jonclark

Tell you what, Yingluck is starting to look pretty knackered - wonder when the grey hair will start to show!!

Think Thailand should stay the hell out of Myanmar's internal affairs - After all Thais detest foreigner becoming involved in theirs!!

Of course I could be wrong but doesn't all the Ya ba come from Burma?

And most of the Cocaine in the US comes from Columbia and look at the mess there,caused in part, by US / CIA involvement

How many allies does Thailand have? The Kingdom is proof that arrogance and hypocrisy have costs. Openness to Myanmar is essential to Thailand's development, should the former country's government succeed in its reform aims. It's premature to assume that Burma is a real opportunity, as that country is well known for arbitrary seizures of property and assets. Nevertheless, Thailand is in decline and has been for nearly a decade. The country is so uncompetitive that the only interested investment party is Japan's economic development fund.

Very soon Thai companies' "cheap laborers will return home" making life of those companies much harder to employ "cheap illegal worker" in the inflated, more expensive becoming Thai economy....

Good on them Thailand exploits a large % foreigners. Only recently the Phuket governor banned a Burmese music concert as he thought they would fight amongst themselves (like the animals they are??)and told workers to be at home by 8 o'clock.

Maybe Thais will become Myanmar cheap illegal workforce? Now that would be a turn around.

If your moving into an apartment you need to check out the connection within the apartment as some (not all) apartments run a single line into the building which then splits into the individual rooms, so when all the residents come home and us the computer the bandwidth disappears very quickly and it grids to a halt. In effect 1 internet connection services 20 rooms (+ reception and the manager office!).

Think Thailand should stay the hell out of Myanmar's internal affairs - After all Thais detest foreigner becoming involved in theirs!!

"The source also said Pheu Thai wanted to make this case a political issue to attack the BMA before the Bangkok gubernatorial election early next year."

Surprised PTP are taking this politically motivated charge to court. After all we know what their boss thinks of politically motivated allegations!! - Unfair and frivolous.

School is not only FREE in Thailand for a FULL 12 YEARS.

Yingluck governmant also provide FREE books, (tablet on the way), cash for uniform, cash for education equipments.

What else do Thai people want? Get paid for going to school?

It's just that some schools are more free than others and I think that is the point.

As for the cash for uniforms; the amount involved covers a single school uniform. It does not include scout or guide uniform / PE uniform and spares (students go through socks v quickly as they take their shoes off constantly ). And let be honest you need more than one set of uniform - after all you wouldn't wear the same clothes to work every day of every week for a year. would you?

My daughters uniform costs for this academic year are as follows

Skirt (x 3) 750 baht

Top (x3) 600 baht

Belt (x1) 120 baht

Socks (x12) 300 baht

Shoes (x1) 300 baht

Sports shoes (x1) 100 baht

PE Trousers (x1) 300 baht - must have school logo on (school direct)

PE To (x1) 250 baht - must have school logo on (school direct)

Guide uniform inc hat - 650 baht

Books [including school notebooks] with school logo on front (from school directly) 750 baht

Embroidery of school uniform - 80 baht

School bag (with logo) 400 baht - although cheaper were available (250 baht)

Grand total 4300 (not including government subsidy - 350 baht)

I won't include the 'voluntary registration fee', even though she has been at the same school for 4 years!!

Yep school is FREE

Skirt (x 3) 750 baht ? Bullshit I just bought for 129 at Tesco. You have been ripped off

Top (x3) 600 baht ? Bullshit I just bought for 99 at Tesco. You have been ripped off

Belt (x1) 120 baht? Bullshit I just bought for 49 as Tesco. You have been ripped off

Socks (x12) 300 baht ? Why do you need 12? Pack pf 6 is only 69 at Tesco. You have been ripped off

Shoes (x1) 300 baht ? I just bought 3 pairs at 79 each. All size 44. You have been ripped off

And all the others that you paid, like 'voluntary registration fee', etc, are just stupid corruption money, WHY COMPLAIN?

Also, I get the free cash every year; my children still can wear last year cloth, but I just went to Tesco to buy more unnecessary uniform, just because the school want the receipt.

