kwilco

Hitler has won! https://www.independent.co.uk/tv/news/miriam-margolyes-palestine-israel-gaza-war-b2525107.html

The lack of cabals is why Bkk is sinking

Observation???? - NO!!! How wide of the mark you are - are you just making this up as you go along? I'm sorry but you clearly don't know and like Dunning & Kruger say - you just don't know how much you don't know.... Road safety Statistics in Thailand So ‘deaths not at the scene are not counted.” Is a myth - the figures during holidays are released by the police - but they make no claim to them being final figure only angry expat amateurs do that. “Lies, Damned lies and Statistics”- Stats are not facts – tey are aids to understanding and it is how they are interpreted that is important. There are quite a mix of stats available about road safety in Thailand but the ones you usually see in the media are firstly from the Thai police and later from the WHO. The Thai police could almost be dismissed out of hand and the WHO is usually misrepresented by the media as they only quote only the set of stats relating to DEATHS out of 100,000 population. If you want to get an idea of how pathetically incomplete Thai road safety stats are just compare them with a brief look around the UK government web sites - https://roadtraffic.dft.gov.uk/downloads The way statistics are usually gathered is usually governed by internationally recognised methods, but Thailand has had dreadful statistics gathering and collation. Their statistics are incomplete inconsistent and inaccurate – Organisations like the WHO have to try and make sense of them, but in some categories, the statistics simply aren’t available. How they are gathered and applied in Thailand can be very haphazard. Having said that, it is fair to conclude that the stats for Thailand however vague, are genuinely frightening and there is a serious road safety problem in the kingdom. Other collations of statistics may include Deaths per 1 million inhabitants Serious Injuries per 1 million inhabitants Minor injuries per 1 million inhabitants Deaths per 10 billion vehicle-KM Deaths per 100,000 registered vehicles Registered vehicles per 1000 inhabitants Here are some of the main data sources for road safety statistics in Thailand Police Information System (POLIS) - Royal Thai Police Department of Highways (DOH) – Monitors road conditions and accident statistics on national highways. Department of Land Transport (DLT) – Manages vehicle registrations, driver licenses, and safety compliance data. Thai Road Accident Data Center for Road Safety Culture (ThaiRSC) – A key database managed by the DLT, compiling accident reports from multiple agencies. Emergency Medical Institute of Thailand (EMIT) & National Institute for Emergency Medicine (NIEM) – Provides data on injuries and fatalities from road crashes. TRAMS - "Thailand Road Accident Management System," 7. E-Claim - Road Victim Protection Company 8. Injury Surveillance (IS) - Ministry of Public Health 9. Trauma Registry - Ministry of Public Health 10. 19 External Causes of Injury - Ministry of Public Health 11. Information Technology for Emergency Medical System (ITEMS) - Emergency Medical Institute of Thailand 12. Emergency Claim Online (EMCO) - National Health Security Office 13. OP/PP Individual Record - National Health Security Office 14. Death Certificates - Ministry of Interior 15. Public Health Ministry (MOPH) & Bureau of Epidemiology – Tracks road traffic injuries and fatalities through hospital records and death certificates. 16. Road Safety Directing Centre (RSDC) & Thailand Road Safety Committee (TRSC) – Collects and analyses data to improve road safety policies. 17. Academic and Research Institutions – Universities and think tanks conduct studies on traffic accidents and road safety trends. 18. World Health Organization (WHO) & Global Status Reports on Road Safety – Provides international comparisons and estimates for Thailand’s road safety situation. These sources put together, provide a comprehensive view of road safety They are seldom used or even acknowledged by the mainstream media. OS here's a screenshot giving kjust a tiny sample of the stats available in the UK -

