them. Touché !

And you aren't? No, because I agree with and believe in the 'road engineering' and 'traffic calming measures' that lead to accidents and road fatalities. Where Kwilco and I differ, is that I also believe that even with the best road engineer people stupid riders and drivers will still find a way to kill themselves. So, while the rhetoric of my argument may seen one sided, it is in fact multifaceted, accomodate all factors yet still arrives at the same conclusion - stupid people will do stupid thing and we can't engineer for all of them.

It could be explained to you, but it can't be understood for you !!... At risk of contracting the famous Mark Twain quote... I'll give a very brief explanation, though I'm sure you can't seriously believe what you write, instead you are playing a 'devils advocate troll'... The constellations appear relatively unchanged over thousands of years despite Earth's motions because of the vast distances between stars and the scale of the universe. Here are the main reasons..... Vast Distances: Stars are so far away that Earth's and the Sun's motions barely affect their apparent positions. Relative Motion: Stars also move, but their shifts are tiny from our perspective over thousands of years. Short Observation Time: Human history is too short to notice significant changes in constellations. Local Motion: Earth's and the Sun's speeds are insignificant compared to the cosmic scale. Slow Changes: Precession and star motion cause small shifts, but constellations only change noticeably over millennia or more. Water doesn’t “stick” to a spinning ball in space due to belief or magic but rather because of gravity, and the gravity on earth exceeds the centrifugal inertia. Somewhat difficult when your beliefs are irrational... we get dragged down the rabbit hole and the Mark Twain quote springs back to minds.... "Never argue with a... " 10 pages on this thread and I've avoided posting because I fail to believe that someone can truly believe that the Earth is not spherical and for some reason some posters such as yourself are getting a trollish kick out of this...

Are you betraying intimate knowledge of a soi most of us have never heard of ???

You heard it from me before because it is factual. The AOC, banks and police work together on this and, for the initial investigation, I don't believe that a warrant is necessary as the time delay would defeat the object of the exercise that is to try to reimburse people who have been scammed before the funds are transferred out of the mule bank account to a third party. Is there anything in place that stops me from blocking my Wife's account (just to use an example) ? It seems, if it was this easy, anyone could block anyone else's account and use this tool as revenge etc. Thus: How easy is this actually ? (not argumentative but genuinely interested ) Wife and I were scammed 2800 baht - I would have very much liked to have the recipient account frozen.

Based on 20,000 deaths per year the average is 54... 52 is below the daily average !

I've read this from you before... but I can't remember the response to the question probably asked at the time. What is to stop someone from calling up 'this number' and reporting someone they've had an argument with and getting their account frozen almost immediately ? Is a police report and some form of warrant not necessary to freeze an account ?

