way2muchcoffee

Right, and I bet a large proportion of those music lovers were wearing yellow shirts.

Nah. I reckon they removed their yellow shirts before heading for the show. Wouldn't want to be attacked, beaten, stabbed, injured, maimed, or killed now would they?

Ever been to a benefit concert? Did you go to see the artists, or did you go because you wanted to donate money to a cause?

Given today's so-called PAD rally, let me add a slightly different perspective

>It could be argued that this is in fact a Democrat Party rally. But who really knows. The PAD and that Party are so intertwined. I do know that the organizers went to Government House to do some rally planning with Abhisit. And I read on this board that many participants arrived from the South via train. The south being the epicentre of the narrowly regional Democrat Party.

>The bigger political event of this weekend occurred in Khao Yai. It was a fundraising concert for the UDD. I understand that the participation was so huge, that there was traffic backed up from Rangsit to Pak Chong. Apparently over 150,000 were in attendance. Compare that to the group in BKK this weekend. If anything, this contrast speaks to the electoral majority/minority thing.

I don't see the comparison. One event is a music concert/festival where the proceeds are donated. Another is a rally. People go to concerts to see the artists and musicians live. People go to rallies to support a cause.

Very simple, don't commit the crime = don't pay any fine.

Perhaps a sliding scale then. Pay a fine base on you income, and the relative effect paying that fine will have on your quality of life. You earn 100,000 baht monthly then the fine is related to your disposable income, ability to save, and effect on quality of life. Say perhaps 200,000 bt or higher. You earn 5,000 per month and your fine is 100 bt.

^^ That isn't the one I was referring to. The one I'm talking about is near Villa Market. Just walk from Villa back toward the BTS station. It is only about 30-40 m away, and located on the same side of the street as Villa.

We're not debating whether viewing porn or drinking alcohol will affect their development and whether it's something that "everyone" does. It's that the teachers didn't live up to the reasonable expectations of the kids parents when they paid for them to go on their cultural trip.

Yes, my mother was chaperoning 17 and 18 year olds. That's why she'd come home utterly exhausted!

We've gotten to know some 17 and 18 year old kids from North America who are here for a year on an Rotary exchange student program. Obviously, these kids can't be watched 24 hr/day, but they go thru an extensive orientation session where it's drilled in their heads that they will be sent home pronto if they engage in any of the forbidden "four Ds" -- drinking, drugs, driving and dating. Yes, driving is legal for 17 and 18 year olds here, but Rotary doesn't want their exchange students doing it. And dating is legal, too, but they don't want the kids forming exclusive relationships with a boyfriend/girlfriend during their exchange year. Mixed-sex social outings and parties are fine just so none of the "4Ds" are present. These kids all know of peers who violated the rules and were sent home, so the ones we've met have stayed true to the "4D" prohibition despite all the temptations of Thailand.

I think the part of the problem is in the two sentences I've bolded in the quote above. They can't be aware 24 hours per day. However, if something happens in any one of those 24 hours then they are held responsible, regardless of any due diligence that may have been present.

As far as the 4 D's. That sounds unnecessarily restrictive. Dating? That sound ridiculous. A person would probably learn more about the culture they are visiting by engaging in a relationship with someone in that culture than they would from 20 visits to museums and temples. I would agree with the other 3 D's.

The sensible way to solve the flood of clippings re the exiled one, would be to put them all into one headliner / folder and start posting other news fron ALL sources that are of interest to our membership and our guests.

Tags could also be added where sensible and applicable to this subject / debate.

This was fair comment I thought and a sensible way to keep the forum tidy and not flooded with several new additions of the basically the same subject matter.

Threads of a multiple quantity are gradually becoming uncontrollable IMHO and we seem to be debating repeatative issues thread after thread, after thread.

I for one used to visit the various threads and add my own comments to the debates, now I find it difficult to even read the various content and offer exchanges of my views.

I agree with each of your points above.