So to conclude - there is a big gap between public perception and the reality of the road safety situation. People have an unassailable belief that their driving experience qualifies them as experts on road safety, but this is just not true. The general public usually fails to understand that road safety as a public health issue. They stubbornly continue to view crashes through outdated concepts like "bad drivers" rather than recognizing that “human error” is a universal problem. In fact they don’t even understand what human error entails. (that’s human error on their part!) In reality, we all have the potential to be bad drivers and nothing can prevent this. To deal with this road safety measures need to be systemic rather than individual-focused The blame for failure to truly understand the issues of road safety at least in part has to be laid at the door of the media – in all its forms…their reporting being one of the main problems in getting across a realistic perception of road safety in Thailand. The media prioritizes sensational news stories rather than focusing on the root causes of accidents. This reinforces common misconceptions and cognitive biases. Unchecked, people then rely on unreliable eyewitness accounts rather than evidence-based research. The primary cause of road accidents is human error, yet many prefer to blame aberrant behaviour because it is easier to understand. The key to understanding road safety is statistics – they enable governments to initiate policies that work. Unfortunately Thai crash statistics are inconsistent and unreliable, making it difficult to analyse and implement effective policies. Without comprehensive data reform, significant progress in road safety is hampered. Thailand’s driving culture is difficult for foreigners to understand – they frequently misinterpret it. This further complicates any constructive debate. Expats and long-term residents often struggle to fully grasp the nuances of Thai road behaviour, leading to misunderstandings about traffic flow and safety. It seems to be the natural prerogative of expats to descend into the habit of cynically deriding their new host country Thailand being no exception. One see them sitting in groups in bars and restaurants reinforcing each other’s prejudices with token anecdotes. Whether this is from a feeling of inadequacy or what, I’m not sure but without proper language skills, no real aim in life they seem to try to hide their ignorance with a generous dose of cynicism. The mix of traffic on Thai roads—including motorcycles, cars, buses, and pedestrians—creates a highly dangerous mix; compounding the problem is the poor quality of the roads themselves, with a notable lack of road and traffic engineers contributing to inadequate infrastructure. Law enforcement is also a major obstacle to any improvement. The police and the courts require reform to ensure that traffic laws are effectively enforced. This could involve constitutional changes, even. Attempts at enforcement, such as fines and speed limits, are frequently undermined by corruption and inefficiencies. Fines go uncollected, and some do not even make it into official records due to questionable policing practices. Emergency services are frequently overlooked, with Thailand lacking an efficient system for first responders post-crash care and any standardised emergency facilities It seems at last some progress is being made. New traffic engineering programs are being introduced. However, some of these initiatives are poorly executed—pedestrian crossings and road markings often appear bad designed and haphazard, and newly introduced speed limits are so low that they are widely ignored. The elephant in the room is motorcycles, which account for around 75% of all road deaths and injuries. Addressing this effectively could lead to a significant reduction in casualties. If road is to improve with any significance, Thailand must adopt the Safe System approach. This includes education, enforcement, engineering, emergency response, and evaluation. Public awareness campaigns should promote lifelong learning for drivers, as seen in other countries.. Stricter enforcement of traffic laws can only happen with major police training and reform. All aspects need to be addressed together - improved road and vehicle safety standards, and a more efficient emergency response system are essential. In the future, policy-making must be data-driven, relying on accurate and consistent crash statistics. Thailand’s new Parliamentary Advisory Group https://www.who.int/thailand/news/detail/03-05-2024-th-rs-parliamentary-advisory-group-takes-aim-at-road-crashes - on road safety marks a step in the right direction, but sustained efforts and systemic changes are necessary to make a lasting impact.

I see that many poorer republican supporters are concerned about loosing welfare and healthcare - they didn't rea;ise it would happen so quickly. THey are also concerned about the increase in prices brought about by the new tarriffs

I'm afraid it is - sinking is just an excuse - plenty of other solutions to a sinking city - at best it's rats leaving a sinking ship.

