CRUNCHER

Hmm...looks like the actual terms lie somewhere in the middle. From the HK Lands Dept. site:

http://www.landsd.gov.hk/en/service/landpolicy.htm

So in a nutshell:

Older properties with pre-existing longer-term leases are being honoured.

Properties built between 1985 and 1997 have leases expiring 2047, but can be extended for another 50 years.

Properties built after the handover have fixed 50 year leases which are renewable for another 50 years (but the govt still reserves the right not to renew!).

Never easy, is it?!

Sure is difficult sometimes. Interestingly I bought a flat in early 2002 and my lease expires 30th June 2047 45 years). The difference between theory and practice I suppose.

As far as Thailand is concerned, you could not plant HKs system here, because the Government does not own all the land. However there could be some mileage in something similar, especially if the Government found out that they could make some money.

For example owners of land could hand over the land to the Government in return for a long lease and the payment of rent. This would help house owners whose land is owned by a company with nominee shareholders. Existing condos might be problematic, but at the completion of new development the developer turns over land ownership to the Government and condo purchasers would get long leases. This might help Thai paranoia over foreigners owning land and provide the Government with income. 49% ownership of condos would become irrelevant. Rent need not be exorbitant. For example on 100 sq. mtr. flat in HK I pay about 15,000 baht a year.

I appreciate what I have said is very simplistic and I can see arguments against it. It could, however, provide a starting point for thought in resolving many problems that exist with the Thai housing situation at the moment.

Quite an interesting (if you like that sort of thing!) paper from one of the HK universities about the relative valuation of long-term (999 year) leases in HK versus short-term ones here:

http://www.citb.gov.hk/cib/psdas/content/d...aper_KWChau.pdf

A fairly meaningless paper. Conduit Road is not typically of the Hong Property market. There may well be a few longer leases (beyond 2047) left, but very very few.

There is not actually 50 year leases as such. If you buy a new property today the lease will run out on 30th June 2047 i.e. 40 years

Having lived in Hong Kong over 30 years and bought and sold proterty since 1989 as well as knowing Hong Kong people well, I can say a 40 year lease is very accepable. It is a liftime in the Hong Kong scenario. It will only become problematic when you get to the stage where a mortgage term will eceed the lease life (in fact banks willl not normally grant mortgages beyond the life of the lease). Typically mortgages in Hong Kong are 10 to 20 years so this will not start to be a problem until nearing 2027 and will not become critical until 2037. In fct the age of the property will be more of an issue until then.

I perhaps should have said almost all land have lease that expire in 2047, bu I can assure you that is the case.

dada - I must confess it is difficult for me to understand why anyone would now buy in Hong Kong, commercially Thailand is a far better bet.

I think HK is still not a bad place to invest. Foreigners can buy anything they like, and whilst properties there are all leasehold (the only freehold land in HK is St. John's Cathedral in Central - I'd love to know what that's worth now, at least in theory!), the leasehold is usually 999 years rather than the 50 as was mentioned above. There's no CGT, money is still pouring in from the mainland, and space is comparatively limited. Law is largely based on the the English model and at an everyday level, corruption is low.

The biggest downside I can see is the often-high entry price. Of course you could just buy REITs to gain exposure that way instead (and expect to see other property derivatives coming on-stream in the next year or so too).

I have owned a number of properties in Hong Kong. None of the leases go beyond 2047. There are a few exceptions in NT I believe, but I do not know details.

Until the Sino/British agreement few leases extended beyond 1997. This made banks jittery on the question of mortgages and of course property delopers in investing in new developments. This was one of the reasons why the British Government pushed the Chinese into talks on Hong Kong's future. When the leases were extended it was done unilaterally by the HK Government - no cost. Presumably that will happen as 2047 draws near, but nobody knows at this time.

HK is a good place to invest in property if you can afford it. Like anywhere else you need to understrand the market.

Some people in the business in Pattaya were recently predicting that farang ownership of condos would soon be increased to 70%, but that rumour seems to have died a death

CRUNCHER - I must confess I did consider the old trading port on the Chinese main land (all be it involuntarily by Chinese standards), but there all property is owned by the state and your right to continue to own it appears to be rubber-stamped.

Has the same happened of Hong Kong or was it always leasehold?

Thailand does offer free hold condominiums admittedly under a 49% rule.

