Bangkok Barry

Those I know are involved in sport and their achievements speak for themselves. They don't need to court publicity. As for if William is unhappy and if so he should quit, it isn't like moving on from a job you don't like for another. You can't quit company A and join company B. And he would not be able to keep a low profile - Harry is evidence of that. Everything he does is reported whether he likes it or not. The only way he could avoid that is to become a recluse in a monastery. Becoming anonymous isn't an option.

Okay. But saying that something happened nearly 100 years ago concerning a minor royal family isn't much of an argument. The world and the position of royalty is very, very different now. The chance of that happening now, and with such a high profile family, is infinitesimal. In my opinion.

Do you know of any occasion when he or she has refused to give assent to a bill passed by Parliament.

In my line of work I have known a huge number of personalities, people who because of their talent are forced to live their life in the spotlight, and it isn't necessarily the glamourous life you might expect. Imagine being stared at wherever you go, if you are even able to go where you want to in the first place. Of course, there are the financial benefits, and the ability to get a table in a restaurant that is 'full'. And the famous meet others who are famous, people they admire and those us mere morals have no access to. Doors are opened. Most balance it well. A minority do not and fall by the wayside. William and Kate do not have the option of leaving their job. Harry did, and look how he was hated for it, moving away from the tabloid attention he has largely and successfully sued against, leaving the intense spotlight he was under in the UK. That spotlight can be intense, and a life of privilege isn't without its downsides as well as its benefits. It isn't all roses.

The real Head of State is the PM. The King is largely a figurehead with no direct constitutional role, no matter what powers he might have on paper. If he took an active role in the actual running of the country or in enacting laws against the wish of the elected government then there would be uproar and rebellion. The compromise, if you will, is that he advises. But he does not impose, even if constitutionally he can.

William and Kate are the latest example of the once rigid formality of the Royal Family being eased, largely as a result of the enormous outcry when the Queen remained in Scotland after Princess Diana was killed. The whole 'enterprise' then was on very rocky ground, explained later by her desire to protect William and Harry from the huge public reaction to her death. William has continued his mother's informality as much as he is able, and both he and Kate have attended many charities that help others. William's more down-to-earth approach, again as taught by Diana, in my opinion continues a march in the right direction. Just don't expect to see him riding the Tube, as he did in disguise as a kid. At the same time, I find it ironic how many call for the royals to 'get a proper job' (without knowing what they actually do) and when Harry decided to 'get off the gravy train' and do exactly that he was vilified by many.

You don't have a recollection as it didn't happen. https://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-09-13/prank-call-dj-apologises-to-family-of-nurse-who-suicided/5741442

The Head Of State is the Prime Minister, who is unelected as such by the people but by the Party membership. The King or Queen is Head of the Commonwealth and acts in an advisory role in weekly meetings with the Prime Minister. The Royal Family has no active role in government, demonstrated by its representative, Black Rod, having the door to the Commons slammed in her face as she approaches from the Lords to summons MPs to hear the King's speech, which lays out the government's ambitions for the coming year.

That was a very well-known prankster who is very, very well skilled in deceiving others, And if you can produce a quote from a reliable source that William lost his temper and said she should be sacked then please do. In fact, news reports said exactly the opposite. From this link: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-09-13/prank-call-dj-apologises-to-family-of-nurse-who-suicided/5741442 "We would like to thank the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge who publicly and privately have supported the family and have always been concerned for their welfare," said British politician Keith Vaz, who has been representing Saldanha's family.

UK elections are not democratic. When you add up the votes of the various parties after an election, it is rare that the party which forms the government has more than 50% of the total votes. In other words, over 50% did not not vote for the new government. The majority did not want that government. Strange kind of democracy. But at least it's better than Thailand where even if 100% voted for one party it would be banned if it was the 'wrong' winner.

No info at all on the cause of the accident or who was to blame, so maybe it was her fault and no gesture other than a sympathetic wreath was called for? Due to the usual inadequate reporting by The Thaiger we just don't know.

What part of this photo don't you understand?

It is actually very similar. Offend someone, have a conflict of any sort, business or domestic, and it's High Noon and a shootout on Main Street. The social class structure also belongs back in those ancient days, where you have the unassailable lords of the manor at the top who people have to bow down to and respect no matter what. Or pretend to. Much of Thai culture is centuries behind the West. It's interesting how some countries develop so much slower than others. At the same time, I have little doubt that some Western countries are now in reverse. Decades of cutbacks (I'm from the UK, where when I was a kid I could see a doctor within an hour or two, and now it might take days or weeks), more and more violence, more and more plain stupidity.

Just imagine how many lives would be saved if Thailand didn't have poles for people to drive into.

Some things included with the tv are free, some are not and will ask you to subscribe. For example, my tv has Netflix included but it isn't free. So yes, things are included, but the salesman 'forgot' to tell you that they aren't necessarily free as that would spoil his sales pitch.

How many times do I have to state the obvious - I repeat - That only ends one way, and in many countries in you being shot dead. It really doesn't matter who started it or who was to blame or what it was about. Anyone who fights a cop then runs a very high risk of becoming a victim themselves. Frustrating, yes. But no-one ever wins a fight against the police. Especially in a corrupt third world country like Thailand which has a tendency to throw the book at foreigners even for minor transgressions (Swiss guy, anyone?). Retaliation is self-destructive and puts you in a no-win situation. Always. There is absolutely no point in being macho about it. None.

You know some interesting people. Someone who was jailed for domestic violence, another who was involved in another case of violence, even though the woman then admitted she started it - and I assume he continued it for it to have escalated. His best bet might be to apply to enter and see what happens. But, as has been said earlier in the thread, the final decision is made by the IO at the border. Makes for a nervous flight, methinks.

Just drop your trousers and touch your toes eh? or you prefer getting on your knees instead? I repeat - That only ends one way, and in many countries in you being shot dead. But you obviously would take that chance. Good luck. Or are you just making big talk?

We didn't know you were there. Was it you who took the video?

There have been quite a number of posters here saying there must be more to this. But you do not assault police officers. Ever. Anywhere. At any time. For any reason. That only ends one way, and in many countries in you being shot dead.

Maybe they were angry about the new 600% increase in the cost of a Thai visa due to be demanded from NZ citizens from this week. Or maybe they were just another couple of the quality foreigners that Thailand seems to attract.

My experience with Agoda is that they show both prices, but I don't claim that's universal. As for refunds, I don't go down that route. I cancel one booking after I've rebooked at the cheaper rate. Hotels adjust their price all the time, and you'd think that nearer the stay date the rate would increase, but sometimes it goes down, I guess if the rooms are selling slowly.

That's what my wife uses, those from Lotus or Big C. Great that I'll likely be able to do the same. Maybe I can even borrow one of her many pairs for reading ....

Just simple reading glasses is something I'm looking forward to, after I wasted 20,000 on new progressive glasses that had no impact at all, hence my trip to a hospital for a proper test and not the useless test at Thailand's Top glasses chain. I get the impression from an earlier thread that they would come in at well under 5000.

One eye at a private hospital in Kalasin 25,000 (I'm having both done, probably a month apart). Room 1700 includes free meal and dark glasses,