That link is a good insight into the financial interplay between private and state education sectors, however, the report misses a lot of nuance and misses the far-reaching implications on educational equity and public finances. Note: the IFS is funded (in part) by UK government departments. 1) Disparity Between Private School Fees and State School Spending: The report notes that in 2022–23, average private school fees were £15,200, nearly 90% higher than state school spending per pupil, which was £8,000. This gap has more than doubled since 2010. Counterargument: While the nominal gap has increased, this comparison doesn't account for differences in services provided. Private schools often offer additional facilities, extracurricular activities, and lower student-to-teacher ratios, which contribute to higher fees. Therefore, a direct financial comparison may not fully capture the value proposition of private education. 2) Stability of Private School Attendance: Despite rising fees, the proportion of pupils attending private schools has remained around 6–7% over the past two decades. Counterargument: The steady percentage may mask underlying socioeconomic factors. Higher-income families might continue to afford private education, while middle-income families are increasingly priced out, potentially leading to greater educational inequality - the report also makes a huge assumption that the demographic for private schools is concentrated at the very top of the income distribution - I'd like to see the facts and real data here as the assumption that this will only impact those who can afford is very flawed IMO but fits perfectly with the governmental bias, in the hope they will receive the support along the lines of 'tax the rich' - the rich won't be impacted, the middle income and lower income demographics will be. 3) Revenue from Removing Tax Exemptions: The IFS estimates that eliminating tax exemptions, such as introducing VAT on private school fees, could generate approximately £1.6 billion annually in additional tax revenue. Counterargument: Implementing VAT on private school fees could lead to unintended consequences, such as increased financial strain on families, potential reductions in private school enrolments, and a subsequent rise in demand for state school places. This shift could offset the anticipated revenue gains due to the need for increased state funding to accommodate additional students. 4) Impact on State School Funding: A projected 3–7% decrease in private school attendance due to fee increases would necessitate an additional £100–300 million per year for state schools to accommodate the influx of students. Counterargument: The actual impact on state schools could be more significant than estimated. An influx of students may strain resources, affect class sizes, and potentially diminish the quality of education. Moreover, regional disparities in state school capacities could lead to uneven effects across the country. 5) Net Public Finance Impact: After accounting for additional state school funding needs, the net gain to public finances from removing tax exemptions is estimated at £1.3–1.5 billion per year, potentially allowing for a 2% increase in state school spending targeted at disadvantaged students. Counterargument: The projected net gain may be overly optimistic. Administrative costs associated with implementing and enforcing new tax policies, potential tax avoidance strategies by private schools or parents, and the economic impact of reduced disposable income for families could diminish the expected financial benefits. But, as highlighted earlier (copy and paste) >> If its one thing we've already learned from this government, its how readily they lie, and how quickly they will sell out the needy << will the labour government really re-invest that £1.6 BN into state schools or spend it elsewhere ? 6) Uncertainty and Potential Risks: The report acknowledges uncertainties, including potential reductions in labour supply and tax avoidance behaviours, which could affect the outcomes of removing tax exemptions. Counterargument: These uncertainties highlight the complexity of the issue. Policymakers should consider comprehensive impact assessments and explore alternative strategies to address educational funding disparities without unintended negative consequences.

In the UK in 2022 there were 135,000 road accidents. *(in reality, thats probably higher as many go unreported due to insurance excess etc) In Thailand in 2022 there were 939,713 road accidents, with official figures reporting *14,737 deaths *Note previous WHO esimtates are 20,000 to 25,000 deaths when official numbers are similar. *(in reality, thats probably higher as many go unreported as they don't have insurance) The accident rate in Thailand is 7x higher than the UK. The fatality rate per accident in Thailand: 0.0127 deaths per accident The fatality rate per accident in the UK in 0.0157 deaths per accident Thai accident death rates are 1.2x (slightly) greater than the UK - so quite similar going off the figures I have. The stats of course will be questions because they don't fit your rhetoric. Sources: Gov.uk - UK Department for Transport / The Nation Yawn - you're going give up the attempted point score, you've already failed too many times at playing your racist and prejudice card. I doubt this was the deceased first accident, not because he's Thai... but because he's in Thailand.... Western idiots also drink ride and speed and kill themselves on motorcycles here - and they do so out of blind stupidity, if they behaved the same on the UK roads, they'd also die, or have been caught by the police and with repeated offences locked up.

This highlights the simplistic outlook - very short sighted... In the first couple of years your comments might prove correct. But, all that stops when those who would otherwise be in the Private school sector never enter it in the first place - the extra numbers, larger class sizes only serve to burden the state system as those who truly need greater attention and focus lose out. Again, short sighted, those parents with higher standard of education very likely received it in a Private School or Grammar school system, or from a school in a very good area. But, lets say for a moment that you are correct - the ensuing increase in house prices of areas with a good school will force poorer families out of the catchment area, thus forcing poorer families into areas with less educational advantage. Again, short sighted, for the short term, perhaps those excellent high-achieving teachers would accept lower salaries at state schools. In the longer term, those higher achievers would move to industry and elsewhere. You've also assumed the £2.3 billion in additional VAT revenue will be spent on education... If its one thing we've already learned from this government, its how readily they lie, and how quickly they will sell out the needy. Every example you have provided shows a short sightedness and myopathy that fails to grasp the realities of what actually happens.

Got it... nothing to do with being drunk, speeding and losing control then... it was someone else's fault !! Agreed on this point - engineer away the gully and the post.. he'd not have come to such an abrupt stop and killed himself.... But.. he'd still be a drunk rider and a 'fatality stat' waiting to happen... why ?... because of stupidity unless he suddenly got smarter and learned from the consequences.... though I doubt that this was his first drunk accident.

