Fat is a type of crazy

28 minutes ago, nigelforbes said:

Santhiya Tree is very nice and comes in just under 2,500 via Booking.com

 

Walking distance to bars may be an issue but the rest of it more than compensates.

 

https://santhiyatreekohchang.bookengine.com/hotel-detail?hid=74&checkin=2023-06-13&checkout=2023-06-14&adults[]=2&childrens[]=0&utm_content=localuniversal_13-06-2023_1_16445938283619629139H13286461904562652736_TH_desktop_default__&is_ad=false

They had a free shuttle back and forward when I was there. 10 or 15 minute walk each way otherwise but no lights at night.

5 minutes ago, KhunHeineken said:

Why make a minority of Australians, mainly those with mortgages, carry the burden of Australia's high inflation?  Particularly, as mortgagees typically have less money to spend, so are not the ones fueling inflation.  

 

The inflation burden should be carried by the broader population, not a minority.  

It is unfair whoever you target. What is an alternative solution?

One way of looking at it is the big companies such as oil companies make windfall profits and other companies put their prices up freely, more than what the increase in oil price justifies based on demand, and make big profits e.g. Qantas. This causes inflation. The solution? Make things so tough for consumers that they can't afford the high prices and prices are forced to come down. So the individual consumer bears the brunt.

Ideally the businesses could be forced to reduce prices in the first place but that reeks of market control or socialism. In theory it would be fair but in reality every business has different situations so it is not practical.

How to achieve that other than interest rate hikes? Keep in mind interest rates had been unusually low for years and are still not high on a historical basis. 

Meanwhile the big corporations and governments keep a limit on wages to limit inflation too. Individual consumers loses again.

I concur raising interest rates is not a subtle weapon targeting those who should necessarily be targeted but I am happy not to be targeted for once and to actually benefit from higher savings rates. 

In my job I have to give advice to staff and I often find myself thinking 'Please, for the love of god, cut to the chase, get to the point, no need to tell me every step of how you got here or how you feel about the situation'. It can flow through to my personal life too where when people wax lyrical or tell long stories I find myself saying that phrase or similar. So it is normal and you work out some are on your wavelength and some not. 

I don't know Lineker from a bar of soap but I think it is not totally unreasonable for high profile media personalities to be asked to limit expressing their private opinions on highly contentious issues. If I was boss I would limit it to those in the newsroom though, and not limit the ability of other hosts or entertainers such as those relating to soccer shows, to have their say. 

10 hours ago, berrec said:

Why collect more tax from Americans and corporations when what you collect now is wasted on unnecessary programs. 

 

US government don't have a current tax collection problem, they have a wasteful spending problem.

 

9 Crazy Examples of Government Waste in 2022

 

Paul's annual report details more than $54B in wasteful federal government spending

 

Watchdog calls out the government’s most ridiculous spending

I concur. For example in many countries a large percentage of covid payments went to those that should not be eligible. Terrible waste. Sadly that is how it works with large government under democrats and republicans. It should be a priority to upgrade government IT systems for example to better identify and target receipts and payments and reduce waste.

However, all things being equal, in my opinion the government raising money on those earning over $400,000 and for large super profitable corporations can result in fairer outcomes. 

6 hours ago, BritManToo said:

How I view 'woke'

Like every other totalitarian movement, what some call liberalism and others more recently often describe as Cultural Marxism has developed an ideology which its adherents use to justify the imposition of tyranny on the society they seek to overtake. The ideology of America’s contemporary totalitarian left can be called wokeism.

 

The four intellectual pillars of wokeism are:

1. Anti-white racism disguised under the euphemism social justice.

2. Rejection of traditional morality, which is primarily carried out by the promotion of sexually deviant lifestyles such as homosexuality and transgender. In a truly surreal inversion of reality, they paint traditional morality as immoral by charging it with being homophobic, transphobic, and similar terms.