So what your saying is unless you take the cheapest stuff around you've been ripped off. <deleted>. The point is not whether I've been ripped off its that parents - Not YOU - are finding the expense of education increasing. PS if you think a pack of 6 will see your offspring through until the end of the year -think again. I bet my bottom dollar you replace everything you have bought by the end of the year - ripped off no - but you will still pay the same by the end of the academic year guaranteed.

Keep your school fees and tea money in your pocket,doesn"t matter what school you send you kids too they"ll still come out as thick as mince.

+1

Glad you find the education (or lack) of other peoples children amusing

School is not only FREE in Thailand for a FULL 12 YEARS.

Yingluck governmant also provide FREE books, (tablet on the way), cash for uniform, cash for education equipments.

What else do Thai people want? Get paid for going to school?

It's just that some schools are more free than others and I think that is the point.

As for the cash for uniforms; the amount involved covers a single school uniform. It does not include scout or guide uniform / PE uniform and spares (students go through socks v quickly as they take their shoes off constantly ). And let be honest you need more than one set of uniform - after all you wouldn't wear the same clothes to work every day of every week for a year. would you?

My daughters uniform costs for this academic year are as follows

Skirt (x 3) 750 baht

Top (x3) 600 baht

Belt (x1) 120 baht

Socks (x12) 300 baht

Shoes (x1) 300 baht

Sports shoes (x1) 100 baht

PE Trousers (x1) 300 baht - must have school logo on (school direct)

PE To (x1) 250 baht - must have school logo on (school direct)

Guide uniform inc hat - 650 baht

Books [including school notebooks] with school logo on front (from school directly) 750 baht

Embroidery of school uniform - 80 baht

School bag (with logo) 400 baht - although cheaper were available (250 baht)

Grand total 4300 (not including government subsidy - 350 baht)

I won't include the 'voluntary registration fee', even though she has been at the same school for 4 years!!

Yep school is FREE

You are getting screwed. Paying for a high-so education doesn't guarantee a real education.

Didn't realise SatriWitthaya 2 was high so??? Since when did public schools become hi so ??

Uniforms alone cost around Bt5,000? Must be Chula student shopping for mini skirt and tight blouse at Siam Square. I believe lots of post on this already. http://www.thaivisa....udent-uniforms/

I went to Tesco last Sunday. School uniform cost between 100 to 300 Baht max. Some at a discount below 100 Baht. I couldn't resist and bought 3 pairs of canvas student school, size 44, for 79 Baht each. White, Black and Brown. Don't believe me. Check it out yourselves. or if you are lazy see the ads in Tesco Thailand web site. http://www.tesco.co....ion.php?lang=en

Guess your kids will be going to school dressed ONLY in shoes!!

"I dare the Democrat Party to clarify with real facts what kinds of goods are more expensive than last April."

Rice, pork, chicken, eggs & long green beans, just to get the ball rolling.

Shall I continue or would you like a pen and paper for your resignation letter sir?

volk, i agree entirely. but the point is that higher prices are largely the result of external forces. inflation is rampant in china and other developing nations. if you really want lower prices, hope that we get a change in Western policy.

Gonna disagree with you - Just returned from a two week holiday in the UK - food prices were high (but better quality) however cloths / textile prices (of brand names) were a lot cheaper than here. 400 baht for original Addidas t-shirts. Speaking to friends in the pub about the UK economy, all of them grumbled but most of them admitted that previous governments over spent and invested unwisely and now it was time to pay the piper.

Oh come on guys - opinion polls are a western thing, which don't really fit with Thai culture, Thai people usually give the answer they think the pollster wants to hear. Ever asked a Thai person for directions. They'll tell you where to go even if they have no idea where you want to go to, just so they won't look foolish. Same here, When asked a question they'll open their mouths and give an answer just so they don't look foolish or uneducated. True feelings are only usually expressed to close friends and family. Not some spotty munter from ABAC with a clipboard outside standing outside Big C!!

At the end of it, it all comes down to oil and gas prices.

