rethaired

Does anyone know if it cost more to make a wire transfer from a credit card than it does from a debit card?

I am not sure if this is dealt with as a cash advance. Besides the higher rate to payback the card? Citibank no problem Bof A won't give any advice online.

Thanks for the help!!!!!

If you are a member of a western bank, use their ATM card. Mine charges $3 per transaction (max $400). Not sure about the conversion. I have to investigate that part!

Thanks you guys. Much appreciated!

I guess it would help if she could get hired by an employee as a regular, on staff, not as a contract worker. Not sure if she can do it or if it is possible.

Thanks.

Any other ideas?

I have read many threads and I am a bit confused as to what to do with the visa application of my GF who is a tour guide, but a free lancer.

Some people say I can write a letter for her to indicate that I am inviting her to visit Canada. Some people say that nothing should be said about any relationship between her and I. But is that enough, if she has a few friends in Canada to vouch for her, a airplane ticket (return), and enough money to show that she could be going back.

As a free lancer, she cannot get any company to say that she is an employee of this or that company since she is a "sitting guide", which I think means that she is an assistant guide to the guide who can speak fluently Korean, for instance. I think this could be a huge problem. Am I right?

She has never travelled outside of Thailand. I think this could be a problem!

Is there any way I can convince immigration that she will not stay in Canada? She does not intent to.

Thanks very much for the assistance.

I am no expert, but I doubt that even a million hybrid cars being sold in the world every year are going to offset a whole lot of the carbon emissions in the world, although any decrease is good. Then, like nuclear fuel, what do we do with the used hybrid batteries? What does it cost for new batteries, and how often? There is a mathematical certainty about fuel efficiency, called the point of diminishing returns. An SUV that gets 8 km per liter is a gas guzzler, and trading down for a Diahatsu Mira Mint would save the planet. But if your sedan already gets 14 km/liter, a hybrid will not save much more, because you are not using that much fuel now. Besides, how much fuel does a hybrid burn anyway, and how much fossil fuel is burned to make the batteries or the recharge?

High fuel prices will cut down automobile fuel consumption, but we do not want our fresh food delivered by oxcart. Those diesel 18-wheeled rigs burn lots of fuel.

True, about the hybrids, but we are very far from crushing all of those SUVs. And, at the price of everything, people are going to cut consumption by not travelling as much. Already, Air Canada has cut 2,000 employees. A GM plan building SUVs was shut down recently. Trains can transport more and more goods. Roads will get to be more efficient. THere are kits that trucks can use to lower consumptions. New airplanes are going to be more efficient too. I am sure more of this (a whole lot more) will happen and I also believe that the US recession will put a multiplier effect into the growth of China. I think we are going to go into undulating plateaus and dips from this high for a long time. Add the climate change effects. Anyway, there are many theories and many of them are being contested, Peak Oil included.

I think it would be useless for me to discuss all of these: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peak_oil#Timing_of_peak_oil

I believe though that it is overhyped and that the price is artificially held high by speculators.

I am no expert also, but common sense tells me that these recent rises are artificial.

Countering Peal Oil is:

Some commentators, such as economist Michael Lynch, say that the Hubbert Peak theory is flawed and that there is no imminent peak in oil production; a view sometimes referred to as "cornucopian" by believers in Hubbert Peak Theory. Lynch argued in 2004 that production is determined by demand as well as geology, and that fluctuations in oil supply are due to political and economic effects as well as the physical processes of exploration, discovery and production.^[105] This idea is echoed by Jad Mouawad, who explains that as oil prices rise, new extraction technologies become viable, thus expanding the total recoverable oil reserves. This, according to Mouwad, is one explanation of the changes in peak production estimates.^[104]

Abdullah S. Jum'ah, President, Director and CEO of Aramco, states that the world has adequate reserves of conventional and nonconventional oil sources for more than a century,^[106][107] though Sadad Al-Husseini, a former Vice President of Aramco who formerly maintained that production would peak in 10-15 years, stated in October 2007 that oil production peaked in 2006.^[7]

Why is this not getting equal press time? Could it be that disaster sells?

The case for hybrid cars is getting stronger and stronger.

And/or the case to remove the loopholes that have allowed speculators to play Russian roulette with poor children, poor women, and poor men (and everyone else): http://www.stopoilspeculators.com/

FACT: About 60% of the rise of the price of oil (and other commodities) is due to speculation.