Basically it has always been that way (there are a very few minor exceptioons in the New Territories). Leases used to variable, but after the handover to China in 1997 all leases were extended to 2047 on the basis that China promised no changes fo 50 years. What happens in 2047 is anyones guess at the moment.

The system works well, but prices - WOW!

I have been contributing to other threads on the Thai High end Condominium market, but do not wish to confuse issues so have started a new thread.

I note the 49% rule on legal foreign ownership of a Thai condominium. I do however have some questions that I cannot answer.

Is there a similar rule in Malaysia?

Is there a similar rule in Hong Kong?

Is there a similar rule in Singapore?

A lot of high-end Thai condominiums achieve day one 40-50% sales. Is this a coincidence?

As for Hong Kong there are no restrictions. If you have the money you can buy what you want, where you want and as much as you want.

All land in Hong Kong is owned by the Government. All flats, houses etc are effectively on leasehold or rather the land on which they are built is. Almost all leases are good until 2047. Of couse all flat, house owners etc pay Government rent every quarter. Could be the way for Thailand to go, but I doubt it.

Thanks Lopburi. On the ball as always

Can anyone please tell me the cost of getting a "Residence Certificate in Thailand" from the Immigration Department? The one that is needed for driving licences, bank accounts etc. I can find the form on their website, but not the cost. Also how long does it take?

For what I understand is that they are counting days and not entries.

Does anyone have a definite answer/clarification on the method of counting days/entries.

I am leaving for BKK in a couple of weeks and already have 3 stamps within the past 1/2 year, but far from 90 days as follows:

Entry 05 Oct 2006 - Depart 08 Oct 2006 (4 days)

Entry 12 Oct 2006 - Depart 15 Oct 2006 (4 days)

Entry 01 Feb 2007 - Depart 12 Feb 2006 (12 Days)

My next entry will be on 05 April 2007

You are allowed 90 days stay within 180 so you are fine for your next entry

On 5th April it will be 182 days since your first entry and in that time you will have stayed in Thailand 20 days. I am not sure how the 180 days rolls forward, but presumably, as it rolls forward you will be able to get 3 back to back 30 days entries.

This raises the question how the 180 day part of the equasion is going to work. Anyone any thoughts? Presumably you could alternate 90 days visa with one, or even 2, 30 days entries for ever?

I got a double entry visa for thailand but i need to move several time from Thailand to Taiwan.

Is it the re-entry permit still available?

Is it possible to get it in any immigration office?

Anybody has recent experience about this?

Thx everybody

YES!

Single 1000 THB, Multiple 3000 THB.

Also if you submit the form by e-mail you will get fast track service when you arrive at immigration (Bangkok)

Do you have the email address?

Also, if you have to exit the country twice in a short period of time (and don't want a multiple entry), can you get two single entries stamped into your passport before you use up one of them?

I am not still enterend in Thailand and i will have to enter and exit again after few days. I am searching a way to not fire my double entry visa staying there only 1 week.

Wich is the best way? How can i apply the form online?

Is it possible to get the re-entry permit in Samui Immigration office?

Thx everybody

This is a great forum

If you have unused entries on a tourist visa, can you enter Thailand on the 30 day visa exempt entry? This is useful if you want to stay a short time and save visa entries for longer stays. This might help OP and info on this would be useful

I used Air Asia to Macau, it was half price flight.

Of course I had to take ferry over which cost 120 hk dollars, but it drops you right in Kowloon or Central side (Central side for consulate), so coming from airport in HK you still have to pay something for taxi or train to town...

Airasia also had very late flights so if you plan it right you can pick up your visa and take ferry to Macau and then fly out (I think my flight was 10 pm)....

Good luck....

Thats an interesting way to get to Hong Kong, just checked the Air Asia website and i can get a return ticket Macua for 4,500 baht, flew last week with Emirates and i paid nearly 9k (still good deal) - what about the ferries from Macau, do they run all day / night? any info on them? does the same visa allow you to go to Macua and then Hong Kong and i take it you get visa on arrival in Macua? (Im a brit)

Any info on this route to get to Hong Kong would be good. Cheers.

