KanchanaburiGuy

There's not a western country in the world that would consider the supermarket/food distributuon situation in Thailand a "monopoly." Even the Convenience Store argument at 83% would fall on deaf ears. That's because it didn't happen because 7-11 forced competitors out or bought them up. It happened because CP created it themselves! In fact, CP could easily argue that they've created competitive opportunities for others by proving the viability of concept. In response, CJs and Mini Cs and Jiffys and Lotus Expresses, et al., have had no problem whatsoever opening their own competing stores, often next to or near market proven 7-11 locations. The only thing that might have been different in a western country........... is the possibility that CP might have been required to sell or liquidate the Lotus Express part of the Tesco Lotus acquisition. But before the acquisition, Lotus Express seemed to be making significant inroads against this supposed market-controling "monopoly." In the last few years, even out here in Kanchanaburi Province, quite a few Lotus Express locations appeared, despite there already being an abundance of 7-11 locations. I've seen several new CJs locations pop up, too. In a true monopoly situation, this won't happen. The monopolizer will either prevent it from happening........... or quickly squeeze the life out of the unwanted competitor. That hasn't happened; that isnt happening. All you really see with CP and 7-11.......... is deep market penetration by the people who effectively created the "Clean and Professional Convenience Store" in the first place! But yeah, a western court might have blocked THAT portion of the Tesco Lotus acquisition, because it actually was gobbling up a growing viable competitor. But that would have been just one small piece of a much larger whole. Meanwhile, in Kanchanaburi, I'd guess that easily 90% of the non-Convenience Store places I could do my shopping............ are not owned by CP! "Monopoly?" Pffft!

In Kanchanaburi, I can go to Big C, TMK, Makro, Tops, and one other medium-sized supermarket in a department store whose name I can't remember. Oh, and I can also go to Lotus's. That's six different full-blown supermarket brands I can choose from. If I were in Bangkok, I believe I'd also have Villa and Carrefour to choose from? Is that right? When I shop at Big C or Makro looking for packaged meats............ which is a big chunk of CP's business............ I find at least five........ and as many as ten....... other brands of hot dogs, sausage, and "ham"....... (as my wife calls anything remotely bologna-like ????)......... besides the "CP" brand. In Lat Ya, where we actually live, there are an Open Air Markets on Friday mornings, Wednesday late afternoons, and Sunday late afternoons. At the Fort Surasi Military Camp 3 km away, there is what we call the "temporary camp," where a fixed location, covered Open Air Market sells many of the same "Market" items daily. At all these Open Air Markets, I also see many "non-CP" brand packaged meat items; ones that are different from the "non-CP" brands sold at Big C and Makro. ------------------ Sorry, but I think about all this......... ............and then I think about what that word "monopoly" means......... ..........and sorry, nah, I just can't see it! Monopolies are bad because of the way they limit competition. Competition is always good! Does anyone have the impression from what I've described that competition is being limited, in Kanchanaburi? Anyone?

My wife and I own a small hotel, 14 rooms. But for the last 10 years---off and on (off, right now! 555)---I've also had a small mattress store, anything from 2 to 6 beds on display, to give a selection of prices and feels. No workers, just my wife and me. The stepson helps on deliveries, sometimes, for a couple of hundred baht. Why, though? Well, because my savings could be sitting in the bank collecting 1% per year.......... or.......... some of that money can go into inventory----- inventory that gets sold from time to time, allowing me to collect 10-20% per month. (On that total investment, not just on a single transaction.) It's the difference between money that's standing still.......... and money that's working. Bizarrely, people seem to think that once someone gets to the point where they've got ten million dollars......... or a hundred million........ or a billion......... or 10 billion dollars......... they're supposed to have this spare bedroom somehwere where all these stacks of cash are supposed to be, sitting there doing nothing. Wanna buy a new house or remodel? Hit the spare bedroom! Wanna buy a new car or Harley or jet? Hit the spare bedroom! Lol Of course, nobody will say this, because that would make them sound really dumb. But they DO say it! They say it every time they whine and grouse about some rich person who starts another business.......... or buys another business.......... so they can make even MORE money! But WHY do these rich people keep adding, expanding, increasing their wealth? Well, they do it for the same reason I do. They do it because they realize that money that is working for you makes sense.......... while money just stacked up in a spare bedroom doing nothing, doesn't! The rich get richer.......... because........... rather than having their "extra" money doing nothing........... they have their "extra" money doing something. Because having your money sitting in a spare bedroom doing nothing.......... is dumb! And you know what? Lots of the non-rich can do this exact same thing. All they need to do is NOT buy the new iPhone or new HiLux truck or Coach handbag....... and be a little creative with the money they don't waste on their frivoluos "show pieces!" It's just remarkable how much better off a lot of people would be......... if they focused on "need" instead of "want," and on "growth" instead of "showing off!" For the most part, rich people arent evil. They're just rich. And being rich, they've learned it is better to do something smart and productive with your money.......... than to do something dumb!