Of course, the speculators will say otherwise, claiming that all this is good for the environment (which it is) and that peak-oil is responsible for this. If it was, why are so many manufacturers pushing hybrids? And if hybrids are going to be bought, are we not going to reduce our consumption substantially in a few years? Will peak-oil be called hill-oil then?

I feel more empathy than this about "Americans" or "Canadians" because as a European I can see how much advertising the average North-Am. will watch. There was an interesting study that I read a few years ago indicating that sweetness and the taste of fat are passed on (along with any other taste) to a breast-feeding baby, which does explain why NA love sweeter, say, chocolate than other people on earth, why a fat baby has fat parents. Now, it could be true that diet make people stupid (as TV does or underfunded schools or poor parents or drugs/smoking/alcohol or video games or absent parents or obsession on watching baseball for 3 hours eating pop-corn,...), but I digress!

Indeed, we digress - especially since very few American mothers breastfeeed. Even in Texas, and neither with sweet nor sour crude oil.

But thanks for empathizing with us brain-washed, chocolate-chomping, popcorn-popping North Americans. I think crude oil was first drilled in Pennsylvania (Titusville?), and chocolate and corn were both invented in North America. Europe and Thailand can also thank us for potatoes, tomatoes,squashes, chilies, vanilla, fireworks on the Fourth of July, May Day without May poles, and tobacco. However, gone are the days when the gushers of the Texas Spindletop could satisfy the world's appetite for crude oil.

Oh! What are the stats on that? I am interested to know! I wonder if the powder milk versions are as sweet as the rest of the food in NA, which should explain that then (at least partly)!

Glad you appreciate empathy, PB! Thanks for the interesting facts and the cowboy!

Anyway, I totally agree with you that speculators are using the Enron loophole: http://www.closetheenronloophole.com/ and that is the main reason that is driving (pun intended) the price of gas! Anyone who believes that it is peak oil should know that that supply has increased VS demand (demand has decreased). Sorry to burst your speculative bubble!

Nobody is denying that there is some speculation going on in the financials 'market'. But peak oil, as it relates to inexpensive 'sweet crude' is very real. Although the Saudis have increased production, there has been no increase in supply, a dwindling resource, and worldwide demand has not decreased, only that the rate of increase has slowed down.

As for the 'Enron loophole', it is indeed one of the abominations of the cowboy capitalism that is bringing down the US. But regulating the cowboy financiers is a very dangerous endeavor. Look what happened to Elliott Spitzer for his attempts to clean up the financial markets, brought down by a sophisticated honey trap that utilized government resources. These people do not play nice.

I do not know the exact figure as to how much more we have cheap oil, but I would hazard to guess that as worldwide economy is going into a recession like the one we had in the late 70's, I garantee you that demand will decrease substantially. Add hybrid cars, more people switching to normal cars/motorcycles/transit, reducing airplane trips (Air Canada has reduced the number of flights to and fro the US + prohibitive tickets),... will give this mess a wicked multiplier effect as interest rates climb,... Add a terrorist attack of creative or massive proportion,... Add the bursting of that bubble,... I hedge my bets that we are not going to see tomorrow $200 a barrel (and if we are it is going to be very short-lived).

On the other hand, with stories like the following, who knows where things might go:

"With the appearance of a new haemorrhoid the cost for a barrel of oil is expected to rise another $1.22 per barrel although it's expect to drop once the swelling is down."

Where will it go? Where the sun shines no mor'?

The price of oil is high because of speculation and whoever said that the Enron traders have found a new place to dwell are not far from the truth. Enron wrote the book on driving up energy prices and this pattern is the same as that. There were no shortages then and there are no shortages now.

The fact is the worldwide demand is actually less than it was two years ago. I agree that it is projected to increase but it is not what is driving these prices. Oil is sold the same as most comodities. The only difference is that you don't actually have to take posession of it and you don't even have to use any of your own money.

What is incredibly interesting is how everyone here is speculating what the cause is depending on their particular political view and that my friends IS the problem. WE DON'T KNOW for sure because Bush gutted the SEC years ago and there is no one left who could tell us what the hel_l is going on.