Ferries run Macau to Hong Kong more or less round the clock. Night time might not be very frequent, but during the day they go every 20 to 30 minutes. There is an option at Macau Airport to get a ferry without clearing Macau immigration, but personally I wouldn't bother with that. Trip takes about 1 hour. Get the ferry to Central and not Kowloon for the Thai Embassy.

Make sure you tell the taxi driver you want the pier for Hong Kong. The other pier only serves China and is further away. Taxi ride should take about 20 minutes and cost about 40 patacas (about 180 baht). There is a small surcharge from the airport.- about 5 patacas I think, but I can't remember now.

Cost of the ferry is about 5-600 baht,but prices are higher after 6p.m.

With a British passport you will not need a visa for either Macau or Hong Kong.

If you have time take a look around Macau. It is an interesting place - food is not bad either. Of course there are the cassinos

Excellent post there by the OP.

How do i contact you as i am indeed in need of some sound legal advise.

Regards

Get a good lawyer...I have ben told that move the company to a lease hold with a safe nominee for that! BTW, the above comepany, Siam Legal, has a Thai Lawyer offer to set up a corp for a house purchase. Look you have, starting in 1 year, 1 year to get you corp in order..What is new is you can go to the slammer for this stuff...............

The posters above probabl don't have houses or interest/means to by one....this is serious business, one could get spanked for a lot of money on this deal! Again, lawyers are saying to get out of the corp and into a lease hold with 30 + 30...What is in it for the lease holder, you hjouse and land for their grand kids!

"good lawyer" is an oxymoron.

Not looking forward to wait in line for 15 minutes per passenger while immigration count and re-count the days !

A few months ago I was ridiculed for saying that I didn't want to be in the immigration line behind one of these cases. I do not think one poster agreed with me. Dgoes to show! Perhaps Immigratoion should consider separate queues for visa holders and those using "visa expemt entries"

G,day,

CRUNCHER ........you stated the following.....

You cannot live there simply because you have married a Hong Kong lady or you are over 50; no matter how much money you have or how big your income.

Totally disagree mate.

In my experiance. I married a HK lady. applied for an ID card and settlement visa. Was granted a 1 x year then 3 x year and now on my 3rd 3 x year visa

After a total time of 7 years i will (or could) have gained a permanent residency..

I have moved on in my life just recently divorced my HK wife and now settled in Bangkok (New Thai wife)

But my ID card and HK visa is still active. I only need to enter HK once in the current 3 year period to able to gain the permenant residency.

cheers,

lesdunbar

You are lucky. I know several who have been refused - unless you got in as a dependant perhaps. Perhaps things are different now. Problem is too many sham marriages caused problems. Mostly people from mainland, but also Philippines and Indian sub-cotinent. Trouble was HK Immigration was always being accused of being racist and so they tended to apply things accross the board.

Also, unless things have changed here as well you will be lucky to get "right of abode" If you visit just once in three years. You have to positively demonstrate that you regard Hong Kong as your home. Living in Thailand with a Thai wife and visiting once in three years this might be dificult. You also need to reside continuosly for 7 years. Where three years is relevant is that you you loose your right of abode if you do not visit every three years unless you have a good reason such as overseas education.

Sounds interesting and in Hong Kong's defense I can say that the rules are laid out for everyone to follow and with Thailand it seems more like a wink, nod and backhandlers are needed to get things done. Don't get me wrong, as I am sure that there is a level of corruption there. However with Thailand it seems like the levels of corruption run from top to bottom which, IMHO, has done a lot of harm to the country.

Copied from our friends at Wiki...

According to the Registration of Persons Ordinance, Article 177 of the Hong Kong Law, all people of age 11 or above who stay in Hong Kong for longer than 180 days must, within 30 days of either reaching the age of 11 or arriving in Hong Kong, register for a HKID.

Permanent Residency

...person not of Chinese nationality who has entered Hong Kong with a valid travel document, has ordinarily resided in Hong Kong for a continuous period of not less than seven years and has taken Hong Kong as his place of permanent residence...

How long does Permanent Residency take in Thailand? Or is the life of a Permanent Visa Runner the best way to go?

Last comment to all... when posting something you feel as fact, please spend a few minutes on Google to double check the info. The crack about needing an ID card after 30 days was easily verifiable and should have been posted correctly.

Have a nice day!

