Sig

The only possible way this could have been written was by interviewing a politician. "Beauty" and "charm" are words that would likely NEVER come to mind to describe Pattaya.... to say the very least.

Thanks for your ideas. I agree with the sign in the channel! On the bit about people staying upon work visa refusal. I had more in mind the typical Thai illegal who came either for tourism, work, or studies, and then decided to stay on even after their original visa had expired, but wouldn't be able to get a work visa approved. I didn't have in mind the type you mentioned who were intentionally coming over to work illegally. We are not in disagreement there. I'm certain you're right that these criminals who are purposefully entering illegally, seeking work, would not go back home after being refused a visa. They've already proved themselves to be criminals who couldn't care less about the laws of the country they are attempting to take advantage of and wouldn't be stopped by something like that. I feel compassion for these people who are hoping to better their and their families' lives, but I can't excuse them for breaking these laws. I think many of them could actually become productive citizens, but sadly they are headed down the wrong path.

Yes, I do think they (the majority) are going to say, "Oh, that's a shame", and return to their home country. I like to believe that the majority of people are not criminals. I suppose you could say that making laws exacerbates problems, much like those who argue that speeding laws exacerbate traffic issues. However, I don't find that argument logical or convincing. A country can't simply, willy-nilly hand out work visas to everyone who requests one. I know you didn't say such and may not intend that, but it could be seen as a logical progression from your position. Certainly, there will always be individuals who engage in criminal activities and contribute to the 'Black Economy.' This is precisely why we have laws — to provide recourse against such lawless individuals who demonstrate a disregard for the societal norms reinforced by a legal framework. Agreed, there are unscrupulous employers who criminally exploit these individuals for their own selfish gain, thus further necessitating laws to address such antisocial behavior. It may indeed be in the best interest of society not to allow such individuals to operate businesses.

Yes, really. You still don't seem to be able to comprehend what is written at face value, but insist on applying your own interpretation, reading between the lines. As I said, AGAIN, I wasn't making any claim. You strongly imply that I was, yet at the same time use language that would show that I wasn't making a claim, but that I "suggested", which I didn't and I explained what I was doing, which of course you reject because apparently you seem to think you know my intended meaning better than myself. Either way, if it were a suggestion, as you posit, such modality is not a claim. Yeah, well... maybe Reading 101 is too advanced for you. You need the prerequisite of attitudinal adjustment and reform of know-it-all syndrome. I'm done. No use in continuing... Have a better day.

I figured as much... It's a bit of an annoyance, but even low brow morons should be replied to at least once, if it isn't terribly time consuming. Beyond that, it may become an issue of casting pearls to swine and be useless.

And the UK The number of Thais working illegally in the US is mindboggling. It seems like every Thai restaurant has illegal workers. I don't believe that's the case, of course, but sometimes it is so obvious from talking with many of them that there are a LOT of them illegally working. From polls and studies I've come across in the past, Thais alone represent many thousands of illegal workers in the US, and they are a small minority of the problem. It's no wonder the US is so strict about giving visas to certain demographic groups.

Your English hasn't shown deficiencies like this in past postings I've seen... It appears that your extreme bias is blinding you. I was giving an example of how places of worship have been and continue to typically be viewed by cultures across the world in both common practice and law. I wasn't making any claim that there would be any sort of "legal protection" applicable here. And I also didn't claim or even remotely imply that acts of war would be applicable here, so why on earth would you mention that? Remedial reading 101....

Why? Are worshipping offenders granted immunity whilst in their club houses? I don't think it's too difficult to grasp. Historically, places of worship have been sort of like sanctuaries, and in some cases, legally such. Culturally, I think it can be pretty easily understood in Thailand, if you imagine a bunch of police coming to a Buddhist temple for a random check on worshipers for their passports and/or ID, I believe it would be highly likely be considered to be incredibly disrespectful. I could be wrong, but unless there were some clear reason of suspicion of a crime occurring or having occurred on the premises, I really doubt it would happen. I know that if it happened in some countries, it would be expected that there would be some serious public outcry and possibly lawsuits. This protection can also be seen in how places of worship are given special consideration during war, when it is considered a war crime under international humanitarian law to attack a place of worship and specifically prohibited under various international treaties and conventions, such as the Geneva Conventions.

well that didn't work Hard to know... Good luck can come in funny ways. It might have taken out some ne'er-do-wells! 😅 In reality, sad for those bystanders who may be suffering for a while to come...

Yep, about the same amount of time for me, since 2000 and I've been to one national park. My Thai friends paid because they were too upset to let me pay that and felt they sort of needed to apologize by paying for me. I was new to Thailand at that time, but I never went to another place that set charges like that. For one, it is too humiliating for both oneself as well as any Thai friends one is with, and secondly, it is a detestable policy to abide by, so I pass. I'd love to go to many of those places, but I find alternative destinations and smaller operations to support financially.

Ok, no need to read further when you have idiots saying nonsense like this. They instantly prove that whatever issue they're dealing with is a non-issue. So-called "overtourism" is not the issue. The issue is horrific mismanagement and corruption in the tourism sector.

lol I meant for digging, approximately 6 feet....

Of course there were no signs of illegal activity! How could there be such a thing in the most family friendly tourist venue in the country!

Hopefully there's no key involved, but maybe a shovel.

And I guess you'd be fitting to wear a tight brown uniform....

