James105

Why? They would most likely have seen the released footage of the exact same incident that happened to a white guy in 2016 as the footage for that was released in 2019. Since there was no action taken against the police in that incident (the cop who did it has actually been promoted) then why should the less experienced by-standing police in the Floyd incident not believe it was a legitimate tactic to use to restrain an uncooperative suspect? Perhaps if there was more outrage about the Timpa incident lessons could have been learned and Floyd would still be alive today, as well as the additional 19 people killed in the BLM and media incited riots that followed.

Actually I would blame the media. Even if they gave the "white guy knee on neck" incident the same coverage, it would be impossible to rile up white folks as they would do the same as me - shrug shoulders and assume the white guy wasn't complying with the police and was in some way to blame. It would be impossible to incite anywhere close to the level of violence and rioting the media was able to incite following the Floyd incident so they probably didn't see the benefit in reporting on Timpa. I think the media quite like to rile folks up who are easily riled up (woke people/BLM), incite a riot and then watch viewing figures increase as they report on the rioting. There were 19 deaths caused by the BLM riots of 2020 and I think we could say quite comfortably that those 19 people would be alive today if the media gave the same level of coverage to Floyd as they did to Timpa. I doubt any of those 19 dead people will get any justice either.

Like most people, when someone gets killed at the hands of the police I assume that the person killed was to blame in some way by not complying with the police instructions and/or acting in a threatening manner. The media doesn't tell us about the white people unjustly killed (such as Tony Timpa) so how would people even know about it to protest? In the case of George Floyd it was an unjust killing and justice has been served and it was served very quickly. It appears America has even found the time to try Chauvin again for a different charge, yet still cannot find the time to provide justice for the exact same incident that happened to a white guy several years prior. They have, however, found the time to promote the guy who did it. Justice shouldn't just be about which group shouts the loudest or burns the most buildings down in a "mostly peaceful" riot, or the colour of someones skin, but that is exactly how it appears to work in America.

So it was released a year prior to the George Floyd incident, yet still no outrage. George Floyd's family are now worth $27 million, which is the amount Minneapolis paid as settlement. They also got justice as the perpetrator is in jail for a very long time. Have a guess how much compensation Tony Timpa's family got? Zero. They also got zero justice for his death. White Lives clearly do not matter and it is actually considered racist to say otherwise. https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-soccer-england-burnley-race-idUKKBN23V317

What I have always found surprising is that the people who were horrified by this attack have never heard of an identical case that happened in 2016 and was also captured on video. The officer in that case not only did not face charges but has recently been promoted. https://www.dallasnews.com/news/courts/2022/05/25/dallas-police-promote-officer-who-pinned-tony-timpa-to-ground-before-he-died-in-2016/ So why no national (or international) uproar in this case? Why no media attention? The only difference I can see between the cases is the colour of the victims.

Clearly this visa was not designed with you in mind. I am not sure why you are salty about it as they are not removing the other visa choices you already have. This will be in addition to those visas so you have lost nothing here. Some of the comments on here remind me of this Ricky Gervais joke...

So if that's the piddly amount for a graduate, what is the minimum for a non-graduate?

Right, so Thailand only wants to offer this visa to high skilled, high earning or already wealthy people. As I said, this visa is not for everyone and it obviously isn't designed to be, in much the same way the over 50 visa is not designed for people under 50. The people who are upset about this are those who are unskilled or just don't earn enough, but that's fine as there are other visas they can get which are designed for them.

The UK is divided as the people who live there no longer seem to be able to accept the result of democratic votes that do not go their way. The Scots do not accept the result of the independence referendum they had. The anti-Brexit folks do not accept the democratic result of the EU referendum. Half the nation are anti-democratic babies, and that includes the media who seem to have been on a Boris Johnson witch-hunt ever since he helped moved the EU trough away from their snouts.

If only, but it will not happen. It's going to be a globalist puppet like Jeremy Hunt.

I don't really understand why people are getting salty about this. Not all visas are designed for all people. The over 50 visa is not designed for me as I am not yet 50 but I don't feel the need to jump up and down complaining about that. This one would work very well for me and several other people I know who have done quite well from their online businesses, and are currently working under the radar on education/elite/volunteer/some other kind of visa.

Sure, but my income is not earned in the UK and hasn't been for several years - my income is basically royalties from a publisher in the USA. I remain a UK tax resident as I need to pay tax somewhere and Thailand does not allow me to work here legally. This visa would allow me to legally conduct my business here as well as pay tax where I am actually residing. Seems like a win for me and a win for Thailand.

