Lacessit

The information against climate change is all on social media, where deniers can seek out cherry-picked data for confirmation of their biases. They confuse quantity with quality. Gee whiz, you don't think deniers have an agenda? It's actually quite simple, if they say it is not happening, it isn't. When scientists and engineers come up with marvelous things to improve our lives, such as smartphones, aircraft, and clean water, everyone cheers. When it's something they don't like, they shoot the messenger. Yes, scientists have an agenda. It's alerting ordinary people to the fact they are facing an existential challenge. And if you think economic refugeeism is bad now, see what happens in 2050 when a billion people are only getting half the water supply they used to. Luckily, I'm not going to be around to see it. Global warming and climate change are real, get used to it. Pro tip: Don't buy any property that is vulnerable to natural disasters. Because they are only going to get bigger, and more expensive.

Oh please. The rate of deforestation is way more than the carbon dioxide absorbed by plants that only grow one meter high. About one-third of the excess carbon dioxide from the Industrial Revolution on is being absorbed into the oceans, the Great Barrier Reef is having record bleaching events. Strange the governments of the Pacific islands don't agree with you. Please post the link where NASA says global warming is not a bad thing. Since over 95% of scientists think it is not going to be good for humanity, I doubt you have one. Insurance companies are quite hard-headed businessmen, you think the hike in house insurance premiums happening now is because they are religious adherents?

Your post exhibits a lack of understanding of how the terms "global warming" and "climate change" are interlinked by the laws of thermodynamics. Global warming is resulting from anthropomorphic emissions of carbon dioxide, the trend from 300 ppm to more than 400 ppm since the Industrial Revolution is irrefutable. It's the Second Law of Thermodynamics in operation. Climate change is the First Law. As the seas warm via heat absorption ( Second Law again ), storms become more violent and frequent. Every meteorologist knows that. Insurance companies are not science-based, although they do listen to the science. When the Insurance Council of Australia declares 1 in 25 houses in areas vulnerable to climate change (bushfire, flood ) will become uninsureable by 2030, homeowners had better be listening too. Pooh-poohing models is fashionable among climate sceptics, even though most scientists are quite conservative in modelling, and the assumptions they use. What matters more is what is happening NOW. The Larsen Ice Shelf is melting at an unprecedented rate, Iceland's glaciers are disappearing, record heat cells in Australia over the last ten years. Russia, of all places, is fighting bushfires as I type. I don't disagree pollution is important too, our addiction to plastic is a plague. However, I think you won't be too impressed when insurance companies double your yearly house insurance premium because they disagree with your assessment of how important climate change is to you. I am wondering how insurance companies are assessing their risk in Bangkok, the combination of sinking, and rising sea levels, for a city that is only one meter above said sea levels presumably makes for some intense boardroom discussions.

There's only two really important things in life, good health and time. If you are wasting time, you will come to regret it eventually. I do have to wonder at someone who gets enjoyment out of other people's problems, the Germans call it schadenfreude. Pretty sick IMO.

I've never planned any trip here on the basis of toilet availability, all one has to do is look for a gasoline/LPG station. Out in the sticks is what, offroading?

I meant what are you doing on an ASEAN thread, when you have so much money and time to spend on other things.

Toilet paper probably comes off a production line very similar to that which makes tissues and napkins, except those go into a box instead of on a roll. It's just as clean. I actually admire the simplicity. What kills me is toilet paper in various pastel colors, I doubt anyone's bum knows the difference.

Read my post again, that figure is the real depreciation I've had on the car.

Oh dear, you believe in warranties too? Perhaps in Australia, where there are consumer laws that demand suitable durability in any product. Here, it's Rafferty's rules. Perhaps you have forgotten how Chevrolet dudded customers here by heavy discounting when they pulled out of Thailand. You think the Chinese will be more honorable?

M take on life in Thailand is one can only get into trouble if they go looking for it.

The only major issue I have here is the yearly retirement extension, I should not have to worry at my age whether I will be told to leave by an IO having a bad day. If the Thai government wants to know if I can still afford to live here, a bank book is all the proof I should need, not reams of documents. How hard would it be for the Thai government to say after 3 or 5 years of living here - OK, you've proved you are law-abiding, as long as you remain that way, you can stay for as long as you want. Most retirees want to be left alone to enjoy what life they have left, the extension BS detracts from that, and serves little purpose.