True... many private schools in the UK claim charitable status. Historically, many of these schools were established as charities with the aim of providing education to children who could not afford it. Today, a significant proportion of private schools in the UK still operate as registered charities under the Charities Act which enables them relief from VAT. Adding 20% VAT to private school fees will push many students into already overburdened state schools, exacerbating overcrowding and resource shortages without guaranteeing proportional reinvestment in public education. Whether a charity or not is somewhat beside the point and moot - Private schools ultimately benefit the state schooling system - taxing them, impacts this and ultimately also impacts state schools.

The argument for applying 20% VAT to private school fees under the guise of "equity" is profoundly flawed and deeply naive. To suggest that taxing private education is a step toward fairness ignores the broader implications of this policy. Many families who send their children to private schools are not the ultra-wealthy caricatures often imagined but ordinary middle-income households who make significant sacrifices to prioritise their children’s education. Branding these families as “relatively wealthy” and burdening them further is a myopic approach that misunderstands both equity and the dynamics of the education system. This move does little to address inequality and instead penalises those seeking better opportunities for their children. The notion that the state education system can simply absorb a wave of students transitioning from private schools as fees inevitably rise is laughable. State schools are already buckling under the weight of overcrowded classrooms, underfunded resources, and staffing crises. Adding thousands of students to this system will not fix these problems; it will exacerbate them. To assume that the additional tax revenue from VAT will somehow magically resolve these challenges is optimistic at best and delusional at worst. Governments have a long track record of diverting funds from such measures into unrelated projects, leaving both private and public schools worse off. This policy is a political vanity project masquerading as fiscal responsibility. Your comments attempt to paint a dystopian picture of a world where private services are allowed to flourish, implying that this would somehow undermine the public good. This argument is absurd. The private education sector currently provides an invaluable service by alleviating pressure on state schools. If private schools close or shrink under the weight of VAT, the state will bear the burden of educating an influx of students, a scenario that will cost far more than the revenue gained from this tax. This policy is the equivalent of shooting oneself in the foot and then wondering why walking becomes so difficult. The suggestion that “increased investment” will solve the issues in state education is a simplistic platitude. Where will this magical investment come from when every decision to tax and spend is accompanied by bureaucratic inefficiencies and waste?, as is your comparison to Liz Truss-style economic policies, you've presented a red herring meant to distract from the inadequacies of this VAT proposal. Thus, rather than engaging in serious debate about how to strengthen the education system as a whole, your argument resorts to patronising rhetoric that fails to address the real-world consequences. If equity is the goal, there are far better ways to achieve it than taxing private schools into oblivion. Encouraging partnerships between private and state schools, sharing resources, and creating programs to support disadvantaged students would yield far greater benefits. Instead to support the demonisation of those who prioritise their children’s education and slapping a tax on that will do more harm than good. This policy is not about fairness; it is a poorly disguised attempt to score political points at the expense of families, children, and the education system as a whole.

Ah, thank you, Professor, for blessing us with your extensive cut-and-paste wisdom, as if this thread were an international conference on stating the obvious. You’ve somehow managed to cram every vaguely related buzzword about road safety into one long-winded, self-congratulatory essay, and yet contributed absolutely nothing original. Bravo. Your ability to talk down to everyone is truly unmatched, even by myself !!!. Apparently, no one here can grasp the profound complexity of "bad roads and bad drivers," except for you, the enlightened oracle of traffic engineering. Meanwhile, the rest of us peasants must stumble along in our ignorance, oblivious to the groundbreaking revelations of "better signage" and "less drunk driving." How revolutionary. For someone so obsessed with being "objective" and "scientific," your comments are dripping with smug superiority and unsubstantiated generalisations. Dismissing Thailand as some backward, irredeemable failure of a nation in road safety ignores reality, and reeks of the kind of arrogance that assumes reading a few reports qualifies you to solve all the world's problems. And oh, the “flat earthers” jab, what an original, cutting-edge insult. Did you come up with that before or after deciding you’re the sole authority on what constitutes valid commentary? Here’s a tip: If you want to pretend to have a superior intellect, try not to undermine it by resorting to tired clichés and hollow condescension. In summary, your verbose tirade is less a contribution to the discussion and more a monument to your own inflated ego. Next time, try engaging with others instead of delivering an unsolicited lecture. Who knows? You might actually learn something.