I'm sorry, but losing 3.7 billion means they didn't have profit. Losing money is, in fact, the very definition of not having profit! The negatives exceeding the positives!

Hmmm. I guess if you drop the vowels, you can turn profit into a four-letter-word..........

Andros Orange Jus pictured earlier in the thread is 410 calories per liter The Daily Fresh Valencia Orange Juice pictured here is 350 calories per liter. (1750 cal. for 5L.) The difference in calories suggests either Daily Fresh is watering theirs down......... or the oranges used by Andros pack a bigger whallop than "Valencia" oranges. But yeah, having 17% more calories, I'd expect the Andros Orange Jus to have a much more full-bodied flavor than the Daily Fresh. ---------------- ---------------- (I started using calories as a way to compare the relative value of small vs medium vs large at fast food restaurants. It's the same product on all three sizes, so the calorie difference shows exactly how much more you're ACTUALLY supposed to get, when you step up in size. I've found it's not uncommon for the calorie jump from small to medium to be fairly substantial, but the jump from medium to large to be somewhat smaller.......... often for an even greater jump in price! They won't intentionally tell us what the portion difference is from small to medium to large. But it turns out they DO tell us accidentally......... if you know how to look for it!) McDonalds Fries......... Kids = 110 calories -- Small = 220 calories -- $1.39 Medium = 320 calories -- $1.79 Large = 490 calories -- $1.89 (McDonald's Thailand delivery website shows 49 baht for "Large Shaker Fries," as of today.) (Prices are from RealMenuPrices.Com, which says they were updated June 2022.

Except........ That's how Senators get elected. That's how Representatives get elected. That's how Governors get elected. That's how Mayors get elected. That's how City Councils get elected. That's how Boards of Supervisors get elected. That's how School Boards get elected. That's how State Controllers get elected. That's how Ombudsmen get elected. That's how State Attorney Generals get elected. That's how Lieutenant Governors get elected. That's how State Senators and House Members get elected. . That's how........... well........... pretty much everyone gets elected........! Except the President! ---------------- The challenge of course is.............. How do you make an argument that the President shouldn't be elected by "Popular Vote"............ without simultaneously making a mockery of the fact that literally every other election in America....... literally thousands of them!............ is done exactly this way! How can a method of electing people be suitable for literally thousands of elections across the country every two to four years............ ........... but then not be acceptable for this ONE? -------------------- One Person, One Vote --- Nothing could be simpler; nothing could be better!

