WDSmart

When I was young, in my 20s, I smoked weed, but I don't care to do that anymore. I also don't drink a lot now. They both make me feel the opposite of the way I want to feel. I want to be awake and alert, not sleepy and drowsy.

I've kept my main account in only my name, but I have made arrangements with the bank that allow my wife to withdraw funds from it. So, in the case of my death or a debilitating illness, she can do that.

Bad news, but hopefully, as this case progresses through the various levels of appeal courts, Trump's actions will eventually be disallowed.

I wrote about all this and published a book about it five years ago. I'd tell you the title, but I'm not allowed to do that on these forums.

I don't know if the marriage license will help. My Thai wife has an SSN. I got that for her after we got her a Permanent Resident card (Green Card), and we only had a Thai marriage license.

Yes, you are correct. You do not have to have a certain amount of money in the bank as long as you can show THB 65K+ monthly deposits. I've been doing this for the last two times I've extended the stay on my visa for one year. But you should check with your immigration office since I've found that some of these rules do vary from one office to another.

I thanked you for your response; however, I have not experienced what you describe above. In fact, I've experienced the opposite. I usually go to a private hospital, but occasionally go to a public one. When I do, I am always treated well, and sometimes it seems I am given priority. When I just go in without an appointment, I seem to be able to see a doctor within 10 or 15 minutes, whereas it looks like the majority of Thais there have to wait over an hour. Also, when I make an appointment with a doctor for something special, I have always been able to see them promptly. The one place I do know I receive no priority is picking up prescriptions. I have to wait with all the others to do that, and sometimes that's over an hour. Also, I have to pay for my medications, and I see most Thais do not. But, even then, the price for the medications is at least half or less than what I'd be charged at the private hospital. That's been my experience, but I do not live in Bangkok or a large city; I live in a medium-sized town in the northeast area of Thailand, where there are not many Farangs. Maybe that makes a difference.

Boy George 4, Rawlings 2. (That's the number of genders they believe in.)

Just leave it alone, and any tokays living in your house. They are beneficial. They eat insects, like mosquitoes.

I think this would be a good rule. And I see if the drunk driver is not the owner of the car, and the owner is not with them and unaware they are driving drunk, the owner can reclaim the vehicle.

This is DEI at its finest, and I heartedly approve!

That would be okay as long as you haven't used the same photo before. Otherwise, how would they know how old it was?

Yankee Go Home! 😡

I've always said most Thai drivers drive like they're driving a motorbike. They aren't concerned with lanes or turn signals, and they'll even drive the wrong way near the side of a one-way lane if they need to. Once, recently, when I saw an ambulance with a flashing red light in my rear-view mirror, I turned on my emergency blinkers and pulled halfway off the road on the left side. The Thai drivers behind me got very angry, honked their horns, and passed me, giving me dirty looks. When driving here, you must practice "defensive driving" as best you can.

I support Thunberg's cause here. Her method is a bit unusual, but at least it's not violent.

I'm okay with this as long as whatever is used to determine the gender of the newborn is not just a glance down at the genitals. It should also include testing chromosomes and hormones, the latter of which don't really come into complete play until puberty.

You get what you pay for. My health is worth more to me than a Thai government hospital. The same doctors work at the Thai government hospitals as they do in private hospitals. It is my understanding that all doctors who engage in private practice are required to do so. The facilities could be better in some local private hospitals, but I'm sure the larger government hospitals in large cities have very good facilities.

I think you can not get it for free. Thai people can not. It is definitely cheaper, but even for Thai people the treatment on offer may not give them what they need. And then they must ask how much for what they need? It will not be 30 baht. Yes, you're correct. It is not free even for Thais. However, for non-Thais, such as me, who have a Type O visa, it is definitely less than a private hospital. It depends on the procedure, of course, but I've even found the medications to be much less expensive. As a general figure for everything, I'd estimate 50% to 90% less than a private hospital.

I suggest (AGAIN!) that if there are only two categories of activities, one for males and one for females, whoever runs the operations should define how they determine gender. Is it just taking the contestant's word for it? Do they require a birth certificate showing gender? If a test is required, is it: a physical examination? chromosomes? hormones? some combination of the three above? And if it is, how do they reconcile a different outcome of some of the above, like XXY chromosomes, or XY chromosomes, with a hormonal level indicating female? Just how do they determine the gender of a participant?