TheWalkingMan

Point about about the ID card taken. I stuck that in as an after thought. It is a bit early in the morning for me. Can't see what your point is about the Permant residency is. Domestic helpers are specifically exempted from this (racist?). They cannot get permanent residency. Any google search that says they can is wrong. It is difficult to reside in Hong Kong for seven years without working there. Some can do it, but not many.

Yes Thailand could make thing easier. Short term stays, up to 6 months, are easier in Hong Kong than Thailand, but those who complain about long term stays and work permits in Thailand need to put things into perspective.

Hong Kong ranked as the world's freest economy

Hong Kong - Hong Kong has been ranked as the world's freest economy followed by rival Singapore in a report released on Tuesday by a right-wing American think-tank, The Heritage Foundation.

Hong Kong's ranking comes despite criticism that its economy is dominated by a handful of powerful family-controlled monopolies and cartels, which not only control prices of particular goods but also block market access by competitors.

The ranking by the Washington-based organisation puts the former British colony at the top of its Index of Economic Freedom, for a 13th successive year, as it scores top marks in six of the index 10 factors.

Saying Hong Kong is "clearly blazing a trial for others to follow" the foundation and co-sponsors, the Wall Street Journal Asia, awarded the city's economy a score of 89.3, 1.6 points lower than last year.

"The way that Hong Kong (became) prosperous was simply through its free and fair playing field," said Mary Kissel editorial page editor for the Journal.

The above is part of a recent article in The Nation.

Many complain about Thai Immigration Laws and how they affect the economy here. Perhaps they should think how things work in the “world’s freest economy”.

You cannot stay in Hong Kong for years (or any time for that matter) doing “visa runs” every 30 days.

You cannot stay for best part of a year with a tourist visa.

You cannot live there simply because you have married a Hong Kong lady or you are over 50; no matter how much money you have or how big your income.

You cannot work without a work permit. Hong Kong Government policy is they will not give a work permit if a local person can and is available to do the job.

In connection with this last point this restricts people who can work to a small number of English teachers, professionals (bankers, lawyers, businessmen employed by banks, multi-national etc.) and “domestic helpers” (servants).

This latter group by far are the biggest group of foreign workers in Hong Kong typically they come from Philippines Thailand, Sri Lanka and Indonesia. By law they cannot vote. More importantly they cannot use the time spent working there towards qualifying for permanent residence. They cannot come to Hong Kong until the work permits are issued and have to return to their home country and get new permits if they change jobs. This takes up to two months.

You cannot stay in Hong Kong indefinitely by saying I can support myself working on the internet. You would need a work permit (which you would not get) and would be liable to pay tax.

If you stay in Hong Kong more than 30 days you must get a Hong Kong ID card and carry it with you at all times.

Thailand is not quite as bad as some make out.

Like it or not Baht Bus is here to stay, and I predict you won't see any metered taxi(s) in Pattaya apart from pre-bookings or drop offs from airport elsewhere. Acceptance is the key to happiness.

Lor - no you won't get the ride for 10bht in a metered taxi. Just imagine the same amount of taxi(s) roaming Pattaya as BKK.

No need to get rid of baht buses, they are useful. However, another layer in the public transport scene would be useful. Baht buses have their limitations (self imposed). It is, for example, almost impossible to get the 10 baht baht bus even on 3rd Road. The market would largely determin the number of taxis. i.e. low demand - low supply. A good start would be to allow Bangkok Taxis down here after bring a fare here to use their meters to pick up passengers whilst waiting for a fare back to Bangkok. Perhaps baht bus driver might just consider expanding the scope of their services at the same time.

Caught a bus today from Transportation Centre to North Road Bus Station 106 Baht. Left at 1710 took 1 hour 50 minutes. Only two thirds full. No timetable displayed at Transpoortation Centre. Sorry did not have time to get more details as bus was just about to leave. As far as I could see the timetable for this service is still covered at North Road Bus Station

Waste of dosh - they should be thinking about more important things - lets start with cleaning up the beach for starters.

Absolutely. Followed by the roads.

Some of this is rather sad. Obviously many of the posters have never seen drug addiction at it's worst. Well I have. Not, I might add, by taking drugs myself.

If you have seen anyone doing "cold turkey" through lack of heroin you do not want ot see it twice. I have seen it more than enough. It does not even come close to someone who gets a bit grumpy from giving up fags. If you have seen people whose bones are crumbling, whose noses collapse, whose teeth fall out through using this filth you would understand. What cigarettes or alcohol will do to you does not come close. And remember most narcotic abusers get this not all smokers do.