A little clarification............ FOX, as basically the only right-leaning channel that can make a living............. winds up having virtually ALL the right-wing viewers funneled to them. On the left side, though, there are perhaps ten or more channels able to make a living. So, because left-leaning viewers ultimately have many more choices, they DON'T benefit from that funnel-effect that pushes all their viewes into one place with massive ratings! More important than simple rating success, I think, is overall success. And when you compare the results that way, you see the left-side is able to keep a bunch of channels afloat.......... while the right-side is basically only able to keep one......... FOX! Yes, FOX get the highest ratings. But ultimately, A LOT more people watch left-leaning news outlets for their news........... than watch FOX! If you're going to do an HONEST comparison........... you've got to compare FOX'S one number.......... to a comparable single number you'd get when all the left-leaning numbers are combined. FOX's performance as a single channel being compared to other single channels...........is impressive. No doubt about it. But if you compare overall viewership, instead........... left vs right........... there's no comparison. The number of people choosing one of many left-leaning outlets for their news instead of FOX....... completely blows FOX away! I mean, haven't you ever wondered why viewership only seems able to support ONE right-leaning news channel? After all, if there was truly any real untapped opportunity out there........... wouldn't SOMEBODY have jumped in to capitalize on it??? Hmmm? Meanwhile, perhaps ten or more left-leaning outlets are cruising right along...........! Lol

The more I see and hear in these early days after the new Roe v Wade decision, the more I'm reminded of the phrase........... "Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely." The Supreme Court's decision seems to have caused a lot of political leaders to believe they now have nearly "absolute power." At a minimum, the change has allowed them to move closer to it. And my, aren't they jumping up to take advantage of it!

Stick to controlling what YOU say, and not trying to control what others say. Fair enough?

Well, if you're going to get pedantic about it, the sun NEVER "comes up!" The earth rotates and creates that illusion! Never in the history of the planet......... has there ever been a "sunrise" or a "sunset!" Or.......... There may be no actual physical reality, at all! No sun, no earth, no rotation, no seeing these things interact. Because everything we know about the "physical world".......... is a matter of perception! We believe........... we believe in the physical world because we believe the physical world triggers our perceptions. But we also DREAM! Dreams also give us a perception of something like a physical world........... but our "dream world" has exactly zero substance. It is nothing......... absolutely nothing. It is nothing more than a mental construct! And frankly, there's nothing........ absolutely nothing........ that proves that everything else we perceive as "real"............ isn't just another construct of imagination; imagination that creates false perceptions of reality. Thus............ the physical world may not exist AT ALL! It may all just be perceptions we have in our........... um....... Universal Mind-State! See that? When you start getting pedantic, it becomes a question of just how far down the rabbit-hole you want to go! Lol Because if you're far enough down the rabbit-hole........... You'll realize that you didn't just read that........... and I didn't just write it! None of it exists anyhere, except in your mind!! No, wait! That's wrong! I'M perceiving this......... so its all happening in MY mind! (But then............ how are YOU reading it?...........) See? And THAT'S what happens when you take the literal............ a little too literally! Lol

I was mostly guesssing one of a bunch of tv and cable media outlets........... But there are lots of other political and non-political places, too. I suspect there are LOTS of left-leaning companies and organizations who would offer her a position to "thank her" for "Stepping forward and showing the world what integrity looks like!" Time will tell.........!

I'm prognosticating based on seeing similar things happen again and again. Does that count as "evidence?" Nope. But its a pretty strong clue on which to build one's prognostication. Meanwhile, after declaring "you have no evidence"........... you then proceed to do your own detailed prognostication about her future, with no "evidence." ............. What you have are CLUES, clues based on what's happening NOW............. But you have no way of knowing whether those things will fade away quickly.............. or escalate mercilessly. All you can do is take those clues.......... combine them others you think are relevant........... and take your best stab at what those clues tell you/us about the future. That's what you did. That's what I did. Because the one big flaw in demanding "evidence" for things that haven't happened yet.......... for predicted future events.......... is.......... well........ there isn't any! It hasn't happened yet! LOL All we can do is wait and see. But.......... of course......... I believe MY ability to tell fortunes........... is WAY better than YOURS! But then, of course, you would have no way to know this about me, but for literally decades I have been predicting "The sun will come out tomorrow. Bet your bottom dollar that tomorrow, there'll be sun!" * And, even without "evidence," I've been right every single day! ---------------- ---------------- * (Lyrics from the musical ANNIE, for anyone who is not familiar. Don't wanna get accused of play-churism! ) (And yes, I DO know how to spell the word correctly. C-O-R-R-E-C-T-L-Y-! So there!)

