Samui Bodoh

26 minutes ago, Rancid said:

I won't be voting but seems the Progressive polls were indicating about 60% opposed, guess that's why the gay groups tried to stop the ballot. Both so-called political leaders are supporting it, plus every TV and print media and they are introducing penalties (well, for the no camp only) if commercials are deemed undesirable, so as far as I can see,  would expect a yes. Either that or Progressives have a habit of ignoring results that don't go their way, as such they will probably approve it anyway.

 

My brother's gay and would dearly love to have a permanent partner, although the marriage thing neither here nor there to him, problem he says is that it is very hard to get a trustworthy permanent partner in the gay world with the popularity of apps such as Grinder etc.

 

Anyway perhaps the gay community will discover the legal joys of marriage, things often don't go the way you expect, then all the custody and who pays issues get massaged up by the esteemed legal community.

Respectfully, is Grinder any different from Tinder? How?

And the gay community wants equality, so that means that they get all "the legal joys of marriage" as well. Why would they be any different from everyone else?

It is 2017. Why is this still being debated?

16 minutes ago, webfact said:

Sansern added that the third order allowed the National Health Security Office (NHSO) to procure medical supplies for the universal healthcare scheme until the end of this month. 

 

The scheme now covers nearly 50 million people across the country, with health activists long worried about a recent legal interpretation that is depriving the NHSO of procurement power. Though armed with the special power, the NCPO has ruled that the NHSO should not handle procurement beyond September 30. 

When I see a government that is not very transparent messing about with procurement rules, the alarm bells go off at a deafening volume.

24 minutes ago, webfact said:

The new Constitution had not been designed to pave the way for such a government, he said.

The entire constitution has been designed for exactly this purpose.

25 minutes ago, webfact said:

However, it did allow for an outsider prime minister, which would have to be decided upon by MPs, Pornpetch added, stressing that it had nothing to do with the NLA.

"It had nothing to do with the NLA".  Is he talking about the appointed "legislature" which is paving the way for this?

26 minutes ago, webfact said:

Whether or not the idea of a national government was being floated to test the water, the NLA president pointed out that it had come from a political party.

Actually, it came from a FORMER leader of a party, not a current one and not the party itself. A very different thing.

27 minutes ago, webfact said:

He declined to comment on whether this was part of a plan for future negotiations in politics.

There is no need to comment; this plan has been in the works for a long time and everybody knows it.

Rarely have I seen such nonsense in such a few short sentences.

9 minutes ago, webfact said:

Abhisit’s remarks came after his former colleague Suthep Thaugsuban had revealed the possibility of the People’s Democratic Reform Foundation forming a political party with a view to supporting Prime Minister Prayut Chan-o-cha to continue in power.

 

Abhisit acknowledged that many people were concerned about Suthep’s stance.

 

However, he was not sure how Prayut would participate in politics because the general was not eligible to run in an election.

And the HUGE pile of crap among the ruling elite is starting its slow, downward movement on to the heads of the people.

Suthep floating an idea to form a political party to support Prayut?  WHOA! Who saw that one coming? I mean, Suthep said he wasn't going to be involved in politics; and we all know that his word is gold.

Prayut not eligible to run in an election? Gee, I wonder if the entire reason that the new constitution allows an "outside" PM is so that Prayut doesn't need to run in an election? That couldn't be right, could it?

"Disrespecting the people"? What Thai politician has ever disrespected the people? They all participate in an election, don't they?

The whole country will be drowning in it soon.

2 hours ago, webfact said:

Yingluck’s whereabouts still unknown: Don 

And a week ago the line was that "the investigation is 80% complete".

Lying liars who lie. 

4 minutes ago, snoop1130 said:

And the discourse against me continues to this day”

As well it should.

You were the PM, and you have never taken any responsibility.

THAT is why the discourse continues...

2 hours ago, webfact said:

and work closely with the National Human Rights Commission (NHRC)

While I would support the idea that Thai companies should support human rights in their foreign investments, why would anybody "work closely with the NHRC"?

The NHRC is a neutered, degraded and impotent organization in today's Thailand.

Perhaps the NHRC should spend its time building credibility inside of Thailand before it worries too much about things outside of Thailand.

One never knows (until after the fact) in Thailand whether this will be a serious, effective campaign or if this is simply a headline designed to make the boss happy. I truly hope it is the former as dengue is a nasty customer, but one which is largely preventable.

Genuine public health campaigns can be wonderful, cost-effective measures that bring wide-spread benefits to society.

I remember many years ago people were wondering if Thailand had a viable future due to the AIDS epidemic. Now you can buy condoms at the check-out of every 7-11. Many people, myself included, never thought that was possible...

