MangoKorat

57 minutes ago, noobexpat said:

Change of title needed...

 

Owner rightly kept deposit

Change of title for a rental? No way.

I believe the owner is within their rights to keep your deposit.  A more reasonable way though would be for them to market the flat again and if they let it without any loss - refund your deposit. Any losses would be taken from your deposit.

I doubt that's going to happen in Thailand though - I think you're going to have to accept you've lost your deposit.

2 hours ago, CygnusX1 said:

I partly agree, but am extremely reluctant to employ censorship, except for existing laws on defamation etc. Your suggestion of a warning is a lot better - feel free to post that the moon landings were faked in a Hollywood studio, but expect to have a comment added by a fact checker. Who these fact checkers would be is the issue of course. It’s worth noting that the idea that the COVID virus was accidentally released from a lab was flagged by many experts as disinformation, but is now regarded as a real possibility, though still unproven.

Taking it back to our Putin supporting friend - what I'm suggesting is for clear rubbish such as he posts.

I'm not about to dig up the news reports- there is plenty of evidence that tells the truth about what Putin's armies have done in Ukraine - anyone who can make statements such as 'They have conducted the war in the the most moral fashion, scrupulously observing the rules of war and  minimising civilian casualties'   and state that Putin is a 'humanitarian and a gentleman' is clearly out of order.  Decent people don't get arrest warrants from the ICC.

The internet is a great source of information but its also full of disinformation.  It sounds fair to let everyone have a voice - unfortunately there's a few people out there that should be silenced.

3 hours ago, CygnusX1 said:

Maybe he’s a seriously competitive participant in a competition to see who can invent the most outrageous troll post, in which case respect - there’s no way I could have ever thought up something so utterly insane.

He could be trolling or baiting or it could be worse.  There's a lot of reports around at the moment about agents of 'certain countries' posting disinformation in order to cause disruption in elections etc.  Some say that they are responsible for the rise of the far right in many countries.  As with the 'conspiracy theorists' that spread so much rubbish durig the Covid pandemic - some people believe what these malicious idiots post and to a certain extent, I can understand that. So many people believe everything they read on Social Media or believe there must be something in it. They see something in print on their god, the internet so it has to be true doesn't it?

An example: During the pandemic I received a message from a close friend who'd read a fwd'd Whatsapp post that stated the woman who was the first in the UK to have a Covid vaccine had died - so my friend had decided that she wasn't going to have the vaccine.  I asked her where she got the information from and she sent me a link to 'news report' from a media company that I'd never heard of.  I have to say that the website looked very professional. A simple Google search revealed that the report was a fake - as was the media co. Just about anyone can make a website and post whatever rubbish they want on it - then link to it on Social Media.

The above is just one example, I've seen quite a few but recently heard that a foreign country is suspected of spreading disinformation that supported the 'leave side' during the lead up to the Brexit vote.  In the interests of balance, I would state that it could be equally possible that the 'remain side' did the same - I'm not interested in opening up that debate again.

Stirring up opinion using populist methods used to be the realm of politicians - now the public are joining in and more ominously 'certain countries' have realised that they can create influence both domestically and worldwide.

Facebook and other Social media platforms recently reported that they had discovered and removed, thousands of fake accounts being used by 'people' from China, Russia and North Korea to spread disinformation.

Although I believe in freedom of speech and democracy etc, I think there's a growing case for limiting that or at least verifying/requesting verification any controversial information posted. Maybe its also time that Social Media platforms, including Asean Now started removing posts that are not just different in their viewpoint but contain clear disinformation and/or make wild accusations.  Either that or a clear text, automatically added to each new topic - warning of the dangers of misinformation.

5 hours ago, John Drake said:

 

You've just identified the reason Srettha does do these things. There are no consequences from Western governments if he does. China wouldn't wait a day to slap Thailand around were it being constantly spat in its face, as Thailand does to the West. US ambassador is too busy posting his jogging pictures to squeak so much as a pip. 