Also there is a trading organization CIS that congress allowed (when no one was paying attention) that is outside the US regulatory authority and no one really knows what the hel_l their doing. I've seen numbers between 15% and 49% of the futures are being bought buy this group. Huge institutions are buying futures on margin as a hedge against the declining dollar and their are no margin limits. So the speculates are speculating what the other speculator will do with a rumor or a bit of bad news and there is no oversight

This administration wants this to happen because it creates a buzz of fear that we won't be able to drive to work and we won't be able to afford food and it is in that time of fear that there will be an election and guess what?

But the real reason for the price is BECAUSE THEY CAN it is as simple as that. Americans (I'm an American) have become sheep. They are so fat and lazy that they can't get off the couch to protest. The government can tell them anything (through the existing media) and they will believe it and even after they learn that they have been lied to they will do nothing.

Thank you!

I thought I was the only one thinking this (and reading this).

I feel more empathy than this about "Americans" or "Canadians" because as a European I can see how much advertising the average North-Am. will watch. There was an interesting study that I read a few years ago indicating that sweetness and the taste of fat are passed on (along with any other taste) to a breast-feeding baby, which does explain why NA love sweeter, say, chocolate than other people on earth, why a fat baby has fat parents. Now, it could be true that diet make people stupid (as TV does or underfunded schools or poor parents or drugs/smoking/alcohol or video games or absent parents or obsession on watching baseball for 3 hours eating pop-corn,...), but I digress!

Anyway, I totally agree with you that speculators are using the Enron loophole: http://www.closetheenronloophole.com/ and that is the main reason that is driving (pun intended) the price of gas! Anyone who believes that it is peak oil should know that that supply has increased VS demand (demand has decreased). Sorry to burst your speculative bubble!

I'm not an expert on Bangkok condo market, but everytime I read gleeful articles about new projects I have a feeling they are not for living but for speculation only.

Business is ok only as long as demand is rising, so they need to keep the bubble in the constant expansion stage, which is impossible.

They should rename Sukhumwit from "residential" to "speculation" area, no one can afford living their anymore.

Same here in Vancouver, Canada, where an estimate pegs 18,000 units being empty. In the MEANtime, we have hords of homeless people begging and sleeping in the street (and few shelters and affordable housing to speak of, of course).

Speculation is happening everywhere as the Baby Boomers are trying to put their nest eggs in a safe place and make it grow. Problem is that everything else (including eggs) is rising, negating the initial investments' gains, but I digress!

Great topic!

I am convinced that a lot of the crisis has to do with speculation because no matter how you look at things, it is not possible to make sense of the 20-fold price on commodities. Has the Chinese and Indian economy risen 20 times over the last 5 years. Are yoou kidding me? It is impossible!

Here are some of my source!

This one talks about supply being higher than demand.

Excerpt:

Tell me, how is it free when speculators rule the roost? It’s one thing when they do what they do with pieces of paper called stocks, but it’s another when they do it with a vital commodity like oil. We saw the devastation their behavior wrought in the 1990s, and we’re witnessing it again right now.

Moreover, it would be one thing if they were right and buying oil for all the right reasons. But they’re not.

Recently we saw crude oil supplies rise to a six-year high. Gasoline stockpiles were at a three-year high. Distillates have come back from a steep deficit to inventory levels that are now above where they were last year. Natural gas inventories reside well above their five-year average.

Yet prices go up and up and up.

Still not satisfied?

Okay, OPEC is producing at levels not seen since the early 1970s — and that doesn’t even include Iraq, which is struggling to achieve pre-Gulf War production levels, but will soon be there. Furthermore, global production still outpaces consumption, even accounting for China’s unsustainable economic growth rates.

In short, there is nothing in that equation that says oil should cost what it costs today. Nothing! With one exception — speculation.

The New York Mercantile Exchange is the preeminent energy futures market in the world. It has become the price-setting mechanism for oil. Even OPEC refers to NYMEX when it sets its price targets. Right now it costs exactly $3,375 for anyone to control 1000 barrels of crude oil valued at roughly $67,000. Three grand to control nearly seventy!

The NYMEX sets that margin requirement, or “good faith” deposit, based on a number of factors like volatility and price. Yet despite the fact that crude and gasoline prices have doubled in the past year the exchange has only raised the margin requirement once, and by a token amount. I might add. The reason I remember it so well is because I think I had something to do with it.