Here's hoping...

43 minutes ago, Eric Loh said:

Materials from his moronic and comical qoutes are building up fast. Add this latest to his infamous list: -

 

"I am a democratic soldier and will stay because I want Democracy to survive"

"We'll probably have to kill journalists who don't report the truth"

"Let me ask you how are you going to survive wearing a bikini in Thailand unless you're ugly"

"Go sell rubber in Mars"

"If there's less water, grow crickets and earthworms to sell"

"bemoans divisive soap and offer to write"

 

There are more like throwing banana skin at a cameraman and pulling the ear and ruffling the hair of a reporter plus the twerk remark.....

 

This guy is all laugh a minute clown but some here love him.

 

Great post...

But...

My all time favourite (!?) is in relation to the Koh Tao murders, "no Thai would do that"

17 minutes ago, webfact said:

everyone must go through the process equally and face the consequences

How do you explain your own personal immunity?

Hypocrite!

There is dispute as to the efficacy of these programs; see my post #8.

And no, it will not solve the problem entirely. In order to do that you would need the three components of catch/neuter/release, control of food supply (garbage), and public education to work both hand-in-hand and with great efficiency. I have my doubts as to the efficacy of components two and three here on the island.

However, I do recall visiting the island twenty or even ten years ago and being too afraid to enter into a 7-11 as there were packs of wild dogs at/near the doors. Things have changed, and they have changed for the better. It is anecdotal evidence and not a scientific survey, but the plural of 'anecdote' is data, and the data I and others see is an improvement. 

The program will need to be repeated on a regular basis to keep the numbers down; the goal should be managing the problem rather than trying (unsuccessfully) to solve it completely.

I like these programs, and not doing them would be a case of "the perfect being the enemy of the good".

Cheers

36 minutes ago, Ricardo said:

Good thoughtful post there !

 

Unfortunately I believe that a corrupt government can become impregnable, despite regular elections, I'd look to Cambodia as an example.  Or perhaps Singapore, where it's perhaps less-corrupt, but still very firmly in-power despite any opposition which might arise.

 

I certainly agree that the Dems are flawed, and only credible by-default, how much that's Abhisit's fault I'm not sure, but I suspect he has to live with factions he'd rather be without.

 

 

Again a very good point, we all talk about the Dems & PTP as though they were true nationwide parties, but while they command some support in each others' heartlands, I think they still both suffer from being coalitions of regional-factions led by power-brokers who can deliver their local vote.

 

Unfortunately those power-brokers then expect their rewards, local-investment & ministerial-jobs or juicy-handouts, which means both main sides are inevitably corrupt to a greater or lesser degree.

 

I'd love to see the old leaders withdraw, and the parties have a good shake-up and recombination, based on policies rather than power-brokers, but I don't really see this happening yet.  Press the green Reset-button, if you like, except that too is proven not-to-work ?

 

Meanwhile one party now has a dominant position, and if it sees that weakening then it can and does 'buy-in' a couple more blocks of votes, that's a recipe for no-change isn't it ?  I wish I had a better answer.

 

 

Let me disagree... respectfully! 

You mention two regional examples; Singapore and Cambodia. I agree that you would need a rather large crowbar to get some changes there.

However, I do think Thailand has already passed that threshold. Street protests have already knocked off both a 'Yellow' and a 'Red' government here; the precedent has been set. I suspect that it would be much harder with the current or future 'Green' incarnation, but I am also optimistic there. Evidence suggests that the 'Greens' are simply incapable of governing effectively (think 2006 and the current incarnation), especially on the economic front. They are, in my view, incapable of delivering economic growth to a degree where they can maintain popularity. Essentially, they do themselves in; the control they need to stay in power negates economic opportunity.

Yes, I think the 'Yellows' are simply a default party against the 'Reds'. But, I think 'Mark' has simply had his day. Sometimes in politics you get a chance, perhaps two, but his are already used up. Perhaps some new blood at the top would make a difference, however I think the secret paymasters won't let that happen for a bit. The problem with new blood is that sometimes it isn't controlled easily, whereas 'Mark' is. 

As for the 'Reds' and 'Yellows' becoming national rather than regional parties, I think it is a process of evolution, IF the coups stop. A regional party cannot really last too long, even with a majority. The natural process of political evolution will take care of that, IF it is allowed to do so.

Cheers

48 minutes ago, gamini said:

Can there ever be any democracy in Thailand when all major political parties have exactly the same right wing business policies?. No taxes for the rich. i.e. capital gains etc. Thai voters have no politcal choice. There are no socialist, workers. farmers or green parties.