If you have seen addicts unable to work and so steal to finance their habit you would understand. They usually start stealing from family and friends first and then go farther afield. Needless to say many end up in prison - not for drug offences, but for stealing and the like. If you have seen the wives and children whose husband/father is an addict who steal to support themselves when husband/father cannot work because he is an addict you would understand.

I have seen this over many years and I understand. If you thing that an occassional puff or the odd pill is what this is about you better come into the real world. For a start most hard core addicts start like that. Drug pushers have all the sales pitches. Two or three doses of heroin or crack and your hooked and then your self choice is gone - usually for good.

Yes addicts are victims - and so are their families.

An earlier poster referred to me as seeing thing in black and white. Most things, in fact just about everything else, I see in many shades of grey. This, however, I see as black and white. Sorry - I've seen a lot of life around this world. My experiences have conditioned me. I cannot conceive of very much that is more evil that drug trafficking in a way, shape or form. When you have seen some thing that I have your views will change - if you have a heart that is.

Like i have asked you before, please share some of the crap from your closet mr purity, i'll give you a lead...............ever drivien a car while pissed up ? i'll challenge that you have...........................glass houses

go figure......................long and hard.......you are not perfect....................none of us are

Two wrong do not make a right. My weaknesses do not justify others.

Drug trafficking is far worse than drink drive - it kills more people and destroys more lives. Drink/drive - One drink and I do not drive. One bottle of beer and I do not drive for 8 to 10 hours simple as that. People who drink and drive should go to prison.

Alcohol is not as adictive as hard drugs. The problem with alcohol is the stupid things people do when they are drunk. There are laws to deal with this - they are just not enforced enough and penalties are not strong enough. If alcohol was made illegal I would miss my drink, but it would not be the end of the world.

I have smoked cigarettes, but never trafficked in them. Guess if you look at my posts that makes me a victim. Actually it makes me pretty stupid, but as it is legal it does not make me a criminal. Smoking should be made illegal. Such a law would have my full support. It just aint going to happen.

None of this alters the fact that illegal trafficking in drugs is one of the biggest evils on the face of this earth. This was the theme of this thread.

Ok this guy died because a condom of coke split inside him...

He knew the risks and the dangers....he made a choice and lost, full stop...no sympathy for him.

One person said that probably no one would have died from the product that he was carrying...well there was one to start with wasnt there? But to make a statement like this is just silly....how can anyone know that...Did the poster know that the drug was going to be used by experienced social users only...or is it naive of me to think that some of it could have gone to inexperienced users or that it wasnt going to be cut or mixed with a dangerous substance...or that the end user wasnt going to take other drugs with it.

Freedom of choice....unfortunately there is no freedom of choice for an addict, no matter what that person is addicted to. It is a physical need to have that substance at any cost. The trouble with most illicit drugs is that the need is all encompassing once addicted. Most addicts run up a habit that can cost hunreds of dollars if not thousands a day....they cant earn enough to support the habit so they commit crimes such as burglaries or dealing to get the money to support their habits. Now compare that with smoking and alcohol..and I agree that there are problems with them as well..but when was the last time you heard of anyone breaking into a house to steal things because they needed to buy a drink or a smoke compared with the times that people commit crimes to buy speed.

The posters who said that drinking has resulted in crimes such as rape etc...yes it has in some cases...but most times it is used as a mitigating factor not as the cause...and more often than not it is merely an attempt to lessen guilt. A rapist will rape whether he is drunk or not.

To the guy who said his son wouldnt be a drug taker....I hope not for your sake and other peoples sake...but the drug problem is not confined to people from problematic backgrounds...many drug users are from good families where love and affection was not in short supply...the problem is that some people see social use as being ok....Addicts are not born...addiction is an acquired habit...more often than not with its beginnings in social use or peer pressure. It is the people that say that social use is ok who are naive...many young people have died from using E on a night out, just using it socially.

Drug dealers do their jobs for different reasons...BUT...high level drug dealers are usually not users as users are not trustworthy...the lower end street dealers are usually in debt to the middle level of dealers and are looking to eradicate their debt by on selling and thereby affording their supplier with a certain amount of protection. Mules are the same...not every mule is a user...some are in it for the money only, same as every prostitute is not a sex addict.