And this one about food speculation (one of the commodities that includes oil), which is essentially the same idea. This refers essentially to the pre-Enron and post-Enron situation.

And finally, something that the congress is trying to do about it.

Here is an excellent webpage on the history of what led to all this. Here is an excerpt:

In the early 1990s, Mr. West held a seat as a commissioner on the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, the U.S. regulator charged with overseeing trading in hundreds of staple items, from corn and wheat to oil and cotton. Mr. West was a lifelong Democrat; his boss, CFTC chair Wendy Gramm, was a devout Republican and a believer in the laissez-faire, free-market philosophy espoused by president Ronald Reagan, who once described her as his "favourite economist."

In the fall of 1990, the two clashed over the CFTC's response to a New York court decision involving a little-known Bermuda energy company called Transnor Ltd.

Long forgotten by most, Transnor paved the way for wide-ranging deregulation of commodities trading, an effort that helped to spur the rise of Enron Corp. and which has enabled the stampede of large fund speculators into food markets.

In the winter of 1986, Transnor filed suit against some of the world's largest oil companies, alleging that they manipulated prices on the Brent market, an informal oil trading system that at the time determined the daily price of oil.

At first, few paid attention to the lawsuit. That all changed on April 18, 1990, when Judge William Conner delivered a stunning ruling midway through the trial.

The case hinged on drawing a key distinction: Were the 15-day oil contracts that traded on the Brent market "forward contracts" or "futures contracts"?

In a forward contract, the buyer and seller agree to the price of a commodity and a fixed date for delivery. A farmer enters into a forward contract with a food company by promising to deliver a certain amount of grain on a certain date at a certain price. Lawmakers have shied away from regulating forward contracts under commodity trading laws because they are a fundamental part of how farmers and food companies do business — and each agreement is unique.

A futures contract is the same basic agreement, but it trades on an exchange, and the buyer rarely — if ever — takes delivery of the commodities. Instead, futures contracts are used mainly by farmers for hedging and by investors for speculating. These contracts have historically been regulated.

In the Brent case, the difference was crucial, since the Brent market contracts did not trade on any exchange and, in the U.S., were not regulated by the CFTC.

The oil companies, hoping to protect their cozy market, and avoid the red tape and transparency requirements of regulation, argued they were forward contracts.

Judge Conner ruled against the companies, effectively rendering all Brent trading in the U.S. illegal.

Within days, international oil companies stopped trading with U.S. companies and the entire Brent market was verging on collapse.

In Washington, oil industry lobbyists descended on the CFTC, seeking to get the regulator to mitigate Judge Conner's ruling. They found a receptive ear in Ms. Gramm, the commission chair. Ms. Gramm served as a director at the Office of Management and Budget, spearheading a variety of industry deregulation efforts before President Reagan placed her in charge of the CFTC in 1988.

She arrived with other political credentials: her husband, Phil, who is now a senior economic adviser to presidential candidate John McCain, was a Republican senator from Texas.

Even before the Transnor case, Ms. Gramm had started pursuing a deregulation agenda at the CFTC. A year earlier, in 1989, the commission quietly issued a policy statement on swap transactions, deals in which a buyer of commodities such as a pension fund acts through a middleman or a swap dealer — usually a bank. The CFTC declared that it wouldn't regulate swap dealers.

The Transnor case represented another crucial win for financial speculators such as swap dealers. When the court decision was handed down, Ms. Gramm moved quickly to soften the blow to the energy sector, and turned the Transnor decision from an obscure footnote in the history of oil trading into a critical launching pad for a wide-ranging redrawing of the rules of commodities markets.

On Sept. 25, 1990, a policy confirming that the Brent contracts were forward contracts — and therefore, outside the scope of CFTC regulation — was put to a vote among CFTC commissioners.

It passed 3 to 1.

Ms. Gramm faced one vocal critic in her push to keep the Brent market unregulated: Fowler West, the lone 'no' vote.

"It was the way we were doing it, the speed with which we were doing it," Mr. West recalled in an interview. "It was that kind of an attitude that did open the door up for a lot of problems."

Ms. Gramm defends the CFTC's actions, and says the commission faced pressure from Congress to act. Senior CFTC staff, as well as a majority of commissioners, agreed with the interpretation concerning forward contracts, she noted.