I think we can learn from history…new capitals are often tools of authoritarian regimes to centralise and consolidate their power. New capitals are frequently employed by authoritarian regimes as tools of control. By moving away from politically engaged, historically significant urban centres, these governments aim to weaken opposition, reinforce regime legitimacy, and construct carefully controlled environments that reinforce their ideological goals. Whether through monumental architecture, geographic repositioning, or rigid urban planning, these capitals serve as physical manifestations of authoritarian power, insulating rulers from democratic movements and consolidating their grip over national affairs. Throughout history, authoritarian regimes have used architecture and urban planning to consolidate control, project power, and suppress democratic movements. One example of this phenomenon is the construction of new capital cities— strategically planned urban centres - not organically grwn cities for people and commerce, they are designed by single entities or cabals to centralize authority, symbolize regime strength, and minimize dissent. There is plent of historical Precedent for this…. e.g. - Stalin, Hitler, and Fascist Urbanism which has been taken uo subsequently by many authoritarian and militaristic regimes – Rome under Mussolini and Paris under Haussmann. Totalitarian leaders like Joseph Stalin and Adolf Hitler envisioned grand architectural projects that symbolized their regimes' power and ideological dominance. Both sought to transform Moscow and Berlin into monumental capital cities, reinforcing their rule through urban landscapes meant to inspire awe and submission. Their plans included vast public squares, colossal structures, and rigidly controlled urban layouts that reflected the hierarchies of their regimes. While many of these designs remained unrealized, their impact on contemporary urban development remains evident. Thai Prime Minister during the Second World War, Plaek Phibunsongkhram, was inspired by Benito Mussolini. - Phibun's resignation was brought about in part at least by his two grandiose plans: one was to relocate the capital from Bangkok to a remote site in the jungle near Phetchabun in north central Thailand, and another was to build a "Buddhist city" in Saraburi. Similarly, in September 2019, Prime Minister Prayut Chan-o-cha proposed the idea of moving the capital to alleviate issues like overcrowding, pollution, and traffic congestion in Bangkok. He mentioned two potential approaches: relocating to a new city or moving administrative functions to the outskirts of Bangkok. This is a version of th old Thai fascist idea, thinly veiled in “environmental concerns. My guess the current proposal is to placate the military who still maintain a majority presence in Thai parliament. The Military will love it! Other examples of Authoritarian governments relocating capitals… Nigeria: Pakistan: Karachi to Islamabad (1959) Brazil: Rio de Janeiro to Brasília (1960) Lagos to Abuja (1991) Kazakhstan: Almaty to Astana (1997) Indonesia: Jakarta to Nusantara Myanmar: Yangon to Naypyidaw (2005)

so no relocation there, then.

you think that's the yardstick for moving a capital? - BTW Amsterdam is sinking.

It is established fact that Bangkok is sinking, this is being use by the military as an excuse to consolidate their power. THere are mant alternative to simply moving the admin capital into a bullet-proof "castle". The people of Bangkok need a holistic approach which they are a part of.

Very bizarre example, tangential to the discussion - you seem to be somewhat in favour of an authoritarian government?

I think we can learn from history…New Capitals are often tools of authoritarian regimes to centralise and consolidate their power. New capitals are frequently employed by authoritarian regimes as tools of control. By moving away from politically engaged, historically significant urban centres, these governments aim to weaken opposition, reinforce regime legitimacy, and construct carefully controlled environments that reinforce their ideological goals. Whether through monumental architecture, geographic repositioning, or rigid urban planning, these capitals serve as physical manifestations of authoritarian power, insulating rulers from democratic movements and consolidating their grip over national affairs.

The military will love you....

Excuses - the Dutch can live below sea level - if they wanted to extend the whole city then that would be different - but they want to build a capital and military head. This was an idea that came from the military - it is trying to extract the government machine from the chaos of an open city to a place where it can be more powerful.

THis is usually the choice of militaristic governments and dictatorships....

The irony of calling someone ‘pigheaded’ while repeating the same flawed argument is apparently lost on you You insist you ‘understand the stats’ but immediately say ‘it doesn’t matter what percentage it is’—which proves you don’t care about actual data, just personal anecdotes. Observing reckless drivers doesn’t mean you’ve diagnosed the cause—that’s why professionals rely on research, not just what they see on the road. You dismiss enforcement, infrastructure, and education while ranting about ‘attitudes,’ as if that alone explains systemic issues. You keep asking if I’m Thai, as if nationality determines objectivity—a lazy, weak deflection. You’re not ‘seeing clearly’; you’re just repeating the same simplistic, surface-level take while ignoring the deeper causes of road safety failures. If you think you’re playing ‘chess,’ you’re playing without half the pieces."