I don't disagree with you but I think there's a little more to it - I don't know what that is but there's something and its probably connected to China.

I won't go into detail but a couple of years ago I wrote to the Thai Ambassador in London - twice.  The subject was serious matter but one without any adverse consequences for Thailand - just a request for information really.  In the usual, irritating Thai way when there's nothing in it for them, my letters were completely ignored.

I then contacted my MP who was a government minister at the time.  I was aware that he had previously had dealings with the Thai Ambassador and thought he might help.  He agreed with me that I needed answers but when I asked him to put my question to the Ambassador for me, he refused and went off the phone saying he had an urgent call.  I e-mailed him on the matter and his reply, from memory, was something like 'its not my place to dictate policy to the Thai Ambassador.  That was extremely puzzling because my request was nothing to do with policy and did not involve any dictating at all - it was quite a bland matter but one of importance to me. 

Successive e-mails were met with exactly the same response -  even when I pointed out his puzzling comments about policy. He clearly did not want to do anything that he thought the Thai Ambassador might not like, not that I could understand what was not to like. I have no idea what it was but there was something amiss.

I expected the UK government to be openly critical of Thailand (as they have been with other countries) when they did a deal with Putin to buy some of the oil the West was rejecting - they weren't.  Maybe the UK and US etc. think that they have an ally in Thailand and therefore Asia in general so they don't want to do anything that would damage that perceived relationship - with China in mind.  If that's their thinking, I believe they are sadly mistaken.  Thailand chooses its friends according to what that friend can do for them. Their allegiance changes with their bank account and they do more 'fence sitting' than any other country I know.  I seem to remember Thailand was one of the few countries to abstain on UN votes against Russia when it invaded Ukraine.

5 hours ago, smedly said:

something has upset her

Yes, she has a low tolerance to Yaba.

6 hours ago, webfact said:

and bit a police officer on the arm.

Another one of those who identify as a dog. She's barking...........................

Firstly check if your local Land Office will accept a foreign mortgage - some do, some don't. On the presumption that yours does:

Find another family member or a trusted Thai friend, put the property in their name but cover yourself with a mortgage in your name, registered on the deeds. Will that mortgage to your daughter in case of your death. When your daughter is old enough (20), have the 'owner' transfer it to your daughter.  There will be taxes to pay on each transaction.

Another option may be a trust.  I don't know whether trusts operate in Thailand but if they do, and are allowed to own property - set up a trust for your daughter, let the trust buy and own the property on behalf your daughter until she's old enough. Even though its a trust fund - this is Thailand, have a lawyer draw up a lien, registered on the deeds that prevents the trust from conducting any transactions on the property without the express permission of the beneficiary.

You could also set up a Thai Ltd Co to own the property but that would probably involve even more paperwork and the taxes would be higher. I don't think your daughter would be old enough to be a director of that company but she may well be able to hold shares.

The first option I've mentioned is probably the easiest as long as the Land Office will accept a foreign mortgage - but with all methods - make sure they are accompanied by a Usufuct agreement that does not prevent sub letting so your daughter can either use the property or let it out.

The Usufruct, provided its registered on the title, will also prevent the 'owners' from selling the property in each of the above scenarios.

Do not do any of the above without using a decent lawyer.

14 hours ago, webfact said:

which might probably be delayed beyond

Wonderful use of the English language - again!

2 hours ago, sirineou said:

I don't think it is easy, I think it is easier than to upgrade all of the worlds electrical grid,

And this is a very underestimated problem.  The UK government for example, has for years claimed there is adequate supply capacity in the UK - given the massive power requirements of other 'new tech' such as The Cloud - that must now be questionable.  However, when examined by industry experts, the truth is that the total capacity is not the problem (at the moment), the problem is where that power is.  Much of the capacity currently available is located in ex industrial areas and not necessarily where its going to be required.

To provide a reliable power supply, across the country is going to mean years of roads being dug up and heavier cable being installed.  From what I'm told, only a slow charge unit can currently be used at a domestic home due to supply limitations. Anyone requiring a fast charge will have to visit a charging point and in the UK currently that also means, if you can find one.

