Thomas J

50 minutes ago, mogandave said:

Again, join the group that is not paying and make it clear why you are not paying.

There was a gathering of people who knew we were not paying but did not know why.  They were unaware of the fact there was no legal entity.  Though some expressed concern over not receiving financial accountings others were not.  One man went so far as to say, I know she steals but not worth my time.   One way or another, everyone is at the very least paying to high a community dues because without an entity those people not paying (including us) can not be forced to pay.  My bigger issue legal entity or not is to have a separate bank account where all monies for dues are received and all bills paid from.  No more cash, no more mixture of personal bank account with community monies. 

42 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

Do you have a group of unhappy residents or is it just you?

There is a group who is not paying.  The issue is that there is a larger group not paying and without a legal entity there is no way of forcing them to pay.  So everyone paying is paying a larger fee to compensate for those not paying.  The second issue and the bigger one is that everything is being paid for "in cash" or through this person's personal bank account.  No accounting of income or expense.  Tried to "guestimate" what income is coming in and "guestimate" the monthly expenses.  If only a portion of the homes are paying, there still should be more money coming in than going out.  Example, about 1.5 years ago, was assessed extra 5,000 baht to pay for automatic security gate and eliminate 10,000 per month expense for night security guard.  Paid the extra 5,000 thb but monthly dues don't go down.  Where is the extra 10,000 baht going? 

9 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

So you are not starting from scratch. There is an entity, yes?

No, the land office shows the last entity to be formed was in 2012.  The person taking over the responsibilities as "chairman" never filed with the land office.  She has been "acting" as the person in charge of the common area collecting monies, paying for security guard, landscaping etc.  However, she closed the bank account belonging to the association.  From that point on, she has been collecting the money, mostly in cash, with a few payments going directly to her personal bank account.  Expenses have never been detailed.  No income and expense statement, no balance sheet.  Some expenses paid in cash, others documented to be paid directly from her personal bank account. 

 

19 hours ago, Yellowtail said:

If you and or your wife are not paying monthly fees, what is the concern?

 

If you are paying monthly fees, quit paying them until they provide you with the information you are requesting;

We did and they started having the security guard roll out a gate blocking our entrance to the village. 

14 hours ago, Delight said:

There is no such equivalent of the Condo.Act that deals with Walled Estate

There definitely is a law or laws.  Another walled area near Siam Country Club hired a management company.  They put together the bylaws, and filed with the Land Office.  There are very specific requirements as to the formation of the entity, reporting profit and loss, balance sheet etc.  The land office knows the law but has no hand outs or reference to where one can go to read it. 

On 1/22/2021 at 10:14 AM, John Drake said:

Thus costs for services, expenses for Covid, and, yes, exchange rates are a financial impact. You seem to think it simply means getting an uninterrupted paycheck versus being unemployed. Most seniors live on a fixed income. An increase in costs due to Covid is a fact. So is a decrease in interest on savings and bonds due to interventionist policies of the Fed to help big companies and stockholders because of Covid. Your definition of financial impact, sorry to say, is simplistic.

Ok John,  

Maybe there should be a Covid relief bill for prostitutes and drug dealers.  After all with Covid their business is obviously impacted.  The reality is, that of anyone impacted Seniors financially were the least.  You have numerous industries, whose business was ruined and workers out of a job.  The decrease in savings rates happened a long time ago, and if you bothered to check Social Security recipients got a 1.3% increase to compensate for the cost of living increase. 

If there will be inflation that impacts everyone it will come from the spending binge that has caused the U.S. dollar to decrease in value resulting in anything imported costing more.  You say my definition was simplistic.  Yours is grossly overstated.  If anything Seniors likely spent less during the pandemic since their travels were limited.  Also, you seem to believe the the money is coming from goose that lays golden eggs.  Even taking the position that the seniors should receive money and you are "helping them"  That money is borrowed and is owed by future generations.  So you are helping today's seniors at the expense of the current and future working generations.  