You are right... remove the pole and a speeding drunk on a motorcycle would never crash into anything else such as another vehicle and kill themselves...

You are right... If the roads are perfectly engineered a speeding drunk on a motorcycle would never crash and kill themselves...

Sounds like you are part of the problem and should know better - maybe one day some large farang will give you a good slapping so that you can learn No it doesn't... It doesn't sound like that at all.. . It does sound like 2long is capable of more than binary thinking and recognises the grey area into which we may sometimes stray... he recognises that while 'straying into that grey area' he is very respectful of the fact that he's stepped outside of normal boundaries as we would recognise them in the west. He [2long] shows a healthy respect for common sense, and also an understanding of practicality. ...and, just incase you wanted to apply a binary interpretation of above - its clear, that riding on the pavement / sidewalk quickly is obviously wrong... But doing so, when it's necessary and is carried out very carefully, then its not so bad... Thus: a 3rd Option could have been added to the poll - riding down the sidewalk at walking speeds showing respect for and giving way to pedestrians... ... the issue of course is complacency, where one person is considerate, many are not - so the issue still remains.

Might have to do the same thing... never a normal comment, always trollish. As you now have the 1st Gen iPhone SE the upgrade to 3rd Gen would be seamless, you already know what you like. But, also, if you did have a preference to remain within the Apple ecosystem, then take a look the phones form iPhoneX and above, as they have the FaceID and that is an excellent feature. But the phones are notably heavier.

Reckless driving in Thailand. Its someone dumb enough to show online that they are not poor and show off their illegal riding / driving. It means the BiB don't need to get off their bottoms to catch them in the act. It means the BiB has all the evidence it needs handed to them on a plate. It means the BiB are likely to recover 'decent' tea-money so its worth their while to pursue.

Understandable... 5600 baht is a lot of money to some and loosing it in a scam is horribly violating. I lost 2800 baht with a purchase on Facebook... All looked legitimate. The scammer had a decent profile - a FB profile opened 6 years ago, lots of contacts etc. Wife transfered the money for the item - we didn't hear anything from the scammer for a few days, so checked the FB profile again and it was not there, the scammer had closed their account - it was likely a mule FB account and Bank account. I'm wondering how many accounts have been opened over 5-6 years to look more legitimate and they get closed after 1 successful scam - a lot of work... but if it pays off. I was angry... and have since looked for the same photos being posted (same item being used for a scam)... but still don't know how we'd catch the scammer without police support and they just can't be bothered with this small stuff.... We did file a Police report and told our bank though - but the bank can do nothing without a warrant to check where the funds went... and again, the Police can't be bothered to do that for 2800 baht (& neither would the UK police either)... Chalk it down to experience, nevertheless, its very annoying, especially when poor people are targeted.

He [digger70] is another vigilante hardman, who like you will carry around bit of wood to use as a weapon against these motorcycle pest... ... but if you are unable to follow your own thread, its of no surprise that you get into so much difficulty here, bob !!!...

Because of the extra pressure it would place on a state system that is already buckling. You've made that patently clear... You don't understand. Private schools remove a significant amount of pressure on the state system - bringing them back into the state system would apply extra pressure on the state system that requires greater funding and where does that money come from ????? only one answer, an increase in tax to cover the shortfall. Thats why over taxation is fundamentally flawed and this governments answer to shortfalls exacerbates rather than resolves any issues.

This 'over simplistic, dumbed down response' has to be one of the most ill thought out replies for a while... You clearly were not being facetious and the reply was not a flippant pish-take... But, did you think at all ??? Who pays for all these students suddenly on the state system ???.... who pays for the upkeep of the schools ? who pays for teachers and ancillary staff ???? Lets increase taxes to cover the problem an increase in tax caused in the first place !!

Finally........ Does she now understand and accept that this is a scam ?... OR... is she still asking for 35,000 baht from you and friends ?