I suspect the problems in Thailand will be even worse - even though my area doesn't suffer from as many outages these days, it does suffer from low voltage as there is simply not enough power to meet current requirements - how about when people have EV's? I suspect that Solar Power for homes will start to make more sense - so maybe a bonus?

I realise that climate change is a massive problem that we must do something about - its just seems that we are currently putting the cart before the horse.  After years of inaction on climate change, the world's governments seem to think they can put that right by trying to move on EV's before the infrastructure required to power them is in place.

If they can get it right ICE hydrogen seems a much better bet but I suspect its a big IF.

2 hours ago, eisfeld said:

Costs them probably something like 2k THB to produce

Much less than that I suspect.  All these items are sealed so that they can't be interfered with (read fixed).  I had a BMW 12d on which the ABS unit failed.  The ABS unit comprises of a mechanical side (pump and valves) and an electronic control unit, this particular one was used on several BMW models and was only available as a complete unit at a cost of £1600!  When they first started giving problems, BMW (as usual) denied there was a problem but strangely, started selling the electronic control unit separately - still very expensive though.

Luckily I found a company in the UK that repaired my unit, I think for £120 and gave a lifetime warranty on it.  You can bet that the fault was a small transitor or something that cost pennies.

The airbag light in my car is on currently and diagnostics indicate the control has failed, they cost around £600 but again, an independent company will repair it for £70.

From what I hear from friends still in the trade, the situation with these electronic controls is getting worse and given the electrickery on some of electric cars around, they will no doubt be even more expensive to repair.  Motors, I suspect, will not be repairable (until an independent learns how and sources the parts) and will cost zillions to replace.

I believe that one of the problems with ICE Hydrogen powered cars is storage of the gas within the car - I've heard it said that you would in effect be driving around in a H Bomb.  If that can be overcome and the supply network put in place, I think that would beat fighting for a charging point in a supermarket car park.

Coming soon, to a cinema near you: Charge Wars!

2 hours ago, billd766 said:

My advice to the Thai people would be to start their own coup against the military.

That's never going to happen - there is no appetite for it because Thai people know that any serious unrest will be put down immediately.  I expected major protests or even riots after Move Forward were not allowed to form a government despite spectacular results in the last election - it didn't happen.

I've spoken to a few Thai's about that and they appear to be resigned to the fact that they are powerless and that the powers that be will always control the country.  I was also interested to learn that they, like some Westerners, believe that the real power lies within the elite families who tolerate the various parties that they allow to form governments, provided their wealth is protected.

Many years ago I was told, by a well informed Thai academic that the country was controlled by these 'elite families' who exercised overall power via the military.  The people were allowed to think they have democracy and the various political parties shuffled around 'the trough', swapping' perceived power' from time to time via so called  'democratic elections'.  However if those parties got any designs on real power or anything else became a serious threat to the elite, the military were instructed to put a stop to it and that usually resulted in a coup.  And that is exactly what has happened - 14 coups in total since 1932.

The only difference with the most recent coup and subsequent 'return to democracy' was that the military came up with a plan to ensure thay could retain power without actually appearing to do so - the new constitution.  The military can now choose who runs the country via The Senate and were therefore able to state 'No More Coups' - we will see.

The nearest that Thailand came to serious public unrest in recent years was The Red Shirt riots and they were put down when they became a serious threat.  Many of the ringleaders of the Red Shirt movement have been locked up and some have 'disappeared'. The more recent student protests looked like they were gaining momentum and support from the population in general - then the students made a fatal mistake: They added reform of the royalty to their demands and the growing 'popular support' melted away. Move Forward tried that too.

To mount a serious coup against a well armed military would require huge amounts of finance, I doubt that anyone with that sort of cash would be prepared to provide that finance because they are probably already feeding at the trough.