"I don't think it was done too quickly," Ms. Gramm, who now chairs the Regulatory Studies Program at George Mason University's Mercatus Center, told The Globe and Mail in an interview.

Mr. West, meanwhile, wasn't merely outvoted. He was muzzled.

Although he wrote an official dissent after the vote, Ms. Gramm and the other commissioners blocked his views from being published in the CFTC's official record.

Furious, Mr. West retaliated by voicing his concern about the CFTC's moves to the New York State Bar Association. The regulator, he told the lawyers' group, "may soon be paying a price for its politically expedient statutory interpretation. I doubt that its new forward contract exemption can be restricted to large international oil and trading firms represented by influential lawyers."

He concluded with an ominous warning: "The public, down the road, will suffer from this fit of deregulation, no matter how well intentioned."

I am no engineer. But I understand that technologically, most of the proposed replacements for fossil fuel are still - after decades of development - not yet ready for prime time. It is now prime time. The four-stroke engine is a monstrosity of complexity, and the diesel and two strokes are not much simpler. Yet they account for almost all the power units in the world, based on over 100 years of careful development. Even the rotary engine has not advanced much in its 45 years since Dr. Wankel's invention went into an NSU car. You need to replace hundreds of millions of engines from ship powerplants to weed-whackers, and we are not anywhere near that. You cannot move a supertanker or a container ship across the ocean by wind and solar power.

Totally agreeing with PB. Inventing a technology and mass producing it take time. If capitalism works (and it usually does), lots of company (and the share-holders) will not want to be left on the sideline! It is troubling though that the Canadian Tar Sands are being developped to the degree they are, but maybe this does prove the point that we are going to need oil, maybe less than we used to. However, is it a sign that oil companies know something we don't know.

BTW, laws have been passes recently (May) and will be being passed in the US (and hopefully other countries) to restrict the Enron-type loopholes that are allowing the speculators to play with food prices, oil prices, and other commodities for their pension funds customers, to offset the huge loss of revenues caused by bad loans (banks),... It is not going to be easy, but it will happen!

Ralph Nader: “Oil was at $50 a barrel in January 2007, then $75 a barrel in August 2007. Now at $130 or so a barrel, it is clear that oil pricing is speculative activity, having very little to do with physical supply and demand. An essential product—petroleum—is set by speculators operating on rumor, greed, and fear of wild predictions. “

Most of this (as much as 60%) is about SPECULATION.

Peak Oil means that there is about 20 to 30 years of cheap oil left (and possibly more because consumption is going to go down with the more economical cars [hybrid/diesel]/more motorcycle use, and people changing their habits). Is there anyone here who believes that in 20 to 30 years we will NOT have electric cars?

Peak Oil doesn't mean cheap oil for 20 - 30 years, cheap oil is already long gone, haven't you noticed? There in no sign that consumption will decrease, it's the opposite. Increasing oil demand means if the US switched to hybrids today, it would only reduce consumption for a few years.

Peak Oil means a peak in supply, after which supply it drops. There are those who believe we've already reached it, others say it will happen around 2010, while some say it'll go for another 20 yrs. Demand is more likely to increase than decrease, so prices will skyrocket. The result could be severe economic depression, war, famine. Oil is used for almost everything, if there is a major drop in supply the world cannot support anywhere near 6 billion ppl.

This all may sound crazy, but those who accurately predicted peak oil in Texas were also laughed at. The bottom line is the faster we move towards alternatives the better off we'll be.

If we wait too long, there may not be enough oil for us to happily drive around in our electric cars!

So, you are saying that the Saudis, Koweitis,... do NOT have now cheap oil anymore? The tap is closed? They have had to change their extraction ways? Must

Your comment is NOT supported by the data! (Peak Oil debunked): "[...] at the moment, the "demand is overshooting supply" theory looks pretty unlikely as an explanation of the feverish price behavior in April." There is a whole lot more explanations on that site.

