Tulak

On 12/19/2019 at 4:56 PM, bkkcanuck8 said:

That is a pittance as the retirees are not that much importance for the tourist industry in Hua Hin.  Unless a retiree is visiting Hua Hin from another location in Thailand they are not going to pump much into the economy.  Retirees are not even considered prime demo in their home countries as they tend to spend less.  A tourist (especially first time) is going to come into town, spend money on hotels (likely mid to higher end), go out and spend money on lunch and dinner at restaurants (not likely the cheaper end as they tend to go to what other tourists have indicated as good - and that tends to be higher prices)...   Retirees tend to over estimate their importance to the overall economy.  Retirees might provide a steady stream of income over a year to a local economy, but after setting up residence that amount tends to decrease... and that is more of into a local economy rather than 'tourist economy'. Retirees tend to overvalue their contribution... 

During my holidays in Hua Hin (usually twice a year) I met a number of retirees, most of them big spenders (what I observed).

Also consider that just to establish yourself, you will have to spend two to five million B. to buy condo/house and a car. This is only beginning and on a lower scale. Remember also furnishing you house - also living expenses and depositing money for visa...

18 hours ago, AlexRich said:

I think that it’s very possible that they will be. Notwithstanding the immigration rules you also have to factor in the increased cost of living and they terrible air pollution, I believe that era has passed. There will always be some westerners, but nowhere near the numbers of the past.

It was my plan to retire in Thailand. I even bought condo in Hua Hin.

That was more than 20 years ago. Then I changed my mind. 

I like Thailand, but one month holiday twice a year is better than ongoing commitments and dealing with Thai Immigration.

Come and go as I please. No worries in the world. I like a simple life.

3 hours ago, TheDark said:

I'm so close to fully agree with all you say, but.. there is still differences. 

 

Current sciences still need leaders, who can combine various ideas, various fields of sciences to become more whole entities, than experts on their specific fields can do. 

 

Current sciences needs Oppenheimers. who are not the best minds of any specific field, but who are able to understand the larger picture and guide the groups of scientists towards it. 

 

We need Feynman's type of people, who are funny and brilliant how to explain, in simplest possible ways, how the sciences work, to the masses. 

 

In a way Greta has been very good scientists, not for her own scientific breakthroughs, but for her ability to communicate the common idea of thousands of scientists, to the millions of people. 

 

Science is a collective and co-operative community, where each part of it can feel proud (and often a bit jealous), when new ideas are discovered and published to the rest of the world. 

Science is good, but only when it is totally free open and unbiased science.

Free from any kind of political pressure and interference.

During the 1970's, imminent cooling of the Earth culminating in a period of extensive glaciation was big news.

This is not so long ago - and still it was the same science using basically the same scientific methods as it uses today. So what is going on?

The last point the usual "97 % scientists agreeing" on something doesn't mean they are right.

Just think of Galileo. 

19 minutes ago, Eric Loh said:

She done all she can. Perhaps a new POTUS can do more for climate change, 

Please don't ask "potus" - or any other leader to fix anything.

Current episode will be just a glitch in history of Gaia.

By all means, reduce (human) garbage output we manage to generate - but please no more.

Let the Earth to orbit around the Sun in peace, allow her to keep it's tilt, let our Sun shine and change it's sunspots every 11 years or so...

All the above affects our climate more than a six-pack cooling in your fridge - so please don't feel guilty about it. Go, open that fridge and have a cold one. 

55 minutes ago, Boon Mee said:

St. Greta needs to go back to school and get an education... 

no need

she know it all already so why to bother

1 hour ago, 4MyEgo said:

She targets the most powerful leaders first, and if she can get through to them, the rest of the sheep will follow, that's why.

so let's all follow Greta !

Baaa Baaa

19 hours ago, Ricohoc said:

The investigation was in the hands of the Democrat-majority House.  By placing an arbitrary time limit on their investigation to rush it through, the Democrats failed to call all the witnesses (Republicans were denied witnesses), subpoena all the documents (Republicans were denied subpoenas), and go through the courts to get all of their supposed "evidence" if executive privilege was claimed. 

 

Democrats were more interested in fabricating charges (which they did) and getting the ball rolling than being complete and thorough.  Now they want the Senate to continue their sham with selective "witnesses" and documents.  Drag it out as long as possible up to the election -- and even beyond.

 

Having a stable full of weak candidates has caused Democrats to have to GET TRUMP BECAUSE TRUMP.  The effort is all focused on damaging Trump as much as possible before the election.  

 

As for Schiff himself, he's probably the most intellectually dishonest politician that I've ever witnessed.  Nadler, the walking septic tank, is too stupid to get out of the way.

Wouldn't it make sense to get the evidence BEFORE accusing anybody?

Besides, Dem. repeated many times that they have all the evidence - so what else is needed?

From the distance it looks like a Kangaroo Court to me. Gives me the impression that decision to Impeach was made the day after the president was elected.