tpaul1

All this legal stuff is irrelevant in a lot of ways. If you cross the wrong person here or you being alive is the only thing between, say a relative of the original owner who has since passed away and a nice bit of property so they never have to work again, then an usefruct is just putting a big round target on your back. Iearnt a long time ago, the more you make things secure in a legal contract here, the more you are likely to have an unfortunate surprise. We are all here by virtue of a visa, not access to the land itself remember. Also with the Pattaya expat flying club membership souring etc, it is a dangerous game to play.  A wise balance between a prudent contract and knowing when it is best to bail is the best advise I can give. Outright ownership is really the only way that inlaws  or relatives of the owner etc maybe will not look on your property with envious eyes and then only maybe!

I remember when this was all fields

Sad story. Unfortunately, too many animals the world over die through stupidity from humans actions. Education is the key. Around my way, I am horrified and saddened by the huge number of road kill. People are simply unaware and drive right over everything without even hesitation. Last week a turtle was smashed into pieces into a macabre jigsaw puzzle on the road near the golf course. Every time it rains, hundreds of toads and frogs are squashed in the moobahn needlessly. I try to shoo as many out the way but without a 'toad watch' like we have in the UK, there is not much hope. Most of these creatures can be avoided with a little care and attention. Ok, my mrs laughs at me because I'll swerve around something only for it to turn out to be a leaf but better than waste precious lives. Amphibians and reptiles are under pressure enough with loss of habitat and climate change and we need to improve their plight, not make it worse.

One more thing, I preferred it when it would have come last for things to do  (assuming they were things you had to pay for). Back in the day, there was nothing to do except beach comb and snorkel; you didn't need a wallet most days and just settled up your tab (honour system with a book for each bungalow) at the end of the stay and it was cheap as... There were no bars, 7/11s tailor shops, rental shops etc etc. Does everywhere have to end up the same? Can't we just keep some places hard to get to and undeveloped? Frankly, I'd pay a serious wedge to be able to go back to that kind of place, just to relax and not have this commercialism in your face.

I vote Koh Chang best island in Thailand... before Thai Visa users and 99.99% of all the other visitors got there. Now it is ruined by greed and overdevelopment. I remember when Lonely Beach really was lonely and you needed to enlist the help of a local to find the waterfall. It is heart breaking what has happened there in the last 20 years. I can't bear to go back there.

5 minutes ago, Kabula said:

I guess you didn't see the question marks!  Having owned a Private Investigation Agency and a Insurance Adjustment Co for 30 years qualifies me as an expert witness in Superior Court.  I specialized in Product Liability investigations for Honda, and Yamaha for 11 years.  We were recommended by the AM best Company for 11 years doing work for over 300 Insurance companies. Most of those product investigations were multi million dollar cases.  What I saw in that video leaves me with questions?  Especially with a prior cry for help!

As a motorcyclist, I can think of much more certain and easier ways to get the job done that hit an overpass barrier at a glancing blow.  However, I just thing this speculation is wrong, wrong wrong! Poor guy and poor family reading this thread

2 minutes ago, Kabula said:

Possible suicide to cover up intent?  Previous cry for help?

 

RIP...

Ok , here goes, just for the record. In case I should die in a motorcycle accident or any other accident etc, I won't keep you guys guessing. I will make it easy for you and will tell you guys before that I will commit suicide. If I haven't told you beforehand then just presume it was an accident ok, no need to presume this. It truly is pathetic how so many unfortunate deaths are twisted around and discussed in such a way. Truly pathetic!

Why are so many people so insensitive? The appeal that I heard about on the facebook page for expat bikers was for advice on a good hospital and treatment ans far as I know, not specifically for money. Come on, loads of people ask similar things on this forum. It is not clear at all if this had anything to do with the accident. Like others have mentioned, he looks unconscious prior to being on cam and maybe he passed out or maybe not.  It's an overpass not an elevated road so motorcycles are allowed there. So many smug heartless posters on TV.  So many with some sort of chip on their shoulder or complex because of other people choosing to ride motorcycles and have a lifestyle they don't choose or cant' have for whatever reason (age, demanding wife, lack of balls etc). I'm referring to not just this but many threads where they attack all motorcyclists as reckless and dangerous. I can just imagine them spitting vinegar and p**S every time a motorcycle overtakes them in traffic etc. If you want to use the argument that motorcycles are dangerous then it is true of cars too and nobody should drive and we should all stick to bicycles and walking. RIP Christian!

