Thomas J

1 hour ago, Jeffrey346 said:

beg to differ. IMO seniors have been impacted.  Last year their cost of living increase was 1.5% and this year 1.3%. A $7.16 monthly increase covers nothing. It's actually an insult.

That cost of living HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH COVID.  The fact remains that waitresses, movie theatre workers, truckers, farmers, waitresses, cooks, taxi cab drives etc the list goes on, all have had a DECREASE in their income because of Covid.  My comment is correct, that Seniors were not financially impacted.  They got their retirement checks no different than before.  And the fact they got an increase speaks to the fact, their income went up, not down. 

3 hours ago, placeholder said:

The pipeline was a more efficient and safer way to transport the crude."

You sure about that?

You didn't also indicate how much was spilled from rail cars, or truck transports as a point of comparison.  According to the "experts" pipelines are safer way to transport that alternative ways.  No method will eliminate 100% 

https://www.fraserinstitute.org/article/pipelines-are-safest-way-transport-oil-and-gas#:~:text=Both rail and pipelines are,equivalent transported than did rail.

I had to go to the land office in Chonburi and before entering the building you had to walk through a disinfectant tunnel that misted you with disinfectant to prevent the spread of Covid.  You were also then greeted with a person who took your temperature and had you apply disinfectant to your hands.  However once inside the office was stacked with waiting room chairs, shoulder to shoulder.   So the government tells business owners such as bars, restaurants, hair dressers etc they either can't be open of it they are people have to be spread apart, but in their own waiting rooms it is ok to have people sitting literally right next to each other. 

 

2 minutes ago, crobe said:

With the long-term trend in US crude oil consumption levelling off, or even reducing, and with the percentage of energy production by renewables increasing it is difficult to make the economic case that the US needs this extra supply at the present time.

As to your argument that oil will continue to be shipped in tanker rail cars and trucks, how do you think it gets from the Texas refineries to the rest of the country? - There are some pipelines but most goes by rail and road.

That is convoluted logic.  Because the oil is already being transported by rail and truck continue doing that.  Again the entire point of the pipeline was efficiency and pipelines are safer for the environment than oil over ground by rail or truck.  As for the reduced need for oil, the PRIVATE companies investing in the pipeline would not spend the money if there was not a need and a market for the oil and it was available more economically elsewhere.  Finally as to building refineries closer to the source of the oil, there has not been a refinery built in decades because of environmentalists. Also consider that if you refine the product in Canada close to the oil fields you still face the issue of how to get the refined rather than crude product to the USA.  The reason in is piped to Texas is that there are refineries there.  And, the system to distribute the refined products is already in place.   In the end, if environmentalists stop the production, refining, and distribution of petroleum within the USA, it will become totally reliant on other countries such as Saudi Arabia, Venezuela, Mexico, Russia and others for its needs for crude and refined products.  

On 1/18/2021 at 10:22 AM, webfact said:

- U.S. President-elect Joe Biden is planning to cancel the permit for the $9 billion Keystone XL pipeline project as one of his first acts in office, and perhaps as soon as his first day, according to a source familiar with his thinking.

I don't know the legal ramifications but obviously those backing the construction of the Keystone Pipeline have already spent millions based on receiving approval.  That is disastrous when companies can't invest because they have no certainty that permits can be withdrawn when the political parties change.  

The really stupid part is that they are doing this in the name of the "environment".  The oil from Canada was already coming to the USA via rail and truck.  The pipeline was a more efficient and safer way to transport the crude.  So the effect of the pipeline being cancelled will be the oil will continue to be shipped in tanker rail cars and trucks.  

2 hours ago, Jeffrey346 said:

The average SSI payment is $551. per month. For most it's their only income. Can you live on $551. a month? I know I could not.

Did you get the Stimulus Payment. If you don't need it to live on you can return it. 

You are missing the point.  It is suppose to be COVID RELIEF.  The group least impacted by Covid financially are those on social security.  The fact that seniors may or may not have a small SSI is irrelevant.  They could just as easily said that they were giving money to the movie industry to subsidize the starving movie stars whose income is impacted due to fewer people going to the movie theatres.  The latter statement is actually more true than giving an extra $200 to seniors for Covid relief.  Seniors on Social Security were unaffected financially. 

15 hours ago, newnative said:

 I think the answer to your 'why' is that a lot of seniors--about 40% in a new report--rely solely on social security to live on.  I am lucky in that I also have a state pension but if I was relying solely on SS my monthly income would be about $1400 a month.   Not really much to live on--either here or in the US.  An extra $200 a month would certainly help out a lot of seniors--especially those with no other income.  Even before covid there were proposals to change the COLA formula for SS so it better reflects the cost of living for seniors.  

Sure it might help.  That is not the point.  It "might" help if they gave the money to homeless vets, it "might" help if they gave it to underprivileged children, It "might" help if they gave it to people working on minimum wage.   The fact remains that if there is a group of people LEAST IMPACTED by Covid financially it is those on social security.  Their payments have been coming uninterrupted.   Money can be spent only once.  Those monies given to any group to spend on consumer goods in the economy quickly dissipate.  If they "invested" the spending in projects that provide long term benefits such as improved roads, repaired bridges, a modernized electric grid system, new power plant construction, etc. That spending would have multiplier effect in the future as it fuels the economy and growth.  A couple of hundred dollars the senior can spend on a new pair of shoes, a better cut of meat, or taking a trip to see the grandkids is nice, but it does not enrich the economy going forward.