Thaksin obviously did some sort of deal to be able to return to Thailand - Thai people are aware of that and don't believe that he was ever destined to actually be imprisoned.  They don't believe the 'seriously ill' fiasco either and are not in the slightest bit surprised that he has gone from 'needing to be hospitalised' to straight home when his parole date came around but what can they do?

Protest: That would achieve nothing.

Riot: That would be put down immediately

Stage a Coup: They wiould lose and thousands would be killed, the people cannot finance a coup. The only thing that a 'Citizens Coup' is likely to achieve is that the military would step in and take control once again. Thai people have had enough of that.

Many people forecast that major unrest would ensue when the previous monarch died - arguing that he was the gel that held the country together and the military's grip would be broken. It never happened.

I'd love to see serious change in Thailand and a real democracy rather than the sham that currently exists but all I see is resignation.

On 2/18/2024 at 7:20 AM, billd766 said:

It doesn't matter to the Thai people what you, I or any other farangs think or say. It is up to the Thai people what to do about it.

The truth of the matter is that a 'duplicitous, greedy and corrupt' bunch takes over every time the people try to do something about the total lack of democracy, accountability and the edemic corruption that permeates every walk of Thai society.   No party that threatens the 'establishment' (read: corrupt, selfish, dictatorial barstewards) will ever be allowed to be in power.  Any credible opposition is denied the right to form a government, even if they win an election, by a branch of government put in place precisely for that purpose.

The 'Thaksin Pantomime' that's been going on since he arrived back in the country is simply another meal of rubbish the Thai people have had to eat.  The establishment in fact, insult the intelligence of the Thai people by carrying out this charade. What's worse is they know it does and don't give a damn.  I've seen more credible plays written by children.

Those who oppose the 'establishment' are regularly locked up or charged with some spurious yet serious offence and effectively, knocked out of the running.  Others have simply disappeared. Its no surprise that Prayuth was cosying up to Putin not so long ago - he was learning from him.

So maybe you can advise the Thai people what they can do about the current situation in Thailand? Hold an election and get a truly decent person into power?  I seem to remember they tried that a few months back, maybe you can help them - any ideas?

Most of the time when I'm in Thailand - except that is for breakfast.  Sorry but soggy rice and pork soup just doesn't do it for me. Bacon and Eggs just about every day.

When I cook Thai food at home that involves meat, I also supplement the usual cheaper cuts for quality meat and add more vegetables than Thai's normally eat.

As for some of the 'weird' stuff like chicken feet or bugs - never.

17 hours ago, ozimoron said:

One man's limitations is another man's bigotry. Sorry, I l have little time for those who don't understand the fundamentals of issues they comment on. Understanding that gender isn't binary is basic civics these days

You're missing the point.  You are also making an incorrect statement.

The Point:

I don't give a damn if a guy wants to identify as a Gay Giraffe, He is welcome to consider Himself as whatever He so wishes to me, and I believe the majority of the sane world, he's a male human and I for one will always address Him as such.

Incorrect Statement:

Human Gender Is in fact binary (with some extremely minor exceptions) - the difference here is that some people wish to consider themselves non-binary - that does not change their biological make-up. There are of course some variations such as Gay Male but their actual gender is still male.

They can say they are non binary but its up to others as to whether they accept the 'perceived' gender.

General:

You state that 'understanding that gender isn't binary is just basic civics'. You don't say it but its clear that you feel this 'binary' thing is actually meaning that its up to the individual and the rest of us should accept that.

So let's take it outside the 'gender' issue for a moment and consider a different matter but with similar traits.

I'm a white male but how would it be if I grew dreadlocks, blacked up and spoke with a Jamaican accent (such people do exists as it happens)? If I then said that I identify as black?  Would, or should you accept that I am a black man? Would that also form part of your 'basic civics'?

10 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

Every human ( except a few hermaphrodites ) is born with either male or female genitals, ergo every human is either male or female. PERIOD.

If an adult wishes to live as a person of the opposite gender, that's OK by me, but they will never actually BE a person of the opposite gender.