"Some commentators, such as economist Michael Lynch, say that the Hubbert Peak theory is flawed and that there is no imminent peak in oil production; a view sometimes referred to as "cornucopian" by believers in Hubbert Peak Theory. Lynch argued in 2004 that production is determined by demand as well as geology, and that fluctuations in oil supply are due to political and economic effects as well as the physical processes of exploration, discovery and production.^[102] This idea is echoed by Jad Mouawad, who explains that as oil prices rise, new extraction technologies become viable, thus expanding the total recoverable oil reserves. This, according to Mouwad, is one explanation of the changes in peak production estimates.^{[101]" (Wikipedia)}

So, all you have to do if you are producing oil is to reduce the production of oil compare to the demand and create a crisis. Then, buy lots of stock futures and see them rise, rise, rise,... And since you have command of the production, you have command of the stock prices. But, believe whom you like. There are many factors that UNDENIABLY prove that a good portion of the rise of oil prices is speculative in nature. Of course, if you are speculator, why would you not dispute that point! PLease supply counter-arguments with FACTS.

Demand is not likely to increase at those prices. That is such an illogical statement. It is economics 101. Demand will go down or level off as people sell they SUVs and reduce, reuse, and recycle,... Hybrids are already being sold by many manufacturers. Green technology is selling and all of this will reduce demand.

"The faster we move to alternatives?" Presently, the speculating bubble in MANY commodities and for the most part are creating people to DIE of starvation or to go starving. Does this trump that? Do you care? This sounds like an extremist statement and extremism is almost never based on logic or facts, but passion. Use facts.

its hyundai guys and not hyunday

I knew something was wrong, but I just could not put my finger on it! Thanks!

Speaking of which, ... it is "it's" ... not "its" ... !

I can dai ... I mean ... die now in peace with myself !

I'm trying to find info (including maps) about some public bus routes in CM. The CM public transport website seems helpful but I can't read it. I'd appreciate if someone can help me with routes 11, 12 and 13.

http://www.chiangmaibus.com/index.php?click=way

Are the above routes running or are they proposed routes? Every description I've seen of CM's bus routes only goes through route 10. Also, can anyone tell me which of these routes are operated by songthaew and which are operated by white buses?

I would appreciate any help I can get! Thanks.

That's a great initiative!

I will ask my GF and let you know.

There are lots of CRDI engines here in Kias

Are you saying that they are selling Kias with that kind of an engine in LOS? How does consumption compare with the Hyunday mentioned, for instance?

Thanks.

There are three segments in Thailand - Corolla is "medium" size, there's also Civic in this class, Together they have something like have 90% market share. The rest is divided between cars like Ford Focus, Mazda 3, Mitsubishi Lancer and new Nissan Tiida (it's a bit smaller, though) but their sales are staticstically insignificant.

The most popular is the smaller segment - Toyota Vios/Yaris and Honda Jazz/City. Yaris and Jazz are hutchbacks. There's also Chevrolet Aveo. Vios is Thailand's best selling car ever.

Bigger cars (medium in the US) are shared between Camry, Accord, and Nissan Tiana.

Toyotas and Hondas hold value very well here.

Later this year Hyunday will reenter the market with Sonata. It remains to be seen if it can survive against Japanese comptetition.

I hope they sell that very economical car the Hyunday i30 CRDi : about 4.7 L/100 km. (Review)

YONTRAKIT BMW!!!!

They <deleted> gave me my car (BMW 7-series) back without my engine cover. Noticed when I got home. Freakin huge V8 plastic engine cover and they say they couldn't find it. Took them 3 MONTHS to get me a new (i.e. used) one with scratches on it). They said it couldn't have been stolen by the mechanics because they check everyday before they leave. Well, then where the hel_l was my engine cover? Bastards. I think I made a death threat somewhere in there before they got me my new one. Still thinking bout going thru with it too.

This is the one behind Chula near the Yontrakit Peugeot service center, which I'm sure is equally brutal.

Could you please let me know why you felt necessary to mention that it was a BMW 7 series? If the cost of a cover makes you hit the roof, maybe you could sell you 7 series and buy a 5 or 3 series and then not get too upset about buying the cover (which was probably stolen from a mechanic (allegedly, of course) who probably drives a motorcycle! Alternatively, if you still want people to know that this is a 7 series, just buy a cheap car and change the emblem!

Most of this (as much as 60%) is about SPECULATION.

Peak Oil means that there is about 20 to 30 years of cheap oil left (and possibly more because consumption is going to go down with the more economical cars [hybrid/diesel]/more motorcycle use, and people changing their habits). Is there anyone here who believes that in 20 to 30 years we will NOT have electric cars?