I am a senior and on a fixed income living on Social Security.  The proposal to give Seniors and increase is merely a pretense and not a valid reason.  Everyone was impacted by Covid to a greater or lesser degree but of anyone, Seniors financially were the least impacted group. 

4 hours ago, John Drake said:

Seniors weren't impacted?

Which part of THEY WERE NOT IMPACTED FINANCIALY which is what I said do you have trouble understanding.  Unlike the workers who lost their jobs seniors social security checks went on without interruption.  Were they inconvenienced or impacted by Covid yes.  But to say it is a stimulus for the financial impact seniors suffered is Bogus and  is a false narrative.  If you want to pass on money to seniors OK but don't use the façade that it was because they were financially hurt during the pandemic.  It never ceases to amaze me how people think the government can somehow just magically create unlimited sums of money and there are no negative ramifications.  If that were true, then why not make the money to the Seniors $100,000 per month.  The reality is that money once spent and borrowed can not be used for truly worthwhile capital investment projects that the USA needs desperately.   I in no way implied that other monies were not also not wasted and went to undeserving people and companies.  However because you throw away money to one group hardly is a good justification for throwing it away to yet another. 

1 hour ago, fyrekrig said:

So if some foreigner managed to do the smartphone verification, I never managed.

As I mentioned, I got the same response when I first tried to apply.  However I tried it on a laptop.  I tried it again on a laptop after someone said the policy had changed and it was denied again.  I went to the Lazada app on my phone, and it processed my after I had to take a picture of my passport and a  selfie of me.  It went through immediately. 

I previously was told you could not have a Lazada wallet as a foreigner.  However it was posted on Thai Visa that the rule had changed.  I had to use my phone not desktop and submit a photo of my passport and my picture.  Within minutes my wallet was approved. 

Just now, Jeffr2 said:

Pete is a super smart man

You again are showing your huge bias.  Pete was the mayor of South Bend Indiana.  A town of 102,000 people it has a 13.3% unemployment rate  It reportedly has a looming budget crisis.  And yet you say he is a super smart man.  Again, name 5 things that Buttigieg accomplished that DEMOSTRATE his proficiency. 

https://www.southbendtribune.com/news/local/controller-south-bend-vulnerable-for-budget-deficit-without-spending-cuts-or-revenue-increase/article_31da8f75-93d9-5da5-9b67-bd656d7775cd.html

Just now, pixelaoffy said:

They are there ! Another denier of facts

What facts.  That oil is still coming to the USA?  As said, the only thing accomplished is the oil will come by tanker truck and rail.  Please spare me when the tanker overturns and you blame the oil companies for the spill. 

2 minutes ago, Jeffr2 said:

Nope. Just the majority. I ignore those on the fringes.

LOL  Go ahead show me the "majority"  In your opinion.  The majority is whatever you agree with, and like others you dismiss any expert as "false" if you do not agree with them.  Am I biased, sure.  However as pointed out.  Trumps picks were often flawed and so are Biden's 

Just now, Jeffr2 said:

How about going green and getting out of oil?

First off lets for the sake of discussion say that going without oil is a desirable goal.  You don't cut off the supply of oil until you have the alternative in place.  40% of electricity in the USA comes from Coal, 40% from Natural Gas. 10% from Nuclear, and only 10% from renewables.  The vast majority of cars, trucks, and all airplanes still run on refined petroleum products.  

Just now, Jeffr2 said:

In every experts opinion.

Oh you must consider yourself to be the only expert.  Or you select only those "experts" you agree with. 

1 minute ago, spidermike007 said:

Well, with the exception of scientifically vetted information, I would say 99% of what is on here, is opinions. But, I am curious. Name five talented members of the past administration. Can you?

What would be the point.  You would just call them not talented.  I can certainly point to Pete Buttigieg whose only experience in Transportation is that he can drive a car.  And I am from Michigan so I know Jennifer Granholm well.  She is now Secretary of Energy.  What is her background in energy?  The fact that she hates the oil, gas, and coal industry.  She has zero experience in the field. 