I have seen what drugs such as speed, E, Coke, Heroin, etc..has done to people and not just the users but also those whose lives have been affected by what the users have done. It is not a nice picture, neither is the physical effect that these drugs have on the users...how debilitating it is, not just physically but mentally.

Well said, on behalf of the more sensible posters on this thread who like me are pissed off with the negative observations.

At last a post worth acknowledging and in my view, raising reasons why, along with the implications of drug trafficing and back on the route the O.P. was intended to go.

For all you people who admit to taking substances considered be academics, health experts and statisticians to be a scourge on society.

So long as you do it in private and it doesn,t effect the quality of life of others or is taken at a cost to society and what is considered anti social and restrictive on others, enjoy at your peril.

You can do it to your hearts content and one day suffer the consequences of your stupid, self inflicted actions.

That is your choice and again if it does not effect others continue until the day of reconing comes and you cannot control it.

You are a part of the problem make no mistake about it.

We all know the downside of drinking and smoking and the effects and yes they are addictive.

We also know the same relating to drugs.

I do NOT know many in my home town who effect life and freedom to move about without being threatened, robbed, mugged and all the other horrific crimes that take place to feed their drinking and tobacco smoking habits, in comparison they are very, very minor.

I do however know of everyday events caused by drug related issues and i also know most of the ordinary families that are affected by drugs and the knock on restrictions / penalties to their right to live safely in peace, both in their homes and out on the streets.

In my area in an attempt tp rehabilitate the addicts.

They came up with an idea to shift the druggies / thuggies as they are called locally to move them away from the areas where drug related crime and addiction was rife. ( Both are different issues but both are also related. )

Being addicted is to anything is not a crime and no one implicates it any different.

Taking measures to feed their habits ect. are, full stop.

Anyway..............................

They put them in a respectable / low key crime area with the hope of changing their life styles.

Much to the distress of the residents living in the area and most of the citizens of the town i might add.

2 years later you can probably guess what has happened.

That area is now practically destroyed with untold misery inflicted on the residents who built the area up, unable to sell and move away.

Yes, there is other crime everywhere as in all cities and towns but to compare other issues to the drug problem is unreal and irresponsible because all you are doing is failing to address the number one issue.

It starts with the very young by the way and not as someone said in the pubs ect.

The 10 to 24 age groups are now the most effected. YES 10 YEARS OLD

How very sad and distrurbing, don,t you think ? let,s take into account some of the freedom / my choice posters who are role models for these young children..............That,s reality.

It is happening in the schools where these scum are weaning them onto drugs and then once the start, are turning into addicts, who in turn are causing untold misery and harm to their families and society in general.

The suppliers are filth in local terminology and evil.

If you think it is wrong i would invite you to talk to the real victims of these obnoxious people and the circumstances of their MONEY motivated actions with not one iota of care about the outcome.

This is the sort of scum you appear to be supporting with your partaking of and in doing so subscribing to the " It,s o.k brigade and a right of a free society ", irrespective of the PROVEN CONSEQUENCES

marshbags no i,m and you are to think otherwise.

My O.P. was about this sort of issue and the implications / downside of trafficing.

For some reason it has been used as a platform for all the misguided users supporters of freedom to take what you like irrespective of the proven downside in all areas including crime related incidents.

I refuse to debate the rights to take drugs and as the O.P. reckon you should open a separate thread to do so and see how many of the 40,000 plus T.V. members support your views.

I know debate is about expressing various views but for me i have no desire to subscribe to the it,s my choice brigade and that,s my CHOICE by the way.

marshbags no i,m and you are : ( to think otherwise. )

P.S.

I will be very happy to respond to any comments regarding the Aussie and the rights and wrongs of TRAFFICING which after all was what the O.P. was posted for in the first place.

I refuse to be drawn further into your stupid irresponsible debate on the rights of consumption.

Read my posts for my views if you need further insight to my opinions.

If you agree with them o.k. if you don,t no problem, but i hope somewhere down the road you do not become low life filth, another tragic statistic and a scourge on a free society

Two excellent posts. They sum the situation up very well.