Quote

After 20 years here and traveled the entire country I have yet to visit a Thai park that I thought was fantastic. Some are nice but most are a waste of time. There is nothing outstanding in any of them. The waterfalls are small, the old temples look cool but after a few look the same, the flowers can be seen anywhere ......
The grand palace area in Bkk is however really nice but too many people to really enjoy the day.
 

I have lived here for nearly 30 years and only recently have been getting more interested in the forest NPs. They really are quite spectacular so IMHO it is worth visiting them despite the annoyances. There is so much to see! Try to get away from the crowds, either by 4WD or walking. Two Sundays ago, the g/f and I were having a Sunday breakfast at a waterfall in Kaeng Kra Chan after a 4 km walk through pristine forests. It was spectacular. Just the two of us there with hundreds of butterflies etc. I'm not really sure what more you could ask for. (that was after we got through the traffic jam on the way there LOL)

Quote

It is funny to see how they treat the customers as cattle.

20 years ago, just as Koh Chang started to change from a relaxed place for back packers to stay by the beach and become friends with the locals, I was getting off a boat when one of the local Thai men on the jetty shouted out: " Mee Farang, kee tua?". None of the other foreigners understood what was going on, but when I passed him on my way of the boat I said in a firm and loud voice so others could understand, "Farang bpen kon, mai bpen sat!" Pretty sure he got some broken face over that but it was a sign of things to come, and now  like most Thai beach areas where there are foreign tourists, it is ruined by greedy and short sighted people just looking for a quick buck. So sad  

so why should the state be any more involved than the federal government? Why would they be able to make a better judgement on what is violating or not the rights of a person in such a case? Some Americans still think they are in the 19th century!

In my opinion, they should raise the rate for Thais not ncessarily lower it for foreigners, though for maximum revenues, this is something they will have to figure out. When we went to Kaeng Kra Chang earlier this month there was a traffic jam half way up a mountain, 40 kms inside this beautiful park at 6am. You expect this in BKK but not in the jungle! At least charge 500 THB per car for such places and only those who really want to go will cough up the cash. By all means have season tickets and concessions for students, the poor (difficult to prove in this country I'll admit) or a lottery, first to book cheap ticket scheme etc so those local enthusiasts can still enjoy the natural beauty that Thailand has to offer. However, selfishly speaking, I'd prefer to pay a premium to have peace and quiet. As the system is now, we get the worst of all worlds, paying a premium and then having to put up with a second rate experience due to congestion and over crowding. As it was, having got up at 5am, staying right outside the park entrance and we still missed the sunrise. Who would have thought that would be the case?  BTW, after the masses had taken their selfies with the fog sea behind them, they all disappeared from whence they came and left the rest of us to enjoy the excellent wildlife and nature that the park has to offer.

In theory, and in practice, in some locations, eco tourism makes sense because it provides an income and incentive to protect the environment by local people. The reality is that, you can't really justify keeping large tracts of pristine habitats intact for the income that a few, even well paid and well meaning tourists provide. At best, it will only be localised or pertaining to one or two high profile species such as mountain gorillas. It is hard to get people to visit important but frankly unexceptional degraded secondary forests. When I visited Pangsila NP last year, we were the only visitors and the area is vast but actually only of interest to the most hard core enthusiasts (no waterfalls etc). In my view, tourism is therefore not the best approach to managing an ecosystem. You need to protect a much larger area than people will visit. Most tourists only want to walk a km or so from a waterfall and are mostly oblivious to any degradation outside the attraction area. Even where tourists are keen to explore and willing to spend several days in the wild, they are often disappointed with what they witness so this is another issue that needs addressing. Having got back from N Laos on one such trip recently, it is all too evident that the bio diversity area we were visiting is devoid of animals and birds and is surrounded by huge mono culture banana and rubber plantations. I can't really see how the villagers who are still living within the bio diversity area are going to change their behaviour radically and protect wildlife instead of eat it, for the sake of a few hundred tourists. It will take generations and the forest doesn't have that long.  The destruction in Laos in this century alone is massive. Many areas of Thailand are in a similar or worse state, the one major difference and potentially positive thing being the large tracts of national parks in Thailand where people are not allowed to live. To Thailand's credit, there is a huge area of the country given over to NPs, the issue is how to regenerate them. However, when you look at the areas involved, it is way more than even a huge increase in ecotourists could sustain. Obviously, 1M eco tourists is wildly optimistic and also would be very hard to manage in sensitive and fragile environments in such large numbers . If the environmental argument is only made in $$ terms in the short term, I don't think it is an argument that can be won. The stronger argument for me is the fact that it is the nations heritage and belongs to everyone (actually no one in my opinion) and should be protected for future generations for its own sake. Education and experiencing nature (which this article hints at) are key to this, but again, how long does it take to change people's behavior and view of the wild?

