richard_smith237

According to common reports.. 1x tesla fire fire per every 205 million miles travelled.

One other valid point: The difficulty of dealing with E.V. fires compared to ICE fires. That said, E.V. fires start and spread more slowly apparently, allowing passengers time to get out (if / when that happens). But, if choosing a car solely on fire risk - it seems E.V. is the safer option, yet no one is worried about a fire in an ICE because that is a product we are extremely familiar with and due that familiarity may favour.

An excellent stat to get hold of... The information I can find (quickly) is... - 55 fires per 1.6 billion kilometres in ICE cars - 5 fires per 1.6 billion kilometres in EV's https://www.straitstimes.com/life/motoring/electric-vehicle-fires-less-common-but-still-problematic#:~:text=The Phosphorus%2C Inorganic and Nitrogen,EVs for the same distance.

The comparison is 'like for like'.... The information clearly outlines that any greater concern for the fire risk of E.V's compared to ICE's is flawed. I agree there is 'propaganda' flooding the internet from both angles (pro and anti E.V.). In this example (this story) it highlights there is a risk that E.V's can catch fire, but many of the responses highlight a bias that completely ignores the reality ICE's can also catch fire and information suggests more so than E.V's.

Indeed... utter fools... Ask them to run into a wall as fast as they can which is about 20kmh and the logic will be completely lost on them.

Perhaps it is the sense that is not so common when it comes to wearing helmets in Thailand.

Agreed... anyone not wearing a helmet... it doesn't make them look stupid, they just are stupid. A couple of friends carry their own motorcycle helmets around, they don't have motorcycles, but they are smart enough to use a good helmet when they need to get somewhere on a bike (back & forth from work, football etc)... One of the things that has astonished me about Thai's throughout Covid is how they were all convinced to wear masks yet the numbers wearing helmets remained so outrageously low.

No need... I believe you that EV's can catch fire... as do normal ICE's I'm neither pro nor against EV's... but I do prefer to see factual rather than misleading information. Evidence suggests that petrol cars are more likely to catch fire than an E.V. Some stats (from link below). A recent study by US insurer, AutoinsuranceEZ found that hybrid cars had the worst fire record, while EVs were the least likely type of car to catch fire. - Hybrid cars had 3474 fires per 100,000 - Petrol cars had 1,530 fires per 100,000 - EVs had just 25 fires per 100,000 https://thefifthestate.com.au/energy-lead/energy/while-the-ev-markets-on-fire-the-vehicles-are-not/#:~:text=A recent study by US,25.1 fires per 100%2C000 sales. https://thedriven.io/2023/05/16/petrol-and-diesel-cars-20-times-more-likely-to-catch-fire-than-evs/ https://belux.edmo.eu/fact-check-do-electric-cars-catch-fire-more-often-than-combustion-engine-cars/

Decathlon has quite a range, if near a decathlon its well worth a visit and going to checkout the quality etc yourself. Silly discussion about poles - there are rigid poles and flexible poles. The type of pole and material you have depends purely on the type of tent you have, whether its a-frame, popup, rigid etc...

They couldn't swim and went out on a boat without any life jackets ??? RIP and all that, but really, this was outrageously daft... a complete absence of any common sense whatsoever - tragic and completely 100% avoidable loss of life.

To be fair...... have we not also read of numerous reports of ICE vehicles in flames here in Thailand (and elsewhere)..... The reality is any vehicle presents an extremely minor risk of combustion when something goes wrong or it is involved in an accident etc... E.V's certainly do not have a monopoly on combustion - any implication otherwise is simply presenting false and bias information.

Nearly every estate agent website etc has loads of listings... ... they're nearly always old. Why ?.... landlords list on multiple websites and don't update agents when they have rented out their property with someone else. Thus, when making an enquiry it is only then that the agent follows up with the landlord and finds out the property is no longer available. When were were looking to rent most of the decent properties we found online were no longer available, agents wasted our time with viewings of different properties we found undesirable. Thus: IF the Op has found a property he likes for the price he likes in an area he likes... then go for it if all else feels right. The request to prove you can afford it is hardly invasive, its just 'safe business practice'... those arguing otherwise probably can't afford 65,000 per month rent anyway... AND... those who left laughing emoji's at the 65,000 per month rent certainly can't afford it !!!!

What happens in another country with a different system is utterly irrelevant. If you want to talk about rent in your country, go for it... in a forum with a thread about 'rent in your country' !!!!

I think thats fair enough - IF the landlord wants proof that you can afford the rent, then paying up front is a reasonable solution, most landlords would be happy with this. i.e. Sign a years contract - pay 6 months up front (+ 2months deposit), thats fair. IF someone is not willing to present proof of funds for a 12 month contract and is not willing to pay upfront, is going to argue about leaving a 2 month deposit - they really are not really 'good tenant' material and can go forth.