I think there is a great deal of truth to your post. And, I hope one day the Thai people get some of the choices you listed.

I would simply say that the road to a fully functioning democracy is a long one.

Before Thai people get a choice of " socialist, workers. farmers or green parties", there needs to be an end to the coups. And then we need to see an elected government peacefully hand over power to another elected government.

Call me an optimist, but I believe that Thailand has already embedded the idea that a 'legitimate' government needs to come from an election. As to the rest, it'll take some time.

34 minutes ago, Ricardo said:

 

Absolutely S.O.P. here in Thailand, especially if the Big Boss wants to guard against the risk of anyone ever being tempted to do-a-Newin ever again, the problem might be when you then absorb the coalition-partner afterwards, before the next election ?

 

Does that sort of thing really strengthen democracy ?  Or does it just crush the minor-opposition, and cement TRT/PPP/PTP as being unable to be beaten in a straight election ?   Clever political-manouvering I'd agree, but it makes it awfully hard to overturn a corrupt government, at the ballot-box ?

 

Hence my  (slightly OTT, I admit, trying to add humour)  'vampire-squid' comment.

You raise two issues in your second paragraph that I find interesting.

First, can a (corrupt or not) government be tossed out by the voters at any time?

It is difficult to give an answer with 100% confidence as there are so many factors involved, and not all of them can be quantified easily. That said, I believe the answer is yes. One can never know exactly what will happen in a campaign, and more than once a party/candidate has does something stupid which has cost them the election (see the recent UK election). However, one requirement that I think is required is that the opposition needs to be seen as a potential "government in waiting" and has 'earned' that label. Yes, these are a nebulous factors, but I believe that it is one of those things that "everyone knows" even if it cannot be explained. 

This is one of the interesting questions in Thai politics. Are the Dems considered a "Government in waiting"? Yes, I think they are. The question that I ask myself is have they 'earned' that label? My view is that they haven't, but rather that they are simply the alternative to a 'Red' government. I suspect that they are never going to do well until they can offer either a platform which has wide acceptance or a leader who is seen in a better light than the current one.

The second issue is whether it is better that a party form a coalition before or after an election.

There is something to be said for having a lot of parties going into an election as that gives voters a wide array of choices.

However, I tend to come down on the side that it is better to have 'big tent' parties rather than a bunch of little ones. The main reason for this is that the coalition building process AFTER an election doesn't seem too democratic to me. For example, if you voted for party 'A' based on a specific policy, and that policy gets negated during the coalition talks, then your vote has essentially been negated. In essence, your are voting for the negotiators rather than a policy or policies.

I prefer to see large 'big tent' parties with wide-spread support going into the election as that seems the best way to know what you will get. 

Any thoughts?

6 minutes ago, Ricardo said:

"new leaders"

 

Statement of the obvious really, although Yingluck was reported to have little to do with PTP recently, as the verdict approached, that coming from PTP itself ?

 

Yes of course they will need a new face to present the party, the question is whether it will be a family-member again, or not.  Which IMO is where the "internal divisions" bit comes in !  Is there any faction strong-enough & rich-enough & motivated to take control of the party away from the Big Boss ?  Probably not.

 

Regarding PTP's ability to win the next election, whenever that will be, well if they think they will fall short of their usual target 50%-of-the-vote, then they will surely just do-a-deal in-advance for a coalition-party to join them, or absorb one or-more minor-parties after the results are known. 

 

And then declare yet-again 'majority popular-support', and another 'landslide victory', for their vampire-squid of a political-grouping !

 

TRT/PPP/PTP have done this every time except 2005, which was (lets be honest) a genuine landslide & outright-victory for Thaksin, the formula for gaining-power works. So why would they ever abandon it ?

Er...ahem... isn't forming a coalition (when you don't have a majority of the seats) standard operating procedure in every parliament in every country that has one?

Respectfully, why would that be a bad thing here?

Cheers

On 9/9/2017 at 7:19 AM, thailandroadblock said:

hello, looking for front beach house or bungalow to rent at koh phanghan, any information welcome.

It is unlikely that anyone is going to reply to your post without some further information from you.

How long do you want to rent?

What budget (generally speaking) do you have?

Party area or extreme quiet?

Etc. Etc. Etc.

There is great knowledge on this forum, but you are unlikely to access it without providing some details. And, even then it is not guaranteed.

14 hours ago, sambum said:

Yes, Phil also does sterling work and rather him than me!