In the UK, in East Anglia, massive destruction of habitats was conducting in the name of progress and modernization of agriculture. I grew up as a kid witnessing this and knew morally it was wrong. Many of my favourite playgrounds were turned into a sea of chemically sprayed wheat. At the time it was totally legal and the protesters or anyone who objected in the village were considered meddling outsiders. Of course now, it would never be allowed to happen but the hedgerows and ponds were never reinstated etc and the animals, plants, birds and insects have never recovered. People there forget or don't know how it used to be and although there has been a massive change in mindset, the ecosystem has never been allowed to recover. In Thailand, we are still at the destruction stage but here in Thailand where nature has a much longer growing season there is hope but it does require investment in protection and restoration. I just don't see that coming from eco tourism.

4 minutes ago, jpinx said:

What is an expert anyway?  The problem is too many supposed experts being paid for by the various interested bodies behind the campaign, in the same way as the oil companies have double-PhD's on their payroll to counter some of the bad publicity with "research".

Unfortunately, we are not all able to interpret the raw data so you have to accept some things by experts. At some stage, any rational individual has to accept the data and conclusions of experts. Take the link between lung cancer and other diseases and smoking. The smoking lobby, at least up until recently, were denying any connection but anyone with a high school education would probably be willing to accept the findings of scientists the World over that there was a link. Why the reluctance with climate change? Because it is scary? We have to change? Maybe. I really can't answer that since I was on board in 1984 but some people are later than others when it comes to aceppting these things. Problem is, unlike smoking, it has much bigger consequences and we are changing things faster than we are willing to accept we have caused these changes. Man is an optimistic creature by nature and it has served s well in the past but now it is causing our demise if we are not careful

Quote

For a seemingly highly intelligent person, a strange comment. For the average moron like me, man's influence on climate change has not been proven beyond doubt, it is the opinion of some of the scientific community. Prove it,and get the scientific community to support you then  I'll support you, as will the Donald I expect. Donald Trump offered an alternative to the criminal class who run Washington and the US population voted against the current inept corrupt political elite and elected him. There is some debate about the 'popular vote', but when a state like California has a huge  non  US citizen body voting, then the figures are somewhat inflated, so making 'popular 'irrelevant. Then there are the deceased voters, faulty voting machines etc.etc. (don't forget Russian hacking and FBI influence).

How are morons like you going to accept it then? The way there will be no doubt in your mind is when the science is screaming in your face and it is to late to change things? Wait until the patient dies?

Climate change outside the US is accepted, period. It is only in the country where a huge percentage think the world is a few thousand years old do you have any large percentage of the populations in denial. What hope have we got getting through to such an ignorant population? (I'm not talking about all the population but worryingly, so many of them that they elected Trump). It is pathetic and I wouldn't care but we all have to deal with the consequences. So T May better tell Trump to get in the 21st century and be part of the solution and not the problem. The future of jobs in the US depends far more on them working in renewable industries (600K people in California alone) and not the coal (55k people.) it is not only China but huge steps are being made in Europe in renewables. Whole communities in Germany are taking on solar and wind projects. Intelligent and responsible populations who understand resources are finite and there are alternatives to the carbon addiction. 