IMO no child should be allowed to have any permanent physical alterations done as children don't know anything, let alone what they want to be when they grow up.

Well said,

I would add to that that during a recent UK TV documentary on the subject of changing gender amongst young kids, a physologist stated that the majority of their time in recent years has been spent counselling young people who had gone through the change and now wanted to change back!

17 hours ago, ozimoron said:

 

No, I'm saying that a person can be born with traits of both genders along a scale, like 1 to 100 if you will. Almost nobody hits either 1 or 100. The preponderance of genetic factors which determine sex can vary widely, both hormonal  and physical, not to mention mental... Some identify as asexual and some as both sexes. Human behaviour bears that out. A failure to understand that requires a reluctance to want to find out. That said, those those who comment without that understanding can be assumed to have an ulterior motive.

You're getting a little to involved - genetics or whatever have nothing to do with the topic or the examples that I have used. 

People may or may not wish to understand why variations in actual and perceived gender exists. They may also not be interested or particularly bothered about how people 'identity'.

The point is that we are being asked, in some cases told to accept such variations and address people according to their wishes.  Some may not have a problem with that, others, myself included, reserve the right to address someone correctly - as in by their actual gender.  I can't speak for others but my reasoning for that is that a man is a man..............bla bla bla.

Moving on to the offence taken, I find it quite ridiculous that 'No Trans' is , in some areas, considered as 'Hate Speech'.  Likewise, returning to the example of Sam Smith, the British singer, I cannot work out how he is harmed be being refered to as he or him.  I am unlikely to be addressing him but if I was it would be as a male - because he is a male. If he objected to that, up to him - I'm not about to start re-defining what and what is not offensive.  Once we start going down that path (which, to some extent we have) - it will just go on and on.

The more society panders to the whims of these people, the crazier things are going to get.

1 hour ago, ozimoron said:

 

"They are a human being and as such should be afforded the same rights and benefits as the rest of us. But I do not believe that should include accepting that a male is now a female. "

 

Respect would actually being to read a little science and not trying to humiliate people based on the genetics they were handed at birth.

What science would that be?  Surely you're not going to claim a man can fully transition to a woman.  Or is it that you have some other 'scientific' explanation?

You might also be interested to know that there are some branches that would take offence at your notion of genetics.  They say its a choice not genetic and would baulk at your suggestion.  That particular argument has been brought up on this website before but I'll take a bet that the people who argued it will not comment on this thread - they can't be seen to be supporting such a 'disrespectful' person.

Do not imply that I do not respect them, I respect all people but I also believe that there is a norm. Those who claim there is no 'norm' or ask 'what is normal?' are in fact simply failing to recognise that a human being is 'designed' (for want of a better word) in a particular way in order to reproduce = male & female. Anything other than that is abnormal in the literal sense of the word. A male cannot reproduce with another male and likewise females. I have not and would never, say that such people are in any way inferior to 'straight' people - they are not. But they are not the 'norm'.

To themselves and anyone else who goes along with it, they can call themselves whatever they want but I refuse to be told that I must address someone in any other way than their biological make up determines. Nor will I subscribe to the notion that I must address people who state they do not want to be classified in a non gendered way. They can request it but they won't get it - certainly not from me.

In much the same way, I do not accept that the wording 'No Trans' is Hate Speech.  If someone wishes to think of it as such, that is their problem, not mine, hate was never my intention.  If I wrote 'No Disgusting Trans', that would be hateful.  As I suggested in an earlier post - how long will it be until stating 'Blondes Only' become discriminatory?

It seems very odd that on the same App members can state WHAT they are looking for - i.e. Long Term Relationship or Short Term Fun and those preferences can be added as part of a pre written list but it seems, members cannot be clear on WHO they are or are not looking for in terms of sexual preference. I am virtually bald but I would not be offended if a girl wrote 'No Baldies' on her profile.

You read what I say, well you read your version of what I say and try to make it offensive - that is not and has never been my intention. Anyone who is so touchy that they find it offensive is going to struggle in life.