 

However, I stand by my statement about the work done by the voluntary Dog Rescue Centre, Samui - the situation regarding stray dogs is nowhere near as bad as  it was say 10 years ago. And you should be aware that this organisation has 2 centres - maybe one is better/worse than the other? :- 

 

"We have two shelters: a small one in Chaweng at our house and the large one at Ban Taling Ngam in the south west of the island."

 

Possibly you caught the staff on a bad day - it does happen sometimes wherever you are,  and these people are doing voluntary work, so you should give them a bit of leeway

 

And to say:-  "100% of dogs on our street is vaccinated and fixed already thanks to them" is possibly true - you don't know all the dogs on his street, whereas he possibly does. Now if he'd said "100% of the dogs on the streets are vaccinated and fixed already thanks to them" then I would take that as a bit of an exaggeration to say the least!

 

Anyway, sorry for your bad experience, and by the way, I have no connection or vested interests in either of the above shelters!

 

 

I very much agree with Sambum (above).

EVERY person that I have talked to regarding this (who has some basic knowledge) says that the Dog Rescue Center Samui group is an excellent organization.

And as for Mr Sucker being a liar, offer some concrete evidence or shut the hell up. Your post was very offensive.

Thaksin did a runner and yet, the 'Red' side won the ensuing election. I can think of no reason to believe it will not be something similar again.

Many people hate the Shin family (not without cause) and consider them to be the main cause of problems in Thailand.

I disagree with this assessment, for the most part.

The problem, in my view, is that the Bangkok based political entities simply do not have the trust of the people in the N and NE. I do not believe that they view them as equal citizens that are worthy of respect. And I do not believe that they treat them (politically) with the respect their numbers and needs deserve.

Until the Bangkok based entities EARN the respect of people in the N and NE, the troubles will continue, either with the 'Reds' or with whatever entity rises up to take their place.

This is the problem.

4 minutes ago, rooster59 said:

Comparing Prayut and Thaksin ‘not appropriate’

Hmm... I disagree.

I see many similarities and only a few differences...

16 minutes ago, rooster59 said:

The poll also looked at impacts on other political parties, including Pheu Thai’s arch-rival, the Democrat Party. Some 71.1 per cent of respondents thought that the Democrats could become an alternative for voters.

Does anyone believe (regardless of what the "poll" says) that 'Reds' are going to vote for the Dems?

These polls are hilarious....

98.48567% of people in my house agree!

1 hour ago, rooster59 said:

He also had four kangaroo rats with him

I am REALLY happy that the story doesn't specify where the rats were...

8 minutes ago, rooster59 said:

‘I really loved them’

" I really loved them long time- me so horny!"...

...might be a better quote.

1 hour ago, loong said:

Although this is admirable, I wonder whether this will ever make more than a temporary dent in the number of strays.

If 80% are sterilised, how long will it take the remaining 20% to fill the gap?

I thought that your question was a good one, so I did a quick search on-line for an answer. Unfortunately, I did not find a clear answer regarding the effectiveness of these programs, and certainly no specific numbers/data.

In the various articles that I read, there are three items which seem to be needed for an effective program:

• Catch/sterilize/release
• Control of food supply (garbage)
• Public education

I am not really sure what to say about these three items.

If they manage to achieve the 80% target (especially in females), then there should be a noticeable difference in a relatively short time. And logically, it will take a while to "fill the gap" again. Further, we are on an island, so the physical barrier will make this kind of thing much more effective; one article noted that some programs failed because (dogs especially) will roam far to find a bitch in heat.

Food supply/garbage. What can I say? We all see loads of garbage on the island, so I think there will be an adequate food supply for a long time. Perhaps if they fix the bloody incinerator sometime, that will help!

Public education. Again, what can I say? I think some Thais would be happy to have their pets spayed, but aren't willing to spend the money to do so. And, some don't seem to care if their pets get knocked up. Public attitudes will be hard to change.

In spite of the above, I think this is a great program and needs to be done, even if there will need to be a return visit by the Soi Dog Foundation in a few years. We humans helped to create this situation, and we have a responsibility to help fix/mitigate it. 

Any members knowledgeable about these kinds of programs? Or any members better at finding answers on-line?

Cheers

21 minutes ago, webfact said:

He called it the first “solid evidence” to emerge from a two-week investigation of Yingluck taking the easterly route.

Hmmm....

Didn't we all see a story here a few days ago claiming that the investigation was 80% complete?

Double Hmmm...

Kudos to the Soi Dog Foundation!

This is a kind thing to do for all the animals that I see everyday. Further, it is action that can actually achieve concrete results with Samui being an island.

I'll be buying those people a cold Coke if/when I see them working on the roads. And if I see a donation box, I'll be putting my contribution in.

Well Done!