Quote

There's lots more information one could look at, but it's worth bearing in mind that CO² is not the biggest cause of warming,  it's a long way second to water vapour.  Given that fact, and that man-made CO² is a small proportion of what's in the atmosphere, man's influence is actual very very small, only inflated by his collective ego :)

 

The science community is remarkably coy about making declarations of the overall proportions of the warming influence of the various gases and it becomes evident that man's emissions are a tiny fraction of the total figure.  CO² is 9-26% of the over all warming gases, and manmade CO² is 4% of that...  Looks like we're causing something between 0.36% and 1.04% ....  really??

 

Sorry, but ' experts' like you just show your ignorance in the subject. Of course other gases give a greeenhouse effect. Without it the Earth would not be able to sustain life. What matters is the balance not the contribution of a particular gas in isolation. It is man made carbon emissions which are causing the increase not the total effect. if the temperature of the earth increases by just 2 degrees then this causes catastrophic climate change. How much is 2 degrees as a percentage of absolute temperature? Not much. Look at other planets and see what state they are in. The earth is in particular 'zone' which is perfect for life. All other planets yet explored are too hot or tool cold due to no greenhouse gases or to many. Also a few percent becomes even more significant since we think in years but climates rarely change much in tens of thousands of years. You don't need much greenhouse gas extra per year to cause this change if over a period of years, let alone hundreds . As it is, the oceans have been absorbing a lot but they will not be able to do so indefinitely and nobody knows when other mechanisms start making a significant contribution such as positive feedback loops from gases released from thawing permafrost and even deep ocean gases stored as methane ice etc. This is scary stuff and we really shouldn't be testing it because once the genie is out, it is hard to see how we can put it back.

Look at it another way, you have carbon deposited over millions of years from ancient bogs. You have more deposited from another period from millions of sea creatures over millions of years. In geological time terms, you then release them all at once and then are surprised that it effects the climate. What other outcome would you expect? The carbon is not 'man made' it man released from where it has been stored out of the atmosphere where it has not effected the biosphere and atmosphere since millions of years before there were even mammals let alone humans. It has nothing to do with ego, boasting what we can do to change things. It is more egotistical people who are dismissive of natural systems who think they can do what they want without consequence. Everything you do has an impact, it is our duty and responsibility to minimize this impact. Ignorance and greed are no longer good excuses. The information is there, the science is there. Just idiotic individuals refuse to acknowledge anything which interferes with their bigoted view of the World. 

Why do people who are not experts in the field of climate study, think their 'opinion' is worth a s$$t? This topic is not about touchy feely gut feelings and dismissing science. If I were sick and 97% of the doctors I consulted, diagnosed me with the same illness, I would be a fool to ignore them. Likewise any climate change skeptics who think that 5 minutes looking at Wikipedia makes them an expert in which chemical is responsible for climate change because CO2 is not the biggest greenhouse gas (per molecule, so what?) is just trying to justify the status quo because of their gut feeling.  I did a 3 years BSc Env, from UEA (same place that the skeptics tried to smear the CRU a few years ago) and yet I would not pretend to even begin to know the answer. Analysis of data by the experts who devoted their lives to the subject (from way back when I learned about it in the 80s and the data was just showing the issue until now) is as conclusive as you can be. Or using the doctor analogy once more do we wait until the patient dies and then do a biopsy to prove the doctors were correct? Anyone who is even sitting on the fence on this one is either stupid or has something to gain from the hydrocarbon industries. Trump probably fits both categories. The idiot already admits he doesn't read. Not a good basis to form an opinion on such serious issue.

If I were a climate scientist and I was in it for the money or because the science showed climate change to be a hoax, wouldn't it be more profitable and give me greater fame a status by showing this than being with the 97.5%? It is totally illogical to think these scientists are saying climate change is real and caused by man if it is a hoax. Conversely, big business and lobby groups have everything to lose when the World turns its backs on carbon fuels, so they would do better to get on board and diversify their businesses to support green technologies than to try to pretend there is no issue. Time will tell how stupid humanity is. Electing Trump is not a good indicator of the US population's intelligence or ability to grasp scientific facts. Let's hope the Chinese have a more rational and radical view of the future or frankly, we and a lot of other species are in for a very rough future.