Hmmm, I wonder......... On this bravery scale that has this 25 y.o. woman with "bigger balls" at the top, and the "cowering Republicans" somewhere farther down.......... ..........where do internet poop- slingers fall? . . More seriously, though.......... Ultimately, comparatively speaking, what does SHE have to lose...... vs........ what do THEY have to lose? Think about it............ Those "cowering Republicans" could see a career they've perhaps been working toward for twenty or thirty years come crumbling down, as a result of "defying Trump." She, on the other hand, probably faces a worst-case scenario of being offered several high-paying jobs for which she otherwise never would have been considered! In a world of consequences........... she stands to come out pretty rosy from her actions........... and they could find themselves in deep doodoo, if they did the same! It doesn't take "bigger balls" to make such a decision. It only takes the ability to do a little math!

No doubt it will leave your reputation in tatters............! *wink*

It has been amusing, hasn't it? To watch people who for years have acted as if "his lies don't matter, not in the least".......... suddenly want to dismiss Hutchinson because they believe........... horror of horrors.......... "she's lying." Here's a clue: Whether or not a person can be called a moral person........... is not defined by the fact that they use them from time to time. It's defined by the fact they don't use them from time to time. ---------------- I don't know whether or not Hutchinson is lying. I do know that many of the people who automatically dismiss what she's saying because they believe she's lying......... threw away their right to be taken seriously on the subject.......... a long, long time ago!

Gee, seems to me that what you DID say............was [paraphrasing]: "I didn't say he was inside the car." Inside or outside............is there a third option I'm not aware of? But no, it's true, you didn't actually use the word "outside." But when outside was the only alternative you left available............ (inside and outside, and you eliminated inside!)........ it's not "putting words in your mouth" to say so! But then, in a comically ironic twist of hypocrisy, in the very same post, you said this........ "but being a Trump admirer it will be difficult for you to accept, anyway." -- Mavideol Except the ONLY THING I have ever said on this board about how I feel about Trump............. is that I absolutely LOATHE the man! The difference between me and a number of others here who are obviously and vocally disgusted by Trump is, though............. I don't let my loathing for the man cloud my ability to seek, understand, and accept what's true. Nor do I let it prevent me from examining and considering alternatives that might be true. But here we have a person who in one breath says........... "Don't put words in my mouth"............. in the next breath............ mischaracterizing my personal view of Trump, to be 180° opposite to what it actually is! Pffft!

No, I must confess.......... I've only read what the squak-boxes here have had to say about it. So........ he tried to grab the steering wheel from OUTSIDE the car? HAHAHAHAHA! "however she didn't say that he was inside the car when trying to grab the steering wheel.........." My goodness, that's not just a little less believable............. that's exponentially less believable! Ah well..........

Seems to me, Trump "wanting to go to the Capitol"........... means exactly the opposite........... from what some people seem to think it means. A guy who plans and organizes a violent insurrection........... doesn't suddenly go and put himself in the middle of it. No, what that person does is watch from afar. Now, if you said Trump wanted to take Marine 1 and hover over the crowd in his helicopter, watching............ THAT I might find believable! Lol

Hmmm. Since when does the President ride in the front seat, which is where he'd have to be to grab the steering wheel?

So, this.......... "yep a Pretty was hired, just out of school and unlicensed and could barely put a sentence together." ...........really had nothing to do with her being "a pretty," did it? He would have likely chosen her, regardless of her physical attributes. What's more baffling, then, is why he bothered talking to you, at all? Appearances, maybe? (How IT looked, not how YOU looked!) Of course, if it was his daughter, you didn't really "lose" the job to her (or "the pretty"). You were probably never even in the running, anyway! Lol

Seems to me, about that time, there was a BIG push to eliminate all foreign English teachers.......... and hire ONLY Thai teachers. I recall seeing it suggested that Thais would be sent to places like England or Australia for a 4 to 6-week course......... and that was supposedly going to qualify them to replace all the native-English-speakers. Thailand for Thais! So, was it a lecherous Director that lead to that outcome.......... or the government directive? (By the way, when you say the Director decided to keep the 45k "for himself"............ why do you believe the "pretty" he supposedly hired instead.......... didn't get paid?)