3. Environmentalism based on the notion that it is desirable and possible to arrest climate change.

4. Intense hostility toward Christian religion, which they negatively paint as patriarchal, intolerant, and oppressive.

 

4. is a bit of an odd one, 'cos the wokes love Islam even though it's more extreme and way more homophobic and anti-women's rights than Christianity.

Taken from the Knights Templar Order site as a different poster pointed out last time you pulled out this quote. Should acknowledge they are not your words though.  

8 hours ago, BananaStrong said:

How about:
 

1.  Farang wife who can't speak English and has 10,000,000,000 in her bank account that will become mine

2.  Thai wife who graduated from Harvard and has a PhD in molecular biology.

3.  Farang wife who cannot complain

4.  Thai wife who cannot complain

5.  Thai wife who sees me and only thinks of prn.

6.  Farang wife who buys a few houses in Thailand (under my gf's name) and lives in America

7.  Thai wife who owns a 100-story condo with me and I stay in the top 10 floors by myself

8.

 

.........

You do have a propensity for hyperbole

1 hour ago, radiochaser said:

My wife isn't embarrassed by my looking and she does not care.   

What I find bizarre are those people who are so insanely jealous that they get raging mad about their partner looking at  another woman!   

What are you supposed to do, wear blinders and walk around, looking at the floor, with your wife leading you around by a string tied to a ring in the nose?   

Fair enough. I see it as a way of showing polite respect by not looking rather than being controlled. Being caught from time to time is probably natural. My girlfriend would be horrified if I did it as a matter of course. If you have no problem with her looking at men and it works for you both then no worries.

My favourites are:

Green and Blacks milk, 70, and 85 per cent

Lindt normal milk, 70, 78 and 85 per cent. 

Moser milk, 70, and 85 per cent from Aldi 

Whittakers  milk, 72 Ghana, from New Zealand

Cadbury Old Gold 70 per cent

Toblerone and standard Cadburys too sweet for those who eat a lot of chocolate. I eat 60 to 80 grams a day. If I retire in Thailand I will have to pay much more. Not eating the horrible staff they mostly sell over there like hershey etc 

Must admit I get tempted by their fares. I like too the direct flights Melbourne to Bangkok and Phuket. 8 or 9 hours so no big deal.  Have one booked in May about AUD $360 return and similar in August. The flying experience is the same. Last time I flew Thai the seats were as cramped. You get a big meal you don't really want late at night and the odd drink. Prefer to spend it on nice hotels.

Had no problems mainly with Jetstar but to be honest my last trip in August was 3 hours late there and a horrible 7 on the way back. So I may have to learn not to be tempted by the low cost. 

6 hours ago, phetphet said:

They are all owned by the same company, and they all get a commission.

 

I tried reserving a room on booking.com last week, but they wanted me to pay upfront. I didn't have a card with me so called the owner direct.

 

When I paid, it was much cheaper than the price booking.com quoted me.

Possibly I should call hotels direct more often. As I noted above I normally don't find that's the case though.

I am a tourist who tends to stay at big hotels so maybe smaller hotels are more nimble and are happy to avoid the fees. As noted above too there are 2 big hotel booking entities rather than one - and some other smaller independent ones. Booking.com and Agoda owned by the same but definitely different pricing. I have assumed the basis is that booking.com has better customer service so charges a bit more but I am not sure that is the case now as Agoda is not too bad to contact too. 

19 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

Nope , in the 1980's you could get huts on the beach's of Koh Samui for 30 Baht a night , beach huts for 30 Baht per night and that was when a large Chang cost more than that and backpackers used to get the bus from BKK as there was no flights to Koh Samui in the 1980's

   There may have been few high priced hotels on Ko Samui for tourists , but there were more more beach huts available  for 30 Baht per night all around the island .

   There was always a market for sex tourists who enjoyed cheap prostitution , but back packers and tourists generally avoided that side to Thailand .