I say all credit to him for setting an example. Living here in Thailand for 25 years, I've seen the average Thai grow from being worryingly skinny and undernourished to more than a little bit pompui mostly thanks to CP Group and the like. At least it focused the issue.

I remember when this was all (NOT) fields!...It would be funny except it should never have been converted from forest in the first place and it will never be restored. The fact that it is one of Fang's biggest tourist attractions is pretty pathetic too. Where I come from, there are pretty much farms everywhere and we don't get any tourists going there to look at fields full of fruit trees etc. because there are more interesting places to visit. I sometimes wonder that for all the 'amazing' tourist places in Thailand, the locals seem to be bored with places that foreign tourists are supposed to go to (which I can understand too) and the locals spend their weekends driving all over the country desperately trying to find something worth of stopping at. Around Pattaya with its sheep, bee you name it farms as well as so called "vineyard" and all the Disney fake Italian style food stops, Mimosa etc, it really is rather sad compared to say Europe which has the real deal. Heck, they even fake their own stuff such as floating markets. On the other hand, there are some worthy places to visit such as some of the further of the radar national parks, it is just it is a struggle to get to them when you have to fight for space on the road with meandering Vios and Honda city drivers intent on searching for any location worthy of a selfie to impress their friends. 

With Climate change denial fools in the new US administration, China is the World's best hope for a leader in the switch to sustainable energy use and a driver in making renewables ever more economic. Luckily, apart from coal, they don't have huge hydro carbon reserves so it is in their economic as well as environmental interest to move to renewables. If the US, or any other country decides to ignore the potential long term benefits of switching to renewables, they are going to be the losers in the long run. Apart from China, some European countries have made huge efforts and hopefully Thailand will want invest in 21st century energy projects and policy instead of look to the past like some luddites in the US and elsewhere.  I know this is optimistic, but otherwise, we are all doomed by our short terms stupidity and greed. Frankly, it is perplexing why humans are so stupid and short sighted. I don't even have kids but for anyone who does and wishes the best for their kids future, they should do all they can to reduce their carbon footprint as well as encourage others to change too, friends, businesses and government at all levels. Yes, I'm guilty too but I am aware that lowering consumption is a good start (so don't anyone expect any XMas presents from me this year   )

20 minutes for the re-inactment. Hmmm.

Same thing happened to me with my ice coffee about ten years back in a well known restaurant in Jomtien. (name withheld due to lack of memory not any other reason).  Didn't notice the creature until, I had pounded the straw into the ice and been sucking the juice for around 15 minutes. Didn't seem to affect taste or do me any harm. I complained of course, but was treated as if I was the irritant, not the roach! I believe I didn't even receive a replacement drink, presumably because I had drunk most of that one LOL! 

4 hours ago, Thechook said:

Oh please are all these drama queens and doomsayers still wetting the bed.  Get over it you idiots, he won an election so live with it for 4 years.

Anyone who is denying the seriousness of climate change are the idiots. The planet hasn't got 4 years to wait for a rational person to lead the fight. Are we doomsayers supposed to wait until catastrophic events are upon everyone before we act? Just keep your head in the sand and believe all is well with the World  but it is not fair on the rest of us who have to share your filth and pollution!

Thanks to Blackcab and KhunPer for their replies. I guessed it couldn't be that easy or everyone would be doing it! On the parents, excellent point, and understood the reason for raising it. The father is my business partner for 15 years so no problem with him (foreigner) and his missus has shares in our company so as trustworthy as any Thai I know but obviously, I want to avoid any point of friction with my business partner if his missus were to have a controlling stake and started to get funny about things. I could just put it in her name I suppose though, the idea was that with my business partner being a trustee it would hopefully minimize that risk. The  point about not having a long term lease is an excellent one so that would remove any security I might have in living there. Theoretically, the daughter could shoo me out the place, not a good thought The other way would be for them to take out a mortgage with me so at least I could sell or get the investment back if it went pear shaped but it is all starting to get complicated again I think! Maybe just a purchase by my business partner's wife and 30 year lease to secure it might be the best when all things are considered. I'll just need to remember her birthday in the future!  Any thoughts?