Not sure how wide-spread the problem is, but........ Had a friend who had two thai kids going to school. Both kids were taking "English." There arose an occasion where the kids were taught something that was completely wrong. So my native-English-speaking friend (Canadian) decided to go in to talk to the teacher about it. What he found was.......... While the teacher could teach English lessons and mimic English sounds............... she was absolutely incapable of having a conversation in English! She could MIMIC English........... but she couldn't SPEAK it! So while what she taught the kids was wrong, it was only because the lesson itself was wrong. But she was totally incapable of discovering that on her own! She had been teaching "English" for more than 20 years. Sadly, sometimes schools are not able to staff their institutions with the most qualified people. There simply aren't enough of them. Sometimes.......... the best they can hope for........... is to find a sufficient quantity of the less-UNqualified! Having seen some of my wife's lesson plans and educational resource materials........... knowing some of the seminars she attended and travel she took to try to improve both her English and her teaching skills......... i cannot say how successful she was as an English Teacher............ but I CAN say that whatever deficiencies she may have had as a teacher ............. it wasn't for lack of effort!

Lol She was an English teacher in Thai Government Schools, for over 30 years. Nonetheless, she has some quirky ways of saying things that I've chosen to find comical, rather than objectionable. Take the "boring" thing. Sure, it should be "bored with." Gottit. BUT! When I'm the target of her "bored with" declarations, she says "I'm boring you!" And how can I NOT gleefully think in reply, "Yep, yep you are!" And......... When describing a person she thinks is being selfish and miserly, she will call them (me?) "sticky." Now, I think she's going for the word "stingy".......... which does mean selfish and miserly. But it comes out "sticky." But think about that! "Sticky" is a GREAT word for someone who is selfish and miserly! Lol And it's much more fun and colorful than boring old "stingy" would be! So yeah, even after teaching "English" for 30 years, she could stand some serious improvement. But how much LESS FUN would that be for me, then? Lol (Besides, considering how magnificently I have failed at both speaking and hearing Thai........... I'm hardly one to complain about her English! Lol)

Well, you've asked a whole lot of thought-provoking questions, there. Way too much for 2 o'Clock in the morning! 555 So, for now, let me answer with just a couple of teasers........ First off, while our "Separation of Church and State" is supposed to make sure our government isn't run BY a religion or FOR a religion......... that doesn't prohibit people who have strong religious beliefs from running for and holding office. Secondly, our religious freedoms and religious tolerance, if properly realized, should never let us be prejudiced againt a good idea.......... just because it came from a religion! A good idea is a good idea, regardless of where it comes from! Lastly (for tonight), many times, the moral tenets taught by a religion exactly mirror the secular needs of a government or community. They are in parallel. So frequently, what may look like a religiously-derived law or regulation........... was actually arrived at through purely secular means. But, as mentioned above, even if it started out as a religion-based good idea.............. that doesn't mean it cannot be incorporated into a completely secular parallel framework. Ultimately, laws and government need to create a framework that suitably addresses the wants and needs of the governed. (See the Declaration of Independence for a beautifully rendered expression of this!) But those laws......... and that framework........ also have to fall within the boundaries of what is quote/unquote "moral and right." Historically, it was religion.........NOT government............. that kept the light shining through centuries and millennia on what is moral and right. And sometimes, admittedly, they screwed up horribly! LOL But overall, religion did a very good job of keeping moral thought, practice, and tenets alive; of moving them forward when no one else was or wanted to-----through both bleak times and good. Therefore, it would be a classic case of unnecessarily "reinventing the wheel"..........if someone tried to create a government based on moral values.......... as all decent governments must (!)............ and they didn't at least spend some considerable time looking at what religion has to teach us about what is "moral," and what is not! If it's the United States, that means we STILL have to filter out the religion from the morals.......... But that doesn't mean we can't still LEARN FROM THEM, eh? Okay.......... thats enough for now! *YAWN!* Good night........! Lol