The problem with any kind of increased enforcement/fines is the monetary cost to the poor. A person earning only 200 bt/day will only have perhaps a few hundred baht monthly in their discretionary spending budget, no savings, and no protection or security against emergencies. So this will adversely effect the poor considerably more than the middle or upper classes. It's akin to a regressive system of taxation. All of this is especially true as the current MO of the BiB is to unfairly target motorcycles, i.e. the common Somchai who is barely eeking out an existence.

There is a place on Sukhumvit around soi 33, very near villa market. They won't give you much, and then they'll sell them at about 5x what they paid you, but there it is.

I don't see the problem. The news clipping section is for news. Recent events have been big news in Thailand. It's pretty clear which threads are Thaksin related. How hard is it to simply not open those threads if one doesn't wish to read them?

Woohoo! Finally we might be able to get deceny service from the waitstaff!

I couldn't help but think on seeing the picture of Hun Sen and Thaksin embracing that either wouldn't hesitate to knife the other in the back if it suited their purposes.

My wife's relatives live along the Cambodian border in Sa Kaeo and Buriram. Although of Khmer stock they are united in their detestation of Cambodians and tell me that they, the Cambodians, frequently cross the border to steal cattle, motor bikes and just about anything not locked up. The intruders are not averse to offering violence to anybody who gets in their way, so they say.

[paragraph omitted]

Given these insights I have to think that Thaksin's venture into Cambodia will not go down too well with those residing in those parts of Isan in proximity to the border.

It might depend on the ethnic background of the families in question. Many Thai people from Sa Kaeo, Buriram, Surin, Sisaket, Trat, and Ubon have Khmer ethnicity. Many people living in these areas do not.

Well, I reckon we'll have to disagree about human priorities.

Personally, I find fraternity, compassion, and adherence to egalitarian principles, to be a higher level of thought and action, when compared with principles that lead to excess for the few and exploitation of the masses.

They don't like us........we are walking ATMs...........were are not Thai...........xenophobia has increased dramatically in Thailand. But most expats can't see it or refuse to see it. They see smiles at the surface level and think that is reality.

I tend to agree with the observation, but would avoid sweeping generalizations. I've been here seven years. The longer I stay, the more aware of this I have become. Perhaps there is a trend. Perhaps it takes a while to recognize the signs. Perhaps it is more noticeable when you understand the language.

The concept of fair wages is a humanist principle as well socialist. According to the the principles you espouse TAWP then slavery, bonded labor, serfdom, etc. should be perfectly acceptable as that would increase profitability for the masters.

I will tip when in the situation. When in Rome. I'm not here to lay judgment or change traditions.

Yeah, and they probably forced these loans on these folks.

Oh come on. There are few social supports from the government. Tragedy can strike at any time. The wealthy and landed class refuse to pay laborers a fair wage in order to further line their own pockets. Pure exploitation. So a person or family turns to the only source they can find - a loan shark. Then the interests are incredibly high. So high that they can never make a dent in the principal. Threats, intimidation, violence ensues. The whole system is set up to keep the poor in their place.

I know you do lending Heng, but the way you have described it, you simply require collateral. No collateral = no loan. Fair enough. After reading your posts these last few years, I am confident you will give people every chance to make good on their loans before seizing the collateral. Yes, it is a business, but I imagine you have bent the rules on occasion (to your own financial detriment) when it seemed humane to do so. Perhaps not too often, but when circumstances warranted it. The business you engage in is very different from those who deal in unsecured loans.

Any violence or threats of violence should be dealt with harshly by the police. Sadly this is unlikely, simply because most of the BiB are for sale, and the loan sharks have the means, while the borrowers sink further into poverty and misery.

I was under the impression that Thais of financial means always tip doctors for this. I could be wrong though.

Porn most certainly still is taboo in most cultures (and remember, we are talking about British culture here). Can you bring porn in to work and view it in plain sight of your co-workers? I certainly can't (at least not without getting me fired). What about family reunions? Schools?

