androokery

There's something weird about this phrase: "...forced into prostitution by economic difficulties" I still need my paycheck to get by. I'm forced into work "by economic difficulties" too.

And the way the question is phrased, unless they met in a bar at some point (or the wife was extremely young), how would the husband actually know what his wife did before?

So the thing about the wife having been a bar girl, is that she offered sex for money? And this can be circumvented by marrying someone with a degree? Strange. Many students need extra money, so they work sideline from time to time. I've met several of them. Should they be categorised as "bar girls" here too, because it's the "sex-for-money" aspect that's important? In my opinion the lowest of the low are people who look down on sex workers. Pathetic hypocrites the lot of them.

Stupid is as stupid does? It's a question. Not a comment. And why was it stupid? I found nothing unrealistic in the victim claiming she had been forced to hurt herself to the point of bleeding (that's a comment).

Surely it depends on with what they're made to hit themselves.

Why was this your breaking point?

I'm not entirely sure what you mean by "revenue". I think you're right in saying that a lot of the money generated by foreign tourism doesn't get taxed, at least not directly. Most of the people engaging directly with tourists are probably part of the "black economy", with informal businesses paying no taxes whatsoever. And the bigger businesses probably manage their revenues in a way that minimises taxes. But the country as a whole - not the government - gets more money into the system. Money that a tourist spends on beer, tourist guide, motorbike rental, lady drink etc (not on accommodation necessarily) gets spent somewhere by someone. Part of that money often gets taxed somewhere along the line. But even when it doesn't get taxed, it helps grease the economy on the smallest of scales and in large enough numbers it will help the entire society. There's really no such thing as "trickle down economics" from billionaires and large corporations but there definitely seems to be a "trickle back to home economy" in play between holiday resorts and Issan villages and small towns.

These are all interesting statistics. But where does the money go? One thing that the government may have found out during the pandemic, is that a lot of people benefit from your silly example of noodle soup and massage, while in truth there's a lot of lady drinks, transport, bar fines, beer, excursions, scams, jet ski, motorbike rentals etc associated with the foreign tourists. What we've learned is that a lot of people, many of them in poorer areas of the country, rely on the money sent home by individuals who make their money directly from tourists. So the absence of the revenue streams from tourism has caused damage to a lot more people than the actual amounts would suggest when you just compare them to things like rice or rubber production.

You're still not answering the question though. But I can guess which way you're leaning.

Is this a machine? It's clear to EVERYONE that this notion of retroactive declassification is just a tactic employed after the fact. And AS SUCH - would you be comfortable with the outcome if this tactic succeeded? Even though you have NO IDEA what the documents that would then be declassified contain? That is the question.

You don't know the contents of these documents. Are you that confident in Trump's declassification powers that you don't mind if the documents become public as a result of your argument? Have you learned nothing?

Do you believe that "at anytime" means retroactively? And that this "get-out-of-jail-free-card", if it indeed were valid (which it isn't), would be in the best interest of the nation?

No. And really? You too? This line of argument is so incredibly careless. You would let this information be spread freely just to protect this pathetic individual? Even though you don't know its content? Only that it was once considered extremely sensitive? Why?

Are you willing to throw the respect and integrity of the FBI under the bus to save Donald Trump on the basis of the leadership of J. Edgar <deleted> Hoover? A man who died 50 years ago? I've been reading your comments thinking that you just somehow veered off the track at some point in your past and started to think that mainstream=bad and fringe=good. And everything weird that came after that is based on this simple mistake. That the less credulous the source, the more likely it's speaking the truth. But why are you willing to sacrifice the entire FBI to save a silly little man like Donald Trump? Why would you argue that classified documents are actually declassified by Trump? If that argument is actually accepted the information in these documents will be freely available to everyone. Are you willing to take that risk, without even knowing what these documents contain? Just to save Trump? That's insanely fringe. And "brave". Just burn down the entire house to save Trump. The only way to show your undying loyalty and patriotism is to be willing to burn the nation to the ground. Just another interesting parallel to that story of Trump wanting loyalty on the level of Nazi generals from his own generals.

It wasn't me???? I wasn't there. But I highly doubt the lady was in a lane. Motorbikes seem to be exempt from regular traffic laws here.

But watching a woman take a sht and shave is about halfway up on that list? ????

"All night"? Just because 7Eleven is open 24 hours per day doesn't mean I spend all my time there. I just go in, get what I need and leave. At my convenience. Surely the same would apply for a bar. Maybe I just finished a meal at 11:30 pm and want to visit a few bars, not primarily for drinking but to see if I can establish a rapport or some kind of fun connection with staff at these bars - or in the case of nightclubs, with other guests. It would be helpful if they didn't shut their doors just as I arrive. Full of food and sober as a judge.

In places like Pattaya and Bangkok, where there's more than one "entertainment zone" it makes sense to extend the opening hours during the night, when the temperature is more suited to walk around and try out different establishments. And young men, with more energy, can get more than one ST deal done per night. I'm sure it will raise the GDP.

There's something endearing about this whole chain of events. First, when the pandemic struck and all the tourist activities shut down, foreign tourism wasn't really that important to the Thai economy. Now it seems it's the only game in town, so to speak. And the ludicrous idea of charging more for the same product is rightly being ridiculed. And suddenly there's a stark, realistic tone in what the ministry of tourism is saying. Foreign tourism is driven by the nightlife and the entertainment industry. A large part of that industry is intimately connected with the sex industry, or any of its closely associated gray areas. One way to tap that income source would be to extend the opening hours. Another obvious action by a ministry would be to make sure the resources are available to keep the industry going. So they should run campaigns in the villages and smaller towns of Thailand, encouraging teenage girls to get pregnant. They could employ young Thai men, supply them with fancy cars and send them out to impregnate as many small town teenagers as possible. The government could even set up schools to make sure that the staff is reasonably trained before they travel to entertainment hotspots such as Phuket, Bangkok, Koh Samui and the EEC including Pattaya. Honesty and transparency is the way forward????

I've always felt that getting a dog is a very selfish decision. There will always be an impact on people around you, in one way or another. And getting more than one dog is even more selfish, while having more than five is clearly antisocial behaviour, bordering on sociopathic. That's one of the reasons it's very difficult to deal with these people. They also tend to believe they are animal lovers for having dogs, when all they're actually doing is subjugating individuals for fun or for company. And the added benefit of driving their neighbours crazy, as is the case in your example with the 30 dogs. Clearly the only option is to move. Unless you want to start a war. With a sociopath.

And you can overtake another vehicle on any side?

Please let there be ultrasonic devices powerful enough to drive these dogs mental. And their owners away.

Not really on topic but take a minute to examine your own bias here. When a dog attacks a child the dog is innocent and the child or some other humans most likely caused the incident. When a rhino is killed, where you only have a photo of the dead animal and some proud hunters, you automatically assume the rhino is "innocent". You seem to enjoy philosophy so why not take a moment and get to grips with what you're doing wrong.

Exactly. Why were people in Pattaya asking for food packages during the pandemic while protein was running around in the streets?

Who's having issues with their reading skills now? Internalise what would happen if dead dogs generated a monetary reward. There would be an incentive for many people to round up dogs. There would also be less incentive for irresponsible dog owners to leave their pets in the streets. 50 baht is probably enough for the first example but probably not enough for the second one.