Hard to fathom that an educated, moral person could write this. Maybe it's a safe assumption to make that you are neither? Answers to your questions: 1. Is it really a crime to find money sitting in an ATM machine? Of course, no. And nobody was suggesting that it is. And nobody suggested that the thieving couple did anything wrong in discovering the money there. 2. What person would not take it if you saw it sitting there? A normal moral person. A person who is not a thief. What kind of person would take that money, rather than safeguard it for the person who might even be a poor person for whom that could be a massive amount of money and could cause tremendous hardship for, if it were lost? That kind of person, from what I gather from your comment would apparently include you. It would be an immoral, self-centered piece of trash that has no business being free in society bringing problems, likely everywhere they go. They should be locked up and have their freedom taken away from them, while being educated and taught how they need to behave in society. For a crime like this, I'd give them 3 months in jail with a penalty of restitution to the victim of double what was stolen from him. After the 3 months in jail, a public flogging with advertisement made in the media with his name and what he did. I doubt they would do it again. If they did, double the penalty and so on. If recalcitrant, and continues 4 or 5 times more, put them to death. Simple. Done.

Yep... one would think that elusive, seemingly nonexistent in Thailand, concept known as logic would bring about some change here. But... initiatives? lol --> TIT

I'm assuming you read the article, but maybe missed part of the point. The Thai driver was in a right turn only lane that had its own signal. And apparently they were stopped, but the other lanes had a green. The issue seems to be that the foreigner was the clueless one, not the Thai driver. I had only mentioned that IF a driver needed to have their attention brought back to driving and off their phone or just being distracted, a light beep on the horn should suffice. There is absolutely ZERO reason for this foreigner's behavior. Yelling, spitting, and incessant honking is antisocial behavior. I couldn't care less if the foreigner had a point, although according to the article, it would appear that he didn't have a point, but that he was the clueless one. Not sure where you get the idea that honking is not appreciated in Thailand. My Thai friends give a beep, for safety purposes, VERY VERY frequently. Incredibly more frequently than I've ever experienced in Canada or the US, where it tends to get used by impatient people who can't control themselves more than anything else. At any rate, it's irrelevant in this case since the Thai driver appears to be completely in the right and the foreigner had no reason at all for his foolish antics, other than his own cluelessness and mental state.

That's a reasonable question, but it wouldn't matter one way or the other for this issue. She was stopped in a right turn only lane, apparently. No need to have her indicator on, although it would be nice. Anybody in that lane, stopped and waiting, as was the Thai driver, should have known (if they were paying attention) that lane was a right turn only lane and had its own traffic signal. But even if one wasn't paying attention and was a clueless driver, the foreigner's behavior is inexcusable.

What is wrong with people!? Can't even wait to see if maybe a person's car has mechanical issues and can't move, even if they wanted. As if horn honking spasmodic yelling will help their car move? If they needed to be woken up or have their attention brought back to the road... a light little beep on the horn should suffice. People let themselves get stressed out by the most inane things! Lots of mental problems out there. If someone is honking incessantly or yelling at you on the road, stay away from them. They are obviously mentally unbalanced, as there is zero need to behave that way, EVER.

Tiresome, indeed. FYI, I mentioned "colloquial English" and nothing regarding "colloquialism". You appear not to know the difference. No problem. I suppose that perhaps many people don't. But for one who has a self-professed "A level" English...? It makes it easier to understand why you don't seem to be able to grasp what I explain. You seem to have a foreign understanding of what it means to "berate" someone, as well. You were the one who came at me with unfounded, derogatory accusations. My comments were focused on explaining in order to come to an understanding. But you refuse. No problem. You can stick to your ideological Hobby Horse as much as you like, and continue refusing any attempt at genuine dialog, but rather just run amok accusing nonsense of those you think you understand. It's your freedom. Use it as you like. It doesn't seem to be particularly useful or productive, but that's up to you. Maybe someday that chip on your shoulder will wear down and get a bit smoother. I'm done.

Doubtful. Well... they might want to investigate to make sure the officers have taken enough of their paid leave. Then after they take some paid leave, reassign them to a more comfortable, lesser know facility where they can continue their "work". I doubt any investigation would go any further than that.

Sounds more like a CIA Rendition kind of place than a prison.... Thailand was known to have black sites, hosting the CIA, so it wouldn't be anything corrupt officials in those kinds of places might not be used to. Sadly, the story isn't surprising.

That being the case, I'm sorry that I misunderstood what it appeared to me you were implying. In light of that, there was nothing that you wrote in your comment that I disagreed with at all.

While it may not be what you are used to in colloquial English, it is not incorrect. Sure, it could be stated more clearly, but I was under the, perhaps mistaken, assumption that you understood the context well enough to grasp the point. There was nothing that so "clearly suggests" I make no exceptions, other than your reading between the lines. A lack of qualification does not equate to some sort of fact that no qualifications exist in the writer's mind. It would be arrogant in the reader's part to come to such a conclusion. And yet another accusation with no basis? This is tedious.... I don't mind my opinions being challenged, whatsoever. You were not doing so. You STILL don't seem to grasp that point. You were making derisive accusations, blatantly made from whole cloth, not challenging an opinion. Imagine that! A free English lesson? lol If being ridiculously picky, there are no less than 5 grammatical errors in your final sentence alone, let alone the rest of your "A level" English awesomeness! I'll pass on any further lessons, thanks anyway. We disagree, apparently, on the idea of suicide being selfish. We also seem to disagree on how generalizations are to be made and understood or not. Fine. Have a nice day.