  Actually, Thailand being a sex tourist in the 1980s destination hindered Thailand's growth as tourists didn't want to go to a sex tourist destination holiday .

  Even this day, there still lives the stigma that people only go to Thailand  for cheap sex 

I was one of em. 1985. People didn't talk much about Thailand back then. Phuket a bit. Seemed exotic. Did the hill tribe thing and golden triangle. Flew to Bangkok then Surat Thani and then a boat and cheap huts. Nothing too expensive. Lots of backpackers. Rode bikes around Koh Samui. So I am still a bit sympathetic to those who fall foul of insurance dramas but this generation is or should be a bit better informed. Burma too. Went home and said they are actually fun. Better in some ways to Bali where most Aussies went. 

17 minutes ago, NanLaew said:

Note that agoda.com and booking.com are owned by the same company but hotel availability/cost isn't exactly the same across both websites. The booking website shows the final price on the 'front page' so to speak whereas a few extra clicks are needed to get the final price on agoda. Some prefer that. Some prefer to think they are being scammed by agoda.

 

I haven't seen any significant differences on the final costs for the same room in the same hotel between these two websites beyond a few cents/pennies. There's absolutely no truth in the claim by some that the price they get charged by agoda is higher than the price they are presented with on the FINAL booking confirmation page and agreed to pay.

For what it's worth I would disagree a bit in that sometimes there are substantial differences between Booking.com and Agoda despite having the same owners. I find most of the sites owned by Expedia Inc such as expedia, hotels.com, wotif, and tripadvisor itself tend to have the same prices but hotels.com differentiates itself by its 10 night 1 free policy.

I am not sure why people are seeing different prices at different stages on Agoda because I don't. 

4 minutes ago, Bassosa said:

As a (small) hotel owners myself I would recommend this too. At my place it will be hundreds of baht cheaper per night if you book direct and its zero hassle doing so.

Sounds good but I have had a number of occasions where say, I want to book or extend a stay, and the hotel quotes a higher price and says book on an accommodation site if you want a better price. Most hotel prices on their hotel sites are more expensive than on the sites discussed. 

Just now, Hummin said:

My experience, hotels.com have priced themselves out of marked with often double price compared to agoda. 

Exactly. It's weird how much cheaper Agoda and some other sites are now. Hotels.com will price match though and give the further discount if they can find the same price at the other site. 

You can check your settings as Hummin said. I note on Tripadvisor for example you can alter the left hand options to either include tax or not. Getting the best price is getting tricky. If you search by tripadvisor or google or hotelscombined and link to agoda you'll get better prices than say agoda direct. Sometimes you can go by say tripadvisor then pick the cheapest option that takes you to a second comparison site. This then links to Agoda at an even cheaper price. 

Pre covid I'd find the cheapest price on whatever site and then call hotels.com which will match the price and, on top, offer one night free for 10 nights booked. The problem is that prices vary so much now that hotels.com may not be able to find the price you found as each search, and how you do that search, seems to now have different prices. They may not simply accept your screenshot. This would be for longer stays and nice hotels otherwise not worth the bother. 

30 minutes ago, Mac Mickmanus said:

I know how you feel, when we have 17 year old kids sailing across oceans and giving speeches to World climate change meetings , kids should be home in bed by night time 

Following the flow of your argument it seems you think I am saying 17 year olds have no capacity to engage in the community at large, but I do think they can participate in intelligent discourse and can have well informed opinions, on a range of topics and issues.

But obviously all things being equal, a 17 year old would be particularly vulnerable to poor decision making when walking down a street with a killer weapon in a tense situation. Greta at 17 with an M16 may not be the best combination. 

Actually it's not normally legal at 17 but whether 17 or 21 or 80, having such widespread gun ownership and letting people walk the streets with guns is silly. 

Clearly the issue is with dumb laws that allow a little kid to walk the streets with a big gun. Silly America.