While I am not excusing Justin Thomas however there is a huge double standard.  You can spew vicious comments against Caucasians, Christians, Conservatives, Business Owners, but there are the "special protected" that saying anything derogatory is immediately punished.  I look at Collin Kaepernick who the CEO of Twitter gave him $3 million after Kaepernick uttered his support of the BLM violence.  Personally, I find the public condoning of violence a far more egregious offense than uttering to oneself in a manner that was self deprecating his own performance and certainly he did not intend to have it broadcast to the world.  Yet Kapernick is praised and rewarded and Thomas is punished.  

https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/last-year-colin-kaepernick-praised-deadly-blm-riots-after-which-twitter-ceo-gave

19 hours ago, scorecard said:

"...Look at the stimulus bill.  The Democrats held that up potentially hurting the U.S. economy because they didn't want something that might potentially help Trump."

 

Many other folks see a very different analysis.  

The bill that was eventually passed was for the most part the same bill that was offered months before. 
 

3 hours ago, wwest5829 said:

And now any readers of this ... continue to the next comment for the rest of the story which shows this post as sadly prejudiced due to a lack of critical thinking resulting in a balanced approach toward seeking fact.

You must be a Biden Speechwriter for what you just uttered is complete undecipherable. 

3 hours ago, mike111 said:

Did your branch require a work permit to enable international transfers?.

No, I have a retirement visa.  They asked for my passport but that was it. 

2 hours ago, gwapofarang said:

Second, Google now only allows you to change your location ONCE A YEAR

I was not aware of that, but I did confirm what you said is true.  However that is google which applies strictly to Android phones.  Not sure about Iphones.  I guess if one were really stuck you would just get a cheap second phone and place the country you wanted on that phone.  

I had a filling that disintegrated and used German Dental.  They did a very good job.  My regular dentist is Pattaya International Dentist.  He is US trained.  Very modern equipment and once repaired a crown that came off.   038 412 090 is their telephone number

You can transfer at your bank.  I have Bangkok bank and wire transferred back to the USA.  However be aware they will convert your baht to USD and you will only receive the buy rate which will be a noticeable reduction.  I don't know if you routinely transfer but some banks including Bangkok bank offer dual currency accounts.  You can have your home country's currency and a second in baht.  If you want to transfer to baht, you exchange when the rate is good and place in the baht portion of the account.  If you have money in the account in your home countries currency and want to transfer it back, you pay only the wire transfer fee since the currency is not being exchanged.  I have not used Dee Money but I do have an account in case I ever needed it. 

I purchased a used car from a dealer in Bangkok.  I looked at private sales on Facebook and even looked at a few of them.  The vast majority were from Russian sellers and some did not have the book in their name.  I am told this is typical when vehicles are damaged and then repaired and sold to unsuspecting buyers.  

I would buy second hand again since it is so much cheaper.  However, whether through a dealer or a private party demand that you are allowed to get the car inspected by the dealership who sells that brand.  So you buy a Toyota, demand you get the car inspected at a Toyota dealership. 

It is "easier" to put the car in the Thai persons name but not difficult to put in yours.  You go to immigration and get a certificate of residence and that goes with the book to change from prior owners name to yours.  That is what I did, and the insurance is in my name but anyone can drive the car. 

On 1/15/2021 at 11:03 AM, Antonymous said:

Now Thailand has followed suit with a similar scheme, which will see some of the revenue generated used to insure uninsured tourists.

I actually think the idea of charging tourists for entry is a good idea.  However it should replace the requirement that tourists have $100,000 USD covid insurance.  That is just a money grab for the insurance companies.  The more obstacles you place in front of tourists to come to Thailand, the fewer will come.  Far easier to have a 300 - 1000 thb fee to enter put in a fund to cover uninsured medical expenses for tourists than it is for tourists to have to obtain very specific insurance coverage with language specific to Thailand.  

4 minutes ago, bristolgeoff said:

When I travel or stay in thailand,I have travel insurance always.This is another  tax and people who have no travel insurance will beg on go fund me as usual please help I  had accident and no money

The point is that tourists now can not get into Thailand without medical insurance. 

18 hours ago, cheynewalk said:

Is it possible to buy a house in your thai wife/partner's name, then at the same time rent the house back from your partner at a peppercorn rent for say 20 to 30 years?  That would cover you in the event your partner decided to kick you out or even if you have a trusted partner and they suddenly died then the family could not take the house from you whilst you had the rental contract in place.

After losing one home to a former thai partner my neighbor did exactly that.  He purchased the home which is in her name and then went to an attorney and drafted a rental agreement whereby he is allowed to stay.  I am not sure if it is for a term certain like 30 years or a life lease but one way or another, she can not sell the home without it being subject to the lease nor can she kick him out.  

My fiancé is Thai and owns a single family home in a housing village of approximately 30 homes.  It has been determined that there never was a legal entity filed for nor a legal juristic entity.  In the USA there are typically bylaws of the committees of homeowner associations that detail the formation of the association (entity) and specifies the powers, responsibilities, and duties of the committee and the various members ( owners) that are part of the association.  Just like Thailand they are formed to govern common area maintenance, and grounds that are common to the various owner members. 

Does anyone know if there are samples that are used here in Thailand.  It would be helpful not to have to start from scratch in terms of forming the entity and have it legally formed.