It is available "to all and sundry of any age with an internet connection" because it can be viewed as such (relatively) anonymously. Try viewing it online at work in front of your boss and then get back to me.

This has nothing to do with the fact that it is a multi-billion dollar industry. In fact, I would go so far as to say that the industry relies on it remaining taboo!

Taboo is not at all the correct word. I think the word you are looking for is 'improper' or possibly 'indecent'. It would be improper to watch porn in the office, or at school, in the same way it would be improper to come to work in a pair of speedos and a wifebeater. I might get fired.

I would not, however, be afraid to admit to having watched porn. There is nothing taboo about that. It's not like I'd shout it out for all to hear, but if asked directly I'd be honest. The only reason to lie would be if the person asking is some kind of religious nutjob.

Times change. Porn is ubiquitous. The pendulum has swung.

In response to PhillHarris: "Huh? Can you run that past me just one more time? So if you are the governor of a school and are reviewing the resumes of potential teachers you would ensure you hired a good proportion of those with "Patpong experience" for school trip escort duties".

I don't expect Chris Bonham, but I do expect my kids' escorts to have some mountaineering experience when on a suitable Outward Bound excursion.

Neither do I expect the Baywatch team, but an ability to swim a little and provide basic CPR would be a nice qualification of those taking my kids swimming.

Be it mountaineering, swimming or a Bangkok evening - I do NOT expect children to be left to their own devices or exposed to risky/inappropriate situations.

In response to neverdie: " well said phil, the stupidity of some "

Agreed (how could I do otherwise?), but you could have snided it a tad more eloquently than a simple pithy remark, like that. However, to get back on topic........You really don't geddit, do you?

"sbk" and "oevna" (amongst others) have the faculties to read between the lines and understand that my underlying concern is that either the childrens' escorts (no pun intended) were familiar (and they could at least research from a distance) with the potential pitfalls awaiting visitors (especially impressionable, often reckless and possibly immature teenagers) but despite their knowledge, they failed to exhibit the care a parent can expect (even demand) of them under such circumstances.

Or, those "in charge" were clueless and therefore not suited to the task.

Whichever way you look at it, they were negligent to allow the kids the opportunity of visiting such establishments and (IMHO) criminally negligent if they actually escorted them &/or encouraged them to do so.

I think a lot of us "old-hands" sometimes have foggy memories of being a teenager and all that goes with that (as I, too, described forgetting where my own kids were concerned - in my previous post).

Whichever way you look at it, it was a huge mistake on the part of the teachers involved to either allow or fail to effectively prevent the incident.

At best, common sense was not employed and neither was proper care &/or diligence.

I expect more from those I trust with my children's welfare - be it on a trip to Bangkok or a trip on a hot-air-balloon.

But that's me.

I think you are heaping too much condemnation on the teachers. Have you ever left your 16 your old child alone while you went for dinner? Have you never let them go to the movies on their own? Have you ever turned your back in a mall or elsewhere, only to turn around and not see them? Ever have a child sneak out at night? Now multiply this factor by 14, as there were 14 teenagers on this trip, apparently. Not an easy job. And teens will be teens. I agree that they are deserving of a stern reprimand if things went down the way I suspect they did.

That said, the problem here is that their teachers brought them to see this show. Teenagers know that when they seek pornography on the internet, it is something that they are doing behind their parents' backs. All good role models in their lives tell them that this is not a healthy way to portray sex, and they are well aware that what they are doing is taboo. When a teacher (someone who is supposed to be a good role model) does something like this, it reduces the apparent degree to which it is a taboo for their students. I think it is appropriate for the teachers to be suspended for this reason alone.

If porn were taboo then why is it a multibillion dollar industry? Why does the viewing of porn extend to all national, racial, and ethnic groups? Why is it readily available to all and sundry of any age with an internet connection? Taboo? I think not. It may once have been, but not anymore.