Trying to have a discussion with you is like playing chess with a pigeon... As ever. your response is full of logical fallacies, anecdotal reasoning, and contradictions. “All the data I, or anyone, needs is the yearly accident stats.” - ”OMG! - That’s a fundamental misunderstanding of statistics. As I said before raw accident numbers don’t explain why crashes happen or how to fix them. Professionals analyse factors like enforcement, infrastructure, driver training, and cultural attitudes—not just body counts. It also helps if you know how and where stats are collated. “Drivers know the laws, they just ignore them.” - “drivers” - what do you mean by that? - Another racist stereotype? - If laws aren’t enforced, why would people follow them? We know this from many countries that lack of enforcement breeds negligence and this is why countries with have proper enforcement systems - just suggesting the police “do their job” - is facile in the extreme.. As ever your blaming of individuals without addressing systemic failures is both naive and counterproductive. “I saw a parent with four people on a scooter without helmets.”
Yes, we’ve all seen that. But anecdote isn’t data and actually shows a huge misunderstanding of the future surrounding the rich and poor in road safety - see the post by “Lorry”. If individual observations were the gold standard for understanding road safety, we wouldn’t need actual studies to assess risk factors and solutions. But one thing that is self-evident is that countries that base their safety programs on data show great improvements wheat in Thailand where “alternative” anecdotal methods have shown no significant change in 30 years. “Anyone older than a teenager should know to avoid reckless driving.”
That’s wishful thinking. People don’t behave based on what they ‘should’ do, they behave based on what’s allowed. That’s why better driver training, licensing exams, and strict enforcement matter—not just personal responsibility. - but you have shown over and over again you don’t understand what “human error” is. “Are you Thai?”
This Such a weak, irrelevant deflection. Road safety isn’t about race or nationality; it’s a universal science about policies, enforcement, and infrastructure. If someone disagrees with your opinion, it doesn’t mean they’re “sticking up” for anyone—it means your argument is just not an argument. “It doesn’t matter what percentage it actually is.”
This single line DESTROYS YOUR ENTIRE CREDIBILITY. If you don’t care about actual data, then you’re not arguing in good faith. You’re just pushing a narrative based on personal bias. “I, and many others, have driven for years and see it daily.”
You still haven’t grasped that That’s just confirmation bias. The fact that multiple people have the same subjective experience doesn’t make it objective truth. If that were the case, science and statistics wouldn’t exist “You are close-minded for looking at data instead of the whole picture.”
No—ignoring data is close-minded. The whole picture includes actual research, not just gut feelings. Again you don’t understand cognitive dissonance either. Final thought? You’re arguing based on personal frustration, not actual analysis. If you want real change, you need facts, not emotional anecdotes. PS - "playing chess with a pigeon" —no matter how well you play, they'll just knock over the pieces, poop on the board, and strut around like they won.