Battery at 80% after ten years? LOL, you are believing the manufacturer's advertising. About 9 years ago, I bought a 2006 Toyota Vios for 230,000 baht. Spent 20,000 baht on decent tires, and other bits and pieces.. Since then, routine maintenance. It has 175,000 km on the clock. Probably worth 70,000 baht now. My mechanic says it's probably good for another 5 years. By my calculations, depreciation is 20,000 baht/year. Good luck with getting a million baht EV that has the same depreciation cost.

Everybody lies at some point, no argument. Having said that, it's important to stay true to yourself. IMO the few lies I have told in my life were to avoid hurting people, can't say it worked all that well.

I suggest you try selling a ten yo EV against a ten yo ICE before making that assertion.

Those are your running costs, they say nothing about vehicle depreciation, not to mention what it will cost in replacement when the batteries cark it. I'd venture to say a lot more than the engine and gearbox of an ICE. The general rule of thumb is, the more expensive a vehicle, the bigger the yearly depreciation. Perhaps you were not paying attention when the difference between an appreciating asset and a depreciating asset was explained in economics class.

I bought a MXq box about a month ago, after my very old MXq box lost the plot when Google attempted to update it. From memory, it was 1100 baht. It had Netflix pre-installed, which is all I need.

EV's are much cheaper than ICE's in terms of fuel costs, for sure. There are some problems with the length of time it takes to refuel compared to an ICE, and the reliability of charging stations. In California, apparently 25% of recharging stations are out of commission at any time. If you think you are saving the planet by buying an EV, think again. The probabilities are tilted towards you getting your electrons from a dirty, coal-fired power station. Investments are items which produce income, and/or appreciate in value. I don't know how vehicles fit those criteria.

The supply of wealthy farangs posting on ASEAN is inexhaustible. My question is, what are you doing here, and why do you need to impress people with your wealth when you will never see them? You're probably lucky one of those Poseidon models did not slit your throat, money brings out the worst in people.

We have neighbors coming to the house to play cards, they usually camp in the guest house. The only person who comes into the sanctum sanctorum of my lounge room is my GF's brother, and even he knocks first. I am about twice the size of most villagers, and am quite good at the mad stare if needed, so I do not get bothered by them.

I'm always amused by terms such as organic grape juice, disappointed I have yet to see inorganic grape juice. Call the stuff pesticide - free instead of torturing the English language.

It would not surprise me if Ukrainians were giving the Russians a dose of their own medicine. Given what the Russians have done at Mariupol and in Bucha, I'd be inclined to do the same. "Summer is colder than last summer". If I had 1000 baht for every time I have seen posts and Youtube videos where climate deniers cherry pick a single data point against global trends to support their claims, I'd be driving a top of the line BMW. Probably the same on Facebook and Twitter, which I am not on, and have no interest in. Schiller had it right when he said against stupidity, the gods themselves contend in vain. I don't cancel them, just write them off as dumber than a can of soup.

I'd just notify the bank, and let them sort it out. There's no such thing as being a little bit pregnant, you are either honest, or you are not.

BMI 23.5, Normal. I hate skinny people like you.

Bahtsold

Usually I find I can trust what's reported by taxpayer-funded media in a democracy. The fact politicians are always trying to neuter or defund such media is a reasonable guide to its credibility, and theirs. The ABC in Australia is hated by politicians, because it fact checks many of the claims they make, with frequently embarrassing results. Here's an example: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-05-18/fact-check-michael-sukkar-first-home-buyers/101074546 As for commercial media, there are two gods. Circulation numbers, and advertising. Guys like Murdoch get circulation by pandering to the lowest common denominator of society. It's probably unknown now for a motoring journalist employed by commercial media to give an honest review of any new vehicle, for fear of losing their jobs when the car advertiser cancels the revenue stream. Social media is a wasteland. Apart from China and Russia subverting it to spread disinformation, it's a picnic ground for climate deniers, antivaxxers, Putin supporters and flat earthers to find support of their confirmation biases. I could go on Facebook armed with a desk, teleprompter, shelf of books, and a serious expression, and spout the most arrant nonsense to an army of listeners who were behind the door when intelligence was handed out. Trump weaponised Twitter to do the same. Who do I trust? Mostly myself.