I seriously doubt the teachers were directly involved in taking the young men and/or women into these establishments. It is not completely out of the question, but I've never met a teacher that would do this. Given the ultra-PC nature of our home countries, I find it hard to believe the teachers would have made such a gross error in judgment. If they did in fact take them to such establishments then they should be severely punished, lose their teaching licenses, etc, for they will have badly abused their roles as temporary guardians and teachers.

If, on the other hand, the teachers were only guilty of neglecting their responsibilities then they should be reprimanded, but not terminated. Teens are very clever. I've been a chaperone for student camps and excursions. The older students will invariably try to sneak in alcohol or marijuana. At the very least they will try to sneak out at night for a bit of an adventure. This is true of both male and females. Guards and watches can be set up, but ultimately, if a group of kids really wants to break free from the supervision, they will find a way.

1. The discussion was not whether or not someone should be hanged. The discussion was whether or not the "state" should pay for medical care.

Indeed. A point I made at the end of my brief conversation with neverdie. Nevertheless. A hanging tree or a street gutter (without medical attention) are not so far from each other.

2. I'm apparently not quite as sympathetic to 13 year olds, as are you. Do you think they don't know right from wrong? I was a middle school teacher and administrator my whole adult life. Most clearly know right from wrong. The degree of judgment is the question when dealing with teens.

Yes. Most 13 year olds know right from wrong. However, on the issue of substance use what is right or wrong? Society sends very mixed messages here. Alcohol, cigarettes, caffeine, antidepressants, antipsychotics, ritalin, etc. All legal. Some causing harm to society. Marijuana, mushrooms, etc, not legal. Hmmm.

Can you honestly say that there is a clear right and wrong in this? Is it the legality that makes things right or wrong? Is there a moral angle? Is there a higher order right/wrong involved? If so, what is it? Their peers are telling them it's fine, great even, to experiment with substances. Pop culture, music, tv, all tend to reinforce this to some extent. There is the allure of being cool, unique, individualistic, in a stultifying suburban sameness or inner-city madness.

Teens are at an age where they are defining themselves, embracing life, experiencing, rebelling, questioning, and formulating beliefs. It is no surprise that many normal, healthy, intelligent teens engage in drug-taking. It is even less of a surprise that the unfortunate, abused or traumatized child would be even more likely to use drugs.

3. I guess compassion is a slippery slope, as well. "Aw, the poor 13 year old abused drug user." "Aw, the poor mass murderer." "Aw, the poor child molester." Where exactly does compassion end?

Compassion never ends. It is what separates us from the beasts.

Hun Sen, Thaksin, et al are clearly attempting to provoke the Thai government. If these reports are true, they appear to be baiting the government, daring it to close the border. It smells like a trap. It will be very interesting to see how Abhisit and company respond.

Never a dull moment in this continuing saga of Thai politics.

^

Im a little bizzare at times, but I would never go that line. Please let me pick and chose which way I would like to jump at any given moment....THANKYOU!

LOL. Unexpected response made me spit my coffee. Anyway, I reckon we've veered off topic for long enough....

Its also funny that nobody ever seems to mention all those child abuse victims that grow into loving responsible members of the community. Strange that.

I see. So by your logic, cigarette smoking does not cause cancer because millions of people who smoke cigarettes never get it. Drunk driving isn't dangerous. Obesity doesn't lead to heart problems. The list goes on. An interesting argument.

But how about an abused child who, at 13 'chooses' to use cocaine to numb the pain? That child grows to be a 'half-man' addict. Shall we exercise compassion, or just get a rope and take him to the nearest hanging tree?

ohhh no, not the old abused child theory! I mean afterall, thats where all our mass murderers, perverts, voilent criminals and other evil beings come from.....child abuse .

Not really a theory mate. Plenty of statistical evidence out there. If you were one of these 'abused' children, or worked in any profession that puts you in close contact with them, you might have a bit more insight and wouldn't be so dismissive.