There are issues relating to tobacco and alcohol that need addressing. This thread is not the place. It deals with trafficking in illegal (hard) narcotics and the missery that this causes to addicts, their families and friends and, as set out by marshbags, the community at large.

i've never done drugs, but i'm an expert.

i've never gone to war, but i'm an expert.

oh, please. just shut the f-ck up

Ah well when one has run out of logic there is always obscenities.

War - know nothing about it.

Narcotics - dealt with the problem most of my working life. I seen the up close full frontal misery. Yes I'm an expert.

LET the families ect. personally effected by the abhorent crimes decide and maybe grant as the saying goes, " AN eye for an eye " if this is their wish.

DRUG CRIMINALS / smugglers deserve everthing that comes to them, don,t take my word for it ask the families that have / do / will suffer from this evil trade.

How the responsibility of the outcome of one's own act swaps to others is beyond me?

If I had a son and he dies because of taking drugs. I won't for one second blame anyone except myself(if he is still a kid) or he himself(if he is an adult).

As a father myself, the above statement is nonsense, as any father would tell you.

My son is 5, you think as a father you teach them from an early age what is right and wrong.

If my son, God forbid, got involved in drugs then of course I would blame myself. But I would find the piece of s#it who had supplied him, and the bigger piece of s#it that supplied that person and end their lives forthwith.

Thats not me being Mr Big, that is just reality and I think most fathers would agree with me

You are very close to endorsing the death for drug dealers policy that you and your fellow multiple posters so frequently condemn.I'm not trying to wind you up here nor to accuse you of hypocrisy, simply to remind you and the other obsessive anti-Thaksin posters that the war on drugs had many facets.It also had the support of most Thais, notwithstanding the innocents that were also killed.Thaksin was a greedy and foolish man, but his war on drugs had nothing to do with blood lust.It was an inept and half thought out attempt to deal with a terrible social problem.He, and let's admit it, thousands of others were trying to address the issue.

Not quite sure how Thaksin got into this - but then he gets into most things. I do comment on him one way or another, for a start I do not know the truth of a lot that is said. Suffice it to say that two wrongs do not make one right. Drug traffickers should be dealt with by the law, within the law and according to the law.

Some of this is rather sad. Obviously many of the posters have never seen drug addiction at it's worst. Well I have. Not, I might add, by taking drugs myself.

If you have seen anyone doing "cold turkey" through lack of heroin you do not want ot see it twice. I have seen it more than enough. It does not even come close to someone who gets a bit grumpy from giving up fags. If you have seen people whose bones are crumbling, whose noses collapse, whose teeth fall out through using this filth you would understand. What cigarettes or alcohol will do to you does not come close. And remember most narcotic abusers get this not all smokers do.

If you have seen addicts unable to work and so steal to finance their habit you would understand. They usually start stealing from family and friends first and then go farther afield. Needless to say many end up in prison - not for drug offences, but for stealing and the like. If you have seen the wives and children whose husband/father is an addict who steal to support themselves when husband/father cannot work because he is an addict you would understand.

I have seen this over many years and I understand. If you thing that an occassional puff or the odd pill is what this is about you better come into the real world. For a start most hard core addicts start like that. Drug pushers have all the sales pitches. Two or three doses of heroin or crack and your hooked and then your self choice is gone - usually for good.

Yes addicts are victims - and so are their families.

An earlier poster referred to me as seeing thing in black and white. Most things, in fact just about everything else, I see in many shades of grey. This, however, I see as black and white. Sorry - I've seen a lot of life around this world. My experiences have conditioned me. I cannot conceive of very much that is more evil that drug trafficking in a way, shape or form. When you have seen some thing that I have your views will change - if you have a heart that is.

I cannot relate to some of the remarks made excusing these low lifes

( also categorised as filth where i come from by the way. )

e.g.

Anyone who,s actions undermine the quality of life, cause injury, misery and death by their selfish, stupid and also in many cases show evil disregard for life, are repugnent and should be treated as filth...dirt..of no use to the clean side of society. ( not as in drug free by the way )

There are several posts with a similar content but i,ll re. quote the first one i read

Quote:-

QUOTE(atlastaname @ 2007-01-04 20:37:11)

Maybe people in general are a little too quick to jump on others who maybe have less fortunate lives than themselves. Money certainly comes into it , but not neccessarily greed. I would imagine those desperate enough to smuggle would use up the money they gain from the smuggling quite quickly, as opposed to greed which suggests they don't need the money but are committing a crime in order to bolster their already bulging bank accounts.

