jonclark

On 2/28/2023 at 1:26 PM, spidermike007 said:

Exactly. It is money over health. Money over the well being of the masses. Money over change and progress. 

 

Ultimately, the choice to burn sugarcane comes down to money: leaving leaf trash attached to the canes means hauling more material to the processing plant. This requires more trips and more time in processing, which is expensive. Other green harvesting methods, like removing trash in the field, require additional equipment and attention, both of which cut into profits.

 

https://foodprint.org/blog/sugarcane-burning/

 

Yep. Like pretty much every commodity we produce and trade it comes down to money. Profit margins are narrow anyway and physically removing it takes more time and hard work.  So burning seems to be a winner and when the density of sugar cane farms was much less, 20 odd years ago you could get away with it 

Air pollution has a financial impact. I read somewhere that something like 300'000 people went to hospital with respiratory complaints on a single day of particularly bad pollution in Bangkok this year..

Maybe the solution is some form of government assisted clearance program. The farmer pays the government a fee. Equal to the usual burning cost. And the government sends in a clearance team who remove and package the cane. 

5 hours ago, spidermike007 said:

 

 

1. Fine the farmers 5,000 baht for a first offense, and give them a stern warning, that burning is now prohibited, and the second fine will be very harsh.

2. For a second offense, fine the farmer 100,000 baht, and warn them that if the burning continues, their land will be confiscated.

3. On the 3rd offense, confiscate their land. Period. No questions. No legal proceeding or appeals on the part of the farmers. Allow others to come in and purchase the land at a fair price, with the caveat that sugar is prohibited as a crop to be grown on that land.

The news would travel faster than the toxic smoke, and farmers would change their ways overnight, and move into the 21st century.

 

Good ideas, but you cannot no matter how righteous just steal another persons land and then deny them recourse to the law. Once you start down that dark alley, well you are on the path to total authoritarianism. 

The framers are doing this for economic reasons. I think before we all (correctly) tell farmers to stop burning sugar cane we should go and spend a day or two in the fields chopping the dam stuff down under a baking sun for a pittance. Maybe we would understand why then it is burnt and not cut. Understand the problem is the first step to solving it. 

Democracy is also banned in HK. So it seems CBD is in good company. 

12 minutes ago, proton said:

When they cant fund medical bills and have to ponce off friends and family, as well as strangers, case on here recently

Proton - A bit of perspective please. Millions of tourists and foreign visitors here every year and a only few hundred get into financial difficulties with lack of, or poor insurance that doesn't cover their medical claims. Do we focus on the few or the many? 

I know (and I am sure other members will understand the sentiment) my Thai family here (and my Thai friends) turn to me when they have financial difficulties and I am happy to help, its what family and friends do for each other.

Unless of course you feel that Thai families shouldn't "ponce" off the falang in the family and it's every man for themselves?  

2 hours ago, Xanthe said:

Why the IOs won't accept bribes? Just because they are unfortunate to be born in Thailand and no access to Western incomes don't not mean that they can't have desires and aspirations to send their sons and daughters to fancy schools, buy expensive cars or keep their mia nois happy.  It is the fault of the foreigners not to be able to come up with adequate incomes even though born in a Western country. No adequate incomes, pay up the money to the IOs for the privilege to live in Thailand.

If Thai people (in this case IO's) consider it "unfortunate to be born in Thailand" then it can hardly be considered a "privilege to live in Thailand" can it? From your post it sounds more like a hardship. 

6 hours ago, rwill said:

They may complain about high taxi fares here but I bet they are still way cheaper than in their home countries.

You are right..but that is not the point. It's the dishonesty of not using a meter to milk extra cash.

That being said. I remember many, many years ago in one of the lonely planet guides - south east Asia on a shoestring - the advice was always negotiate a price with taxis before getting in. So maybe the taxis are just going by the book. 

4 hours ago, Saphan said:

Thais only listen to Thais in general. The earth is flat if Thai says it.

Good grief what nonsense is this. 

46 minutes ago, sidneybear said:

Flew into Bangkok the other day and saw lots of burning fields, with the smoke rising to an inversion layer, then spreading out just above the ground. Why can't they stop farmers doing this?

Cause burning is the cheapest method and the profit margin on sugarcane etc is very small. So farmer burn in order to maximize their meger profits. 

3 hours ago, Banana7 said:

Many do charge non-Thai speaking customers more than Thai speaking customers. 90% of the time my Thai girlfriend can get a hotel room, same dates, cheaper than I can. International chain hotels are the most consistent in pricing, the Thai non-chain hotels will usually discount for Thai speaking customers over the phone, facebook, email or their website, etc..

Agoda and booking.com all same price. 

2 hours ago, allanos said:

 

The disparity in entry conditions between "western"

countries and Thailand is due to relative economic

strength between the two. The West is First World

whilst Thailand is a Third World,  or at best, "emerging"

economy.

Sorry to be a grammar Nazi, but third world is not a phrase to describe economic development. It refers to political alignment. 1st world USA etc. 2nd world russian / China. 3rd world non aligned countries. 

Having some of that. 

Always found claiming tax rebates relatively simple here. 

As respectable and socially conscious as all companies profess to be I would have thought that they would be willing shut up and pay....rather than suggesting that their customers..aka the taxpayer bails them out again. 

Most of the Thai TV 'analysis' of the incident is putting alot of emphasis on multiple 'reports' of there being a number of repairs being either substandard or delayed. As there was pressure to move the budget for the purchase of the submarines.

20 minutes ago, bob smith said:

nothing about the drug itself but its sadly the kind of clientele that legal weed attracts. think weekend trips/stag do's to amsterdam. not exactly the nicest of folk.

A very narrow and massively erroneous view.  My gran used to go on weekend trip to Amsterdam...she loved tulips and clogs. What have you got against my gran???

1 hour ago, Neeranam said:

We have obviously been taking lessons from the Capitalist West!

Thailand should get a better teacher !

5 hours ago, StayinThailand2much said:

Exactly. Chinese, rich, creating 'extra value' (not last for certain government employees)... Probably, 9 out of 10 Thais will still favour such 'tourists' over "those cheap Charlie backpackers".

Sorry you think 90% of the population prefer Chinese (criminals?) visiting Thailand over backpackers. I would find that figure very hard to believe.  What is the source for the number  - or did you make it up? 

So raising wages will result in more inflation, more cost to the consumer and reduce competitiveness. 

But the pursuit of increasing profits for shareholders / stakeholders, and increased bonuses for top executives will not result in inflation, more cost for the consumer and reduced competitiveness.