Most of this spike on oil and commodities in due to SPECULATION.

Google Enron, speculation+oil.

People keep saying this because of peak oil, us driving SUV's, rising demand from India and china. Well take a look at the chart on CBC. The US is still the largest consumer of oil by far. These reasons where there 3-4 years ago too. But why the huge prices now?

-The Enron Loophole - 'over the counter electronic exchanges' became exempt from regulatory oversight by the CFTC with the "Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000" (keep in mind that the CFTC is suppose to make sure there isn't speculation at play and prices reflect supply and demand, but can't do that job if they don't have oversight)

- In January 2006, CFTC permitted the Intercontinental Exchange (ICE), which basically meant that US commodities could be trading on the London exchange and not be subject to CFTC oversight. (Congress may have just recently 'plugged' this loophole)

- Large Wall street Banks are desperate for profits following the collapse in their earnings since August 2007 and the US real estate crisis, oil is one of the best ways for them to get huge speculative gains. They are pouring billions in commodities. Apparently there are no 'limits' when it comes to wall street banks buying commodities. It also take little leverage to 'buy' these futures.

Is it a coincidence that the huge price in oil seems to coincide with all these deregulations and following the housing crisis? I think not.

It all goes back to the same 'people'; wall street & international banksters.

And of course they want you to think its all your fault. That it is hurricane this and earthquake that. That it is Peak Oil! Why not? Banks and investors are making a killing!

Thats not to say we shouldn't be conserving anyway, but this speculation effects food commodities and poor countries as well. Peoples lives are at risk.

Could not have more pleased in LOS!

After having an appendicits misdiagnosed 2 times in Canada and almost dying when it was ready to burst the 3rd time, the midnight visit to a semi private hospital in Chiang Mai (Ram) when a doctor on a Saturday night came especially for me to check what was wrong left me with no hesitation to be recommending LOS, even though a previous ACL operation experience was one of the best experiences I had and this one was in Canada. I guess I would need to go through many operations in both countries to know for sure! But, I will let the law of statistics to help me reach the proper conclusion, assuming the suvey is accurate.

Thanks for putting the time to make this survey. Very instructive!

Please take one vote from the USA, as it was the closest option!

Welcome to the real world.

Butter went up by 60% on 1 March,not just the Allowrie, but all of them. Tesco, BigC and all the other shops hit us with that one all at once.

Most food prices have increased, a lot of the imported stuff has exceeded the "normal inflation", rice has done some interesting things at the cash register as has sugar (5B a kilo last week or so by government decree).

Guess we should blame some-one, so to start with I'll suggest we look at

1. the oil producers,
   
2. the folk who are replacing food crops with "bio-fuel" crops because of the fuel prices,
   
3. the weather as it has has had a effect on the global production of almost everything,
   
4. don't forget global warming which is tied into all of the previously mentioned items to blame.
   
5. better include the hole in th ozone layer too.
   
6. coups and the effect of indecisive governments on the economy
   

I'm sure I missed a few but it is a good start

Actually, it would seem that --indirectly-- WE are all a little bit responsible for all of this. Do you get a pension? Do you have mutual funds or index funds,...?

Check this out and spread the news because what is happening is INHO a crime, even though I have a pension manager probably heavily invested in those mutual funds!

EXCERPT from a Globe and Mail article (1) (Canada)

(Make sure you read the whole article. It is really interesting!)

(Make sure you read also about the Enron crisis, because they certainly were famous for using and giving some people the idea of using these vile speculative practices. It would seem many people are and will be playing the ... price for this [just like the Enron's share-holders who got taken to the cleaners].)

"The record escalation of food prices has played havoc with every link in the food chain, from grain merchants to futures markets, from publicly traded food companies to consumers. Producers such as Mr. Giessel now find themselves on the front line of a mushrooming global crisis, one that has sparked violent protests in some of the world's poorest countries, prompting aid agencies to warn of a pending humanitarian catastrophe.

In the search for answers, pundits have attempted to pin the blame on the usual suspects: rising demand from China and India, bad crop conditions and booming ethanol production.

Yet one major culprit behind these gyrating markets and unprecedented price spikes has been largely overlooked: the deep-pocketed pension and index funds upon which most Canadians and Americans depend for their retirements.