The law is indeed "black and white." You're either guilty or not guilty. The determination of guilt or innocence io an accused, however, is a combination of objective and subjective judgments. A judge would be mostly objective but a jury's verdict would have some to a lot of subjectivity in it. As far as the term "open borders" go, I'd recommend the use of some adjective before the classification of "open" that more accurately describes your opinion of them. Something like "partially," "dangerously," or "welcomely," but not "completely." The same with Trump's "closed" borders. I'd recommend "mostly," "protectively," or "obstructionally," but not "completely." No, the biggest threat to the left (I'd say "left, moderates, and moderate right)" is not Trump but the number of his ardent supporters; but I agree that Trump, right now, is the right's (I'd say "far right's") greatest hope. I don't believe I am "out of touch" but just have different values than you (and MAGA supporters in general). I do believe that about 25% of the voting public in the USA (my home country) believe virtually 100% of what Trump says. Okay, 100% might be a little much, but I'd say at least 95%, and the other 5% that they don't believe, they don't care about because they have the same values as Trump. Then there's an additional 20% of current Trump supporters that, although they might not believe much of what Trump says, support him because they agree with the goals they think he's trying to achieve and don't care how he goes about achieving them. The former group, the 25%, I detest. The latter group, the 20%, I pity and hope they will wake up soon and realize Trump is just conning/deceiving them. Which of those groups are you in? And, just FYI, I am far-far-left and woke. (And I know I've written that before on other forums. 😉 )

No, again, you have the typical rightist black-or-white view that the border is either "open" or "closed." That's the same erroneous view you have of genders. A border can certainly be one of the extremes, but it also can be slightly or widely open, or slightly or tightly closed, just like genders. I do read a lot of posts here and on other social media sites. I may have said that before, but I believe considerably less than 50% of what I read there. I get most of my news from CNN, and I believe about 95% of what I see there. Yes, leftists do lie sometimes. Rightists do, too, of course. And then sometimes both state something they believe to be true, but later turns out not to be. I don't consider that a lie; I consider that an error in judgment of believing the source, and something they must consider in the future when hearing things from that same source. The biggest problem we (both leftists and rightists) have now is Trump. I'd say about 75% of what he says is a lie, not just an error in judgment, and, unfortunately, most rightists believe him 100%. 😒

No, with "open borders," there would be no such thing as an illegal alien. All immigrants would be welcome. Biden/Harris did not support "open borders," but during their four years, there were more illegal immigrants than in Trump's first term. Of course, as you now know, I support "open borders," and when I say that, I mean completely open borders. People aren't "watching" anything. People are just reading about issues like this on social media or watching them on TV. They believe what they read and see on TV. What that is all depends on where or who they are reading and watching. I've known the right-wing media, like Fox, have been lying for years. I think most people, except for ardent MAGA supporters, know that now, too. I'm a CNN-guy, myself. 🙂

I did believe her (Harris). I certainly do not believe anything Trump has said or says now. She did not have a record of supporting "open" borders. You are, like a lot of Trump supporters, misusing terms like these to denigrate people you don't like. What you should be saying is she did not support "closed" borders, but supported a border policy where immigrants were allowed to apply for visas and, if approved, enter the USA. Just like gender, the border is not just either "open" or "closed." It is operated in such a manner that it is a mix of those designations. Even Trump does not enforce "closed" borders. Harris' policies did not support "mass migration," but did allow immigrants to apply for visas, and if they entered illegally, apply for asylum. And, I believe she would do all this using legal due process, not just by edict. I don't remember anything about her stance on "men in girls' showers and sports," but I assume she was sympathetic to trans people and would have looked for ways to reduce the discrimination against them.

Racism, intolerance, selfishness, and stupidity are the hallmarks of Donald Trump, so I assume his supporters have to have some or all of those traits. How they relate to the subjects you've listed is... Open borders: racism, intolerance, selfishness. Mass migration: racism, intolerance, selfishness. Trans people: intolerance, stupidity. If Harris said she was against these or at least did not fully support them, I believed her. I don't know exactly what she said, but I know of no politician in the USA who fully supports any of these. I don't think Trump's election was based on a dislike or distrust of Harris. It was based on two things: his ability to con/deceive many of the voters and, what worries me the most, the fact that many of the voters actually have the same values as he does.

Again, I agree with you...sort of. Most US citizens, I don't know about "Americans," do not support open borders, mass-migration, and men in girls' showers and sports, but racism and intolerance are only two of the reasons they supported Trump. Selfishness and stupidity are two more important reasons. Harris also did not support open borders, mass migration, and men in girls' showers and sports. I don't know where you got the idea she did. She did, however, at least IMO, support the rule of law, so would have approached the controversies surrounding borders, immigrants, and trans people much differently than Trump has.