JonnyF

You better keep apologising for it then ????.

I'd respectfully disagree. 1. They hate foreigners looking down on them. They might seem like they don't care, but actually they just don't know. My ex was horrified when I told her about the reputation of Thai women abroad. She thought they were revered. 2. If this starts turning up on potential tourists Facebook/Twitter feed, it WILL cost them money. I'd argue it already is if you look at the state of tourism (obviously Covid is the main cause it's fallen off the cliff, but Thailand's deteriorating reputation for these things won't be helping matters).

All you can do is boycott places that do it, and very clearly object to it on forums, and social media platforms like FaceBook and Twitter. You know how much Thais hate their bad practices to be publicly exposed for the world to see. Maybe one day they'll be shamed into doing the right thing. Surely that's got to be better than trying to justify it, or pretending it's OK?

Not if you keep up with the mask wearing, the vaping bans, the dual pricing, the ruination of nightlife, the war on fun.

Not at all. I've paid millions of Baht in income tax here for 14 years. I don't expect anything in return from the government (and that's exactly what I get) and I certainly don't expect a red carpet. But it's a little rich to be ripped off for life saving medical treatment because of my race. Or to pay 10x that of a Thai for a national park that my income tax goes towards funding when many of those Thais pay no income tax at all or a fraction of what I pay. Why? Because I am Caucasian. It's wrong. People like you would call it out if our own countries did it to Blacks or Asians. But here you excuse it. That's pretty much the definition of an apologist. The "if you don't like it then go home" argument is weak. Especially when the TAT actively encourage tourists to come here with TV advertising in our home countries, and then rip them off at every opportunity. The "All Thais are poor" argument is also weak. They pay 20 Baht if they drive a Honda Wave or a Bentley. A foreign tourist might have saved all year to bring his family here here, then have to pay 5 or 10 times that of a millionaire local. The fact they hide the prices with Thai script shows they know it's wrong, and so they use underhand tricks to try and disguise it. Defending people who rip you off is a sign of a lack of self respect IMO.

Presumably you'd be fine with the same logic being applied if you needed treatment for cancer? Normal treatment for Thai is 500,000 Baht. But you are charged 2,500,000 Baht because "him farang, him rich". Ludicrous logic. Anyone supporting this is an apologist and an enabler. Simple as...

And disallow them from purchasing land. Fair's fair.

I have a Thai drivers licence, paid income tax here for 14 years. Still pay 5x the rate of a Thai. Why? Because I am Caucasian. Same at a temple in Chiang Mai. Charged 40 Baht while the Thai gf entered free. Why? I am Caucasian. It's a racist policy. Don't be an apologist/enabler for racist policies. Even worse is the hospital treatment. The foreigner gouged for (I believe it was) cancer treatment and the Thai court upheld it. Thailand must be one of the most openly racist coutries in Asia, if not the world. Shame on them, and those who make excuses for them.

Understood . The laughing face you added at the end of the sentence on the original post made me think you were being sarcastic.

Simply pointing out that many party leaders broke the rules. Yet the only one you are concerned with is Johnson. Political bias once again.

That was due to being labeled a domestic and sexual abuser by Amber Heard. Hence the court case. It wasn't for being a drunk. It's been known he drinks and takes drugs for decades.

Of course not. Why would Johnson invite either of those 2 clowns to a party at Downing Street? Can you imagine Sturgeon walking into any party, it would immediately kill the vibe ????. It doesn't need to be the same event to be the same offense.

If they were worried about that there wouldn't be any movies made. Reminds me of Ricky Gervais last sentence of his Oscars speech when he told the audience of famous actors to "get drunk, do your drugs, F off". What a legend that bloke is ????

Same offence. Johnson was fined. Sturgeon was not. Political bias. No big deal though. All the pearl clutchers can vote for Labour next time. Led by Starmer. Also caught maskless and drinking during lockdown. Same same.

The highest % for any party since 1979.

I certainly wouldn't want to work with her now. I'd be concerned I'd be left alone in a room with her and the next thing is she's claiming I attacked her. Given the public reaction that I've seen on social media, I think any future movies she got would be boycotted by many people anyway. It sounds like Johnny Depp got her the Aquaman role and now there's a petition of over 4 million to edit her out of it. Can't imagine too many producers wanting to take the risk given her limited acting skills and all that baggage.

Yes there is some truth in that. Echo chambers are a strange thing as we saw in 2016. We'll see what happens in 2025 or maybe sooner. BTW Junta generally refers to taking power by force. The conservatives won by a landslide at the polls.

That's the way it should be. Hopefully the votes are respected, we wouldn't want a repeat of Labour and the Lib Dems behaviour after the Brexit vote where they tried their best to over-turn the result. Let's see what happens at the next general election. A week is a long time in politics. I believe the deadline for the next GE is 2025. I'm sure that time will just fly by.

Actually many people I talk to think it's a storm in a teacup and are more concerned about real issues like the cost of living crisis. But if they are that angry they can always vote for Starmer, Rayner, Abbott, Lammy, Nandy etc. at the next election ????.

Also those who continue to support Heard despite her obvious lies and the verdict of the court.

Yet Sturgeon wasn't. Starmer managed to worm his way out of it (so far). Politically biased. Let the voters decide how serious this was.

No. The actions were completely different. Comparing leading a military coup to having a few glasses of wine after work during lockdown doesn't make sense.

Yet Rutte survived wrongly accusing thousands of child welfare fraud. A few glasses of wine. A minor infraction. Let the electorate decide how serious they think it was.

Extreme? It was a few drinks in the office. Against the rules? Sure. But hardly "extreme".

Similar? Stealing power from a democratically elected government via an illegal military coup is not really the same as having drinks at the end of a working day during Lockdown ????.