Trump also had people who lacked the requisite experience Such as Betsy DeVos.  However your statement that Biden's are great and Trumps were lousy is just opinion based solely on your prejudice.  

 

3 minutes ago, placeholder said:

Do you actually understand what selective bias is?

I notice you only refute what others say that you do not agree with, change the subject when I point out the oil will still get there.  So I challenge you.  Show me your studies that show that transport by truck and rail is safer than pipeline.  I said, so don't misquote me.  Oil companies don't want spills.  They are costly. Look at the Exxon Valdez,  Look at the Deepwater Gulf spill.  No company is going to utilize methods that will subject them to lawsuits and damages.  It will be environmentalists who stop the pipeline who will then point to any spill when an oil tanker truck or rail car overturns and then blame the oil company when in fact "maybe" those spills would have been prevented with the pipeline.  The fact remains and you seem to want to ignore it.  The oil has been shipped for decades from Canada.  The only impact of stopping the pipeline is more expense to the US consumer and that the oil comes by rail or truck. 

2 minutes ago, placeholder said:

Lots of us are actually grateful that Trump couldn't attract first class talent.

Again, selective bias.  Your opinion.  Not fact.  You say the person is talented is certainly not a validation that they are, nor is your opinion that Trumps appointments lacked talent anything more than your biased opinion. 

2 minutes ago, placeholder said:

I do selectively dismiss obviously biased sources. Whereas you on the other hand apparently believe that selectivity in such circumstances is a bad thing.

And at least the power of eminent domain won't be wielded for a project the benefits of which are dubious

Yes you do.  You have what is known as selective bias.  You believe sources only that agree with you, and dismiss any opinion other than you.  The studies may have been done by those in the oil industry.  Who do you think who study the subject.  The hair dressers association?   The fact remains.  Those that are in the oil business do not want spills.  They are costly.  They certainly are more knowledgeable than you. 

Just now, pixelaoffy said:

Your opinion isn't facts! Pipeline would have caused huge environmental damage. And the USA needs to get its head out it's ass and look at alternative energy in a larger scale ! Gaz guzzling and coal burning will destory any future for future generations! Joe Biden made a start.. whether it's too late and enough Americans will accept it remains to be seen 

It is not "my opinion"  As stated the oil has and continues to be sent to the USA.  So the only thing that has been accomplished is for them to make the oil more expensive.  You can argue whether the pipeline or rail transport causes more environmental damage.  As for alternative sources, fine.  But guess what.  They aren't there yet.  So cutting off oil before you have any alternatives is just plain foolish. 

On 1/20/2021 at 10:41 AM, spidermike007 said:

he reality is, Biden has appointed more talent in 6 weeks time,

IN YOUR OPINION 

19 hours ago, natway09 said:

The tunnel is not a bad idea though, you must admit, but agree, someone already infected would  not make any difference at all & they would still be a carrier. I certainly hope you still had to register, if not it is a joke

No you still had to register.  I just found it hypocritical that other establishments are force to close because they can not social distance sufficiently yet we literally were shoulder to shoulder inside the waiting area.  Yes we went through the misting tunnel.  However we still could have had Covid but no temperature and now were right next to numerous people. 

On 1/19/2021 at 9:29 PM, placeholder said:

The first link is to an fossil fuel company, the third is to a reprint of that fraser institute report, and the fourth is from some private citizen. Which leaves the second from the Wall Street Journal, a very fine media source. Their evaluation is a lot different from what you apparently believe it to be.

You always selectively dismiss anything that does not match with your own opinion of "what is the truth"  The truth is only from sources your agree with and you dismiss all others as false. 


The fact remains the oil will still get to the USA so cancelling the pipeline is only making the oil more expensive and at the very least is more likely to spill using trucks, and according to numerous others in the industry NOT YOU.  Even rail is more likely to spill.  The issue never was about the likelihood of spills.