It doesn't seem like a good enough reason to me to bring down a PM who won an 80 seat majority and is more likely just another bandwagon for the people who are still salty about Brexit to jump on. I had never heard of this MP prior to this week. How is it that the deviants in the Labour Party (of which there are some pretty famous ones) do not bring down Starmer?

Last I heard the internet in the Philippines was really poor which has always ruled this country out for me. Has it improved in recent years?

I can't imagine Agoda et all would allow hotels to do that. They would have to include it in the advertised (and guaranteed) price and that means getting Agoda et all to publish 2 different prices or check passports etc for anyone who books a hotel. Whoever thought up this daft idea didn't really think it though.

Thailand is now a country without a mask mandate so the people who do not want a mask mandate are already in the right country. I think China still has a mask mandate - maybe you would be more comfortable there?

The rules are that wearing of masks is now voluntary. Just because someone does not follow the crowd does not necessarily mean they are in the wrong.

The discounted personal income tax rate could be a big deal for those of us that are not retired which is 17%. So for someone who is earning £66,000 (which is $80k USD) in the UK (which is where I currently pay tax) then they would be paying £19,691 in tax annually. Even if the 17% discounted personal rate is a flat rate on all income (which it probably is) then the equivalent annual tax bill in Thailand would be £11,220. Thats a pretty good privilege in my opinion.

The higher prices are almost exclusively due to the world closing its borders for the best part of 2 years due to covid overreaction, causing the near destruction of the airline industry and airlines reacting accordingly by not increasing supply to match demand, but increasing the cost of the flights instead. Of course they are hesitant to employ and train workers that they had to lay off to meet the current demand as there is no guarantee that the world will not once again overreact and do exactly the same again. Actions have consequences. The consequences in this case is that flying has once again become a middle class pursuit and is no longer accessible to everyone. Get used it as we will be paying for the costs of lockdown for a very, very long time to come.

I see this kind of comment a lot on here. I qualify quite easily if this visa turns out to be exactly what it says it is going to be. I'm not sure what better options are there than Thailand for someone who meets the requirements of this visa when taking everything into account (weather, internet speed, cost of living, beaches, people, etc)? I'm still paying quite high taxes in the UK as I retain tax residency there as it is technically not "legal" to declare I work in Thailand and actually pay taxes here. This visa would solve that problem and the fact this visa also comes with a "discounted tax rate" is also quite appealing. I'm quite comfortable in Thailand but am always open to the possibility of better options. Just wondering what they are and what they offer that is better than this one - if it came to be?

You seem to have taken an example of how they work out what a case fatality rate using simple numbers (the exactly 10% should be a clue) and are using this number to post misleading information as though it is fact. Here is the context from that link: "The CFR is easy to calculate. You take the number of people who have died from the disease, and you divide it by the total number of people diagnosed with the disease. So if 10 people have died, and 100 people have been diagnosed with the disease, the CFR is [10 / 100], or 10%." Notice the use of the words "so if 10 people etc..."

Sounds like you are in agreement with me then. The only 100% safe (from covid) option for that situation would be a zoom call instead of a physical meeting, and attending the restaurant was a selfish act by the original poster who was calling other people selfish. Glad we finally got that cleared up.

If I was going to meet the father of a child who was in such terrible danger they would die if they caught covid then a 100% effective mask would be the bare minimum I would feel comfortable in using before meeting him. Anything less I would consider to be selfish.

Clearly I was stating that corona virus particles are smaller than the pores in the typical face mask so can get through the aforementioned pores, but are not so big that you can consume food/drink through them so going to a restaurant means removing the mask. This is a factual point before I went on to make my overall point. My overall point (since you did not quote this) was that someone was calling others selfish who actually went to a restaurant with the father of a child who thinks that child could die if he catches covid. If I knew someone who was in such terrible danger from Covid I would not assume a face mask would be 100% effective, would not go to a venue where a mask would be required to be removed, and would do the unselfish thing by playing it safe and using zoom instead. Why don't you try addressing the actual point for a change instead of just quoting a small, out of context sentence? Give it a try sometime.

How did you eat dinner with your mask on? Granted, I may not be a medical expert but a typical face mask has holes in it large enough for the virus to get through very easily, but are 100% effective at preventing eating/drinking. Every one I have tried has been extremely effective at preventing even the smallest morsel of food from getting through though so it would have been required for you to remove the mask whilst eating. If his son was really in such danger who is being selfish here? The father for wanting to eat in a restaurant despite the risks to his son or you for joining him? Is your "freedumb" to eat in a restaurant so important to you that you willingly put someones life at risk? Meeting friends over zoom calls is proven to be 100% safe from covid - why would you not choose this option when hearing about how much danger his son could be in? Try thinking of others in future rather than just yourself.