Incorrect. It depends on location and the property.... If you are not prepared to give up some basic information that proves you can afford the rent for the duration of the contract then its probably because you are unable to. You are clearly not the type of tenant a self respecting landlord wants. I'd tell you, good luck & bye. ... so you'll find yourself in a place where the landlord has no requirements, but good luck getting any professional response when you need it... i.e. when the property needs repairs or when moving out and expecting your deposit back.

Erm... because we are in Thailand and 'not where you live'..... things work differently here. IF there were a government body which 'holds onto the deposits' (same as escrow), I'd be more concerned that the amounts are siphoned off by corrupt officials !!!!... OR, some corrupt officials concoct some hair-brained idea to improve the escrow service etc, but of course that involves some 'investment' (from the escrow funds) and bingo, there is the access and opportunity to pocket some money !! IMO Any such official systems here is more likely to be abused than a landlord keeping the deposit. I've always had my deposit returned - so not all landlords are unscrupulous, we can evaluated this and use our judgment when dealing with how professional the landlord behaves.

If you are not prepared to give up information to prove you can afford the rent for the rental duration, or to provide personal details such as passport information then you are not the sort of person anyone ideally wants as a tenant as there is no 'recourse' should you become a tenant from hell (even if you are potentially an excellent tenant, the landlord doesn't know that). The fact that a landlord wants such information implies he is operating on a professional level and is less likely to screw you over come moving out time if you've looked after the place.

Realistically, if the owner is asking such questions in a professional manner, then you are likely to be dealing with a professional landlord who will live up to his side of the agreement. Perfectly reasonable questions. 1) Proof of funds. 2) Source of income. 3) Passport Copies. 4) Permanent overseas address (if there is one). It may feel like an invasion of privacy, but you are about to move into someone else's home & if it's a good home with a professional landlord then you're in an ideal situation. IF you are the type of person who expects to keep such information private, you may also be the type of person a landlord may not want.

Well done... you are debating the qualities of commercial drone batteries in a thread about electric motorcycles. This is as disjointed as another thread where a poster asked about clearances around a tumble drier in the home and then another poster started arguing how he was more knowledgeable with his experience of 25 kgs commercial driers !!!... Any 'genuine' concern for batteries is about as real as there would be general concern for putting an extremely flammable liquid in a tank and driving around with it if petroleum technology were a new tech today. As such, the concern isn't so genuine as it is ill-informed paranoia.

Considering you have Thai Nationality, thats extremely strange. OR, are you registering as a foreigner ?

Exactly... IF Airlines were to charge more for heavier people it does nothing for the others in the same cabin, it simply profiteering. IF a person is so physically large to fit in an economy class seat, then they can't fit and thats that. If they can fit, then they can fit, and thats that. If someone is unfortunate enough to sit next to an overwhelmingly obese person who can fit in an economy class seat with the arms down, then thats just tough - its not as if this is a frequent occurrence. On about 34 flights per year - this is not an experience I have had to encounter - I've sat near extremely large people but there has been a seat between us. I've sat next to 'large people' but none so large that they were spilling into my seat - I think some of the comments here take the hyperbolic example to exaggerate and strengthen their position.

I'm not so sure about that... On other threads a number of the 'same complainers' argue that there should be 'adults only' flights on which children are banned.

In 'areas' of Phuket, Samui and also Pattaya there is an a somewhat unhealthy atmosphere, one were there is a general sense of disregard compared to the innocent indifference we see elsewhere. I always guessed it was because those in specific parts of such area's are less likely to be from that area, less likely to be community spirited and more mercenary in their hunger for money. Such area's are often a tinderbox for fighting factions, fragile ego's, incendiary responses to simple events. That the police do very little to enforce the laws in such area's highlights the utter absence of any grasp the Thai Police have on law and order in the nation in general.

Unless of course the water is safe to the point that officials never considered the 'subsurface injection' option as there was simply no need whatsoever, just as there isn't at any other nuclear power-station. Water injection carried out in the oil industry is usually to maintain pressure in depleting or migrating reservoirs, being able to get rid of waste water is simply a bonus.

And his had his fine ready? A few possibilities here I guess. 1) he didn't have the money to pay the fine. 2) His overstay was significant enough to warrant being black-listed. i.e. if he has overstayed for more than 90 days he'd be prevented from re-entry to the Kingdom within 1 year. I'm guessing #2 is more likely, but doesn't this sort of stuff happen every day, I'm not sure this is particularly news worthy at all, unless Immigration deliberately trying to send out a message - another crack-down perhaps.