Repeating the same nonsense doesn’t make it any more correct….. “You assume he doesn't know how to drive in Thailand. he might be driving here for years without an accident, like many other foreigners here.”. That’s a complete non-sequitur. Whether someone has personally avoided an accident has zero relevance to their understanding of road safety at a national level. Just one driver's experience doesn’t override actual data on road safety either accident enforcement or infrastructure. Using your logic, as I said earlier anyone who's been to school isn't an expert on education, anyone who’s never had a house fire isn't an expert on fire safety, or someone who’s never been mugged doesn't live in a crime-free country. See the flaw yet? Personal anecdotes aren’t a substitute for system-wide analysis. If you want to argue about road safety, stick to facts, not your own lucky driving record."* As for the rest….. "Ah yes, the classic ‘read this slowly’ approach—because condescension is such a great substitute for a logical argument Your reasoning is risibly flimsy….You say "Many locals are bad drivers." – so can you define "many." - 10%? 50%? 90%? You have zero actual data, just a bunch of anecdotal whinging. If your argument is just gut feelings and cognitive biases instead of statistics, it’s not an argument at all. Again you claim - “Nothing to do with race” - . They say there is “stupid, stupider and then racist” But by saying, ‘It’s the locals.’ you’re ignoring the science, ‘Poor driving conditions exist due to infrastructure, lax enforcement, or education.’ If you used the same logic and applied it to other nationalities, you’d see the problem—but because it fits your narrative, you pretend it’s ‘facts.’ “Where we come from, the police are hardcore.” And again you’ve missed the point, it’s systems, not people that shape behaviour. If Thailand had the same enforcement, education, and infrastructure as your home country, the driving habits would be different. Instead of recognising that, you just blame "locals" like bad driving is coded into their DNA. “Are you Thai?” – What?? - this is where you fully expose yourself. What exactly are you implying? That only foreigners can have valid opinions on road safety in Thailand? That my argument is only valid if I’m not Thai? If that’s not racially loaded nonsense, I don’t know what is. At the end of the day, the difference between us is simple: I’m discussing causes and solutions—you’re just ranting about ‘bad locals’ which that means nothing. If you actually cared about road safety instead of playing the ‘wise foreign observer,’ you’d focus on the systemic reasons behind these issues, not lazy stereotypes

Let's hope they make an effort to find who was setting the traps

Unfortunately that sums up your powers of thought all too succinctly

basically you don't know how to drive in Thailand and it's no wonder because of your racially stereotyping attitude.

Your entire argument is just getting cyclic you keep returning to “they” and Thai drivers as if it is some racially stereotypical group. Basically it’s just laziness wrapped in typical expat arrogance. You seem incapable of critical thinking. (I doubt you even know what it is). ‘I see it, so it must be true’ isn’t analysis—it’s confirmation bias. Just because you notice reckless driving more in Thailand doesn’t mean it’s worse because of some magical “local attitude” problem. That’s just ignorant nonsense. Your math is laughable. More vehicles do not automatically mean more accidents—road design, law enforcement, and infrastructure determine accident rates. That’s why countries with far more cars have far fewer road deaths. But sure, keep pretending your personal observations trump decades of scientific research. And this obsession with ‘bad drivers’? Completely useless. Every country has reckless drivers, but smart countries don’t rely on the fantasy of “fixing attitudes”—they build systems that prevent human error from turning into fatalities. That’s why they have lower accident rates, and why Thailand doesn't. You suggest ‘data doesn’t reduce accidents’—which is just embarrassing. It is the key to truly understanding what is happening on Thai roads. Data drives policy, which actually works. Meanwhile, your approach—whining about ‘bad attitudes’ and playing the blame game—has changed exactly nothing. Bottom line? You’re not proving a point—you’re just making and re-making excuses for why you don’t want to or can’t think critically about road safety. If you really cared, you'd focus on solutions, not just shouting ‘bad drivers’ from the side-lines like it means something.

Sorry missed a bit - Thailand's alcohol figure in crashes is about 33%, in UK it is 20% - in the US it is 32%

Your response is nothing more than thinly veiled racial stereotyping, dressed up as ‘observable fact.’ You are putting forward an argument that is using entirely racial terms Blaming an entire nationality instead of looking at the actual causes—infrastructure, enforcement, education—is intellectually lazy and avoids any serious discussion. Saying ‘they’ means Thais because ‘they’re the ones driving in Thailand’ is like saying all Americans are obese because they live in the U.S.—it’s a meaningless generalization or syllogism that ignores data, context, and reality. You’re not ‘observing facts’—you’re cherry-picking anecdotes to reinforce your pre-existing bias. The real difference between us? I’m talking about solutions based on scientific evidence. —you’re just ranting about ‘bad Thai drivers’ like it’s some inherent trait. It’s not. It’s a product of systemic issues—which you conveniently ignore because that would require actual critical thinking instead of lazy blame. And calling me an ‘apologist’ is hilarious coming from someone who’s actively excusing government inaction by pretending this is just about ‘bad drivers.’ The reality? Your mindset is part of the problem. The rest of us are discussing actual solutions—you’re just screaming into the void."

deleted