In general peopole are also rather quick to condemn others whose lifestyle doesn't match their own. If people choose to use drugs why not lewt them , they know the risks. The way i see it is here we have another , young , life cut short because someone was forced to swallow something deadly in order to try and beat the authorities, who are always battling against something they will never win. You will never stop drug takers, drug smuggling , in the same way you will never stop smoking , drinking, under age smoking , under age drinking , under age drug taking , under age sex , the list is endless. So thousands of people die a year , not just from taking part in illegal activities (maybe some should not be illegal ?) but also from trying to evade capture from authorities fighting a battle they can never win. Very sad isn't it ?

Unquote.

How the F*** can anyone justify these evil individuals who traffic in DEATH and untold MISERY because of what you observe, is beyond civilised thinking.

You are at best misguided, living in a fantasy world, and consequently, far from reality by trivialising it all and saying it,s o.k. if you need funds / desperate, Ect. Ect. Ect. = B******T B******T B******T

Please, do us a favour, we are far from being no brainers and idiots.

Perhaps you can tell us what would have happened had they managed to get this " filth ", as I can also define it, into Brisbane and out onto the streets.

I shouldn,t need to spell it out for you, how sad that the quality of life doesn,t seem to be your main concern and all the untold misery it would cause.

" They all deserve the maximum penalty according to the laws of the country they are caught in or perhaps sent back to where it started from, should laws / do gooders prevent just punishment and accountability for their actions, equal to the consequences of them being undetected and able to get it out onto the streets. "

Remember the majority are not ADDICTS but just Greedy Selfish people who in most cases are fully aware of the distress and misery it causes and all the other implications of their actions.

Out of consideration for time i will not carry on listing the downside of muling / drug smuggling ect. ect. ect.

THERE ARE NO CIRCUMSTANCES WHAT SO EVER TO JUSTIFY / EXCUSE, MATURE, EDUCATED PEOPLE WHO EITHER CARRY THESE ACTIONS OUT OR USE AND EXPLOIT THE UNEDUCATED / IMMATURE TO DO THE FILTHY WORK FOR THEM.

marshbags and

Thanks Marshbags. You and I have similar thoughts. I had decided not to make a further reply on the basis that it is pointless trying to explain to anyone who can even consider justifying this sort of evil to quote make a quick buck unquote. But I felt that I had to support your views.

One way or another throughout my life I have seen first hand the misery of drug addiction. And misery is really an understatement. It destroys not only the lives of the addicts, but their families and sometimes friends as well.

Yeh it is true you cannot stop drug addiction, but then you can't stop murder, rape or arson either. Does that justify these crimes? Should the authorities look the other way in case harm comes to muderers rapists and arsonists? If I had to choose whether a murderer, a rapist, an arsonist or a drug tgrafficker goes to the gallows the drug trafficker would get my vote everytime. (This is not an argument about capital punishment rather a way of prioritizing evil)

Yeh I have made a few wrong turns in my life, but I have never sunk to these depths.

One thing this mans death has achieved is to prevent at least a little misery from getting onto the streets of Brisbane. Who knows it might even deter a few others,

Ladyboy Fingered as Early Morning Pickpocket.

At around 5:00am on Thursday morning Mr Ali Sader-ah-he-Moni, a 31-year-old Iranian tourist, was walking along Beach Road in the region of Soi 12, when he claims he was approached by a 21-year-old ladyboy who offered her sexual services for the princely sum of 1,000 baht.

The Iranian decided this was an offer worthy of further investigation and the pair sauntered onto the sand to consummate their new-found relationship. Sadly, this lightning-fast relationship ended in tears as the ladyboy ran off into the night having managed to get her hands on the Iranian’s monetary wad which consisted of 5,000 Iranian dollars, 100 US dollars and 18 baht.

The aggrieved Iranian called for help from the tourist police and under the direction of Colonel Wootishart the ladyboy was soon apprehended. At the Soi 9 police station the ladyboy claimed the Iranian had tried to avoid paying for her specialized services. Police have made a report and the case will now go to court to determine the truth of the matter.

SOURCE: Pattaya City News

I presume the title was a freudian slip?