Oil to make the fertiliser, oil to power the tractors, oil to power the generators to provide the electricity to run the processing factories, oil to power the distribution, oil, oil and oil.

I heard from an enormous egg producer the other day, they are actually losing money on selling the eggs ex factory because the cost of the feed has sky rocketed. Driers for this feed eat up huge quantities of lpg, which for industry is now at 29 baht a kilo. They make most of their profit for this year from selling the fertiliser produced from the chicken waste.

Anyone want a weaker baht? Then see the prices go ballistic......

As I'm not an economist perhaps someone who has more knowledge of economics could answer the question, what might happen if the baht was weaken in terms of domestic inflation?? Any takers?

And we all thought the Dems were out of touch with the common man. She is clearly out of touch with reality, perhaps the pressure of the job is getting to her?

I think you just had a bit of bad luck. I've never been turned down by more that 2 taxi drivers (various parts of BKK). More times than not, they agree and turn on the meter without any if, ands or buts.

I agree, in 15 years here apart from my naive first year, when i would get in the car and ask how much to ......... and can you blame them for giving me an exaggerated figure - i asked the question they gave me an answer - my choice to say yes or no.

Since, I have found it is very rare that a taxi driver does not turn his or her meter on. I agree they can be a pain in the backside when the shift changes.

Without bothering to read it, can I guess that the "significant irreversible ecological damage" will not mention the offset of NOT burning more than a million tonnes of anthracite / year, every year, for the life of the dam?

I think you are missing the point. The construction of the dam will lessen one form of ecological damage, but create a new ecological problems. Taking from Peter to pay Paul is not a solution and is a weak argument for the dams construction. Because lets be honest it people like you and I and the many millions of others who have energy rich lifestyles and demand this extra energy and cause pollution, not the farmers, fisherman and communities along the Mekong who have a much lower carbon footprint, yet who we are expecting them to suffer the consequences so we can smugly feel good that we are not producing CO2.

As you also pointed out in a previous post the flow in terms of volume will not be changed, however the sediment content will be changed as during the storage of the water behind the dam the sediment will fall out. When the water is discharged the reduction in sediments = a reduction in the nutrient content of the water. Nutrients which have created rich farmland along the margin. Whilst nature currently does this fertilization for free, after the dams construction the farmers eventually will need to pay using chemical fertilizers to maintain crop yields These fertilizers which eventually leaches back into the river and if used extensively can result in eutrophication

Countries have a choice - to become industrialised and move into the 21st century or remain poor and primary industry based. The choice is theirs and should not be influenced by outside agitators who enjoyed the benefits of an upbringing in an industrialised society. If that sounds personal, so does your claiming falsely that I live a high energy consuming lifestyle.

BTW flood fertillisation is as old as the ancient Egyptians and should be just as dead. For every farmer a flood benefits, thousands suffer misery. And educated use of feritilizer should not increase nutrient levels any more than the sediment reduction reduces.

Not talking about flood fertilization!!! As for the rest of your 'points' no point replying as they have very little do with the dams construction. The solution probably lies somewhere in the middle; reducing the demand for energy in all sectors of society, using current energy sources more efficiently and cleanly and using a wider range of alternative energy sources appropriately, according to social and environmental requirements.

The wider problem is this - The BTS is meant to be a mass transport system, unfortunately these price increases take that concept further away from the masses, as it cost 55 baht per person each way from Bearing to Siam, (for example) Is that affordable means of transport for the average person. A return trip for an average family would costs more than the daily minimum wage. Or to put in other words for those of us that earn more than the minimum wage. Would you forgo a days salary to take the BTS? No none of us would. So if not how is this a mass transport system fit for the 21st century?

jonclark ... well if you had a family and worked for the minimum wage you would take the 511 Bus and not the super fast, air-conditioned BTS from Bearing to (near) Siam.

Yes, the mass transport system is definitely fit for the 21st century.

How do you propose to lower the cost of the existing infrastructure?

Government subsidies, would lower the cost, but that would increase the expenses of the government ... hence the taxes (running a 'balanced budget') that ordinary Thai worker pays.

No Government subsidies ... when then the Private Sector simply won't build any more.

So it's the buses for the family and the BTS for the workers who can afford a little more in transportation costs.

What transport does jonclark take for this trip?

I'd take my helicopter or bicycle depending on the weather

But my point is how can it be a mass transit system (emphasis the word mass) when its out of the price range of the vast majority of people? Of course we always pay for things that are faster, cooler etc and are free to make choices.

i just feel that a modern transit system in a major metropolitan area should accessible on a frequent basis by the vast majority of people who live there as opposed to being as opposed to something that is useable on a daily basis as a viable alternative to buses and taxis by a relatively small percentage of the population.

I'm not arsed about the economics

Without bothering to read it, can I guess that the "significant irreversible ecological damage" will not mention the offset of NOT burning more than a million tonnes of anthracite / year, every year, for the life of the dam?

I think you are missing the point. The construction of the dam will lessen one form of ecological damage, but create a new ecological problems. Taking from Peter to pay Paul is not a solution and is a weak argument for the dams construction. Because lets be honest it people like you and I and the many millions of others who have energy rich lifestyles and demand this extra energy and cause pollution, not the farmers, fisherman and communities along the Mekong who have a much lower carbon footprint, yet who we are expecting them to suffer the consequences so we can smugly feel good that we are not producing CO2.

As you also pointed out in a previous post the flow in terms of volume will not be changed, however the sediment content will be changed as during the storage of the water behind the dam the sediment will fall out. When the water is discharged the reduction in sediments = a reduction in the nutrient content of the water. Nutrients which have created rich farmland along the margin. Whilst nature currently does this fertilization for free, after the dams construction the farmers eventually will need to pay using chemical fertilizers to maintain crop yields These fertilizers which eventually leaches back into the river and if used extensively can result in eutrophication

Dam is need to control flood.

No Dam could mean bigger flood this year.

The Dam is in Laos not Thailand, Wasn't aware Laos was under the threat of flood this year??

That's the other big issue, namely that the Mekong is shared between 6 countries (China, Myanmar, Thailand, Laos, Cambodia & Vietnam) and in true style "sh1t rolls downhill" or in this case flows downhill with the actions of one nation having a material impact on its downstream neighbour. That's why Vietnam is spitting teeth as it benefits the least and potentially comes off the worst due to this likely cascade of dams.

Also for Sparebox2, even with the Chinese sub contrcators that will be used to build Xayaburi they would be pretty pushed to get it finished for this flood season, let alone next year's.

If your interested here's a link to a summary report of and strategic Environmental Assessment carried out by the MRC

http://www.internati...ver-s-fate-2634

One of the main points of the report is that the economic benefits of the dam construction, increase energy y to stimulate economies *(Thailand and Laos mainly) will be offset by a dramatic reduction in the local river economies of all countries (including Thailand and Laos) which use the Mekong. So the net economic effect will be marginal combined with significant irreversible ecological damage.

Dam is need to control flood.

No Dam could mean bigger flood this year.

The Dam is in Laos not Thailand, Wasn't aware Laos was under the threat of flood this year??

The wider problem is this - The BTS is meant to be a mass transport system, unfortunately these price increases take that concept further away from the masses, as it cost 55 baht per person each way from Bearing to Siam, (for example) Is that affordable means of transport for the average person. A return trip for an average family would costs more than the daily minimum wage. Or to put in other words for those of us that earn more than the minimum wage. Would you forgo a days salary to take the BTS? No none of us would. So if not how is this a mass transport system fit for the 21st century?

This is really a shame as 300 baht a day is a paltry amount for a days work. The whole policy has been so badly thought through and implemented that once again those who should have benefited, will bear the brunt of this lack of vision and some no doubt will sink further into poverty and debt. With ASEAN looming large and the removal of protectionist trade barriers that cushion Thai businesses from the realities of 21st Century global trade, the cynic in me fears for Thailand future economic well being.

And farang still say Thai education is bad, and most Thai students are not very intelligent due to it.

This prove farang wrong. Well done Thai student.

Sure they didn't copy their presentation from the internet!!! I still stand by the fact that the vast majority to Thai students are thick as two short planks!!