These funds have plowed hundreds of billions of dollars into agricultural commodities as a way to diversify their assets and improve returns for their investors.

The amount of fund money invested in commodity indexes has climbed from just $13-billion (U.S.) in 2003 to a staggering $260-billion in March, 2008, according to calculations based on regulatory filings.

Michael Masters, a veteran U.S. hedge fund manager, warned a Senate hearing this month that this number could easily quadruple to $1-trillion, if pension funds allocate a greater portion of their portfolio to commodities, as some consultants suggest they are poised to do. Because agricultural markets are small — relative to stock markets — the amount of cash pouring in gives these funds substantial clout.

Mr. Masters estimated that that these big institutional investors control enough wheat futures to supply the needs of American consumers for the next two years, and blamed the "demand shock" from these recent entrants to the commodities markets as arguably the primary factor behind the sudden take-off in food prices.

"If immediate action is not taken, food and energy prices will rise higher still," he told the hearing. "This could have catastrophic economic effects on millions of already stressed U.S. consumers. It literally could mean starvation for millions of the world's poor."

The massive influx of cash has only occurred in the past few years. But its roots stretch back to the Reagan era, when a court battle over oil price manipulation set off a domino effect that would ultimately transform the arcane world of commodities trading.

Beginning with the energy market, regulators made a series of far-reaching decisions that gradually loosened oversight of complex commodity derivatives and created loopholes for large speculators, allowing them to trade virtually unlimited amounts of corn, wheat and other food futures.

Only now, nearly two decades later, are the full consequences of those decisions being felt."

http://' target="_blank">

"I know for a fact that at least some of the manufacturers use lower grade parts on Thai cars." (groovyc)

Can you ask then to buy a car made in Japan?

BTW, my Acura (made in Canada) has had one light bulb that I had to replace and that's it ... in 10 years/100 km! You win some; you lose some!

Even though it is true that a lot of parents choosing home schooling have a religious agenda, not all of them do. Let's keep this in mind.

I think that a well-rounded educator (and/or a parent who is willing to research current educational practices) could educate a child better and faster as the child would be receiving one-on-one help, which --we know-- is much more efficient.

In terms of social development, it could occur by way of sport or club activities.

Home schooling is likely to be seen by unions and teachers as a threat.

QUESTION:

Are there laws in Thailand that force a child to go to school? If a child did not go to school, what are the implications (if any) should this student wish to go to university. I would assume that they would need to show that they can handle courses. How would they be tested? Is there a website that indicates what needs to take place?

In my country, ...

The school principal shall offer to the homeschooled child or the parents free of charge:

evaluation and assessment services sufficient to determine the educational progress achieved by the child in relation to students of similar age and ability, and

the loan of educational resource materials that are authorized and recommended by the Minister, and which, in the board's opinion, are sufficient to enable the child to pursue his or her educational program, and

the parent and/or homeschooled child is free to accept or reject evaluation/assessment services or the loan of learning resource materials that have been offered by the school, and

the school has no authority to approve or supervise the educational program of a homeschooled child, and

parents may educate their children at home, but they must provide each school-age child with an "educational program", and

the child does not get a grade 12 completion certificate.

All batteries have a limited lifespan, my laptop's one died in less than 2 years and I have found a replacement on internet very easily.

If you laptop brand is mainstream, and if it is not too old, you may find one in some computer shop.

It also seems that leaving the AC charger connected all the time is not very good, better remove the battery if you are home and using main....

Phil

I agree! Remove the battery if you are at home and don't need it!

I also think it is important to potect your computer from surges and such, by using a UPS or a very good bar that filters out the surges.

Defragment your HD every 6 months.

Do not move the laptop when it is running or bump into it. I had an old P1 destop running for 10 years until a few months after I transported by car somewhere the original HD died on me. Coincidence? I don't think so.

Use free anti-spyware programs that will prevent spyware to slow down your computer.

My Toshiba Satellite (2 y.) has been a very good buy so far, with XP and 1 gb of ram.

This extraordinary article from a courageous BBC reporter inside Burma elucidates partly (I guess) why there are sometimes forest fires in the North (as we can extrapolate Thai farmers might do the same for the same reasons than the Karne people do it). In this case, this is taking place in Burma, near Thailand. Of course this article is more about the war between the Karens and the Burmese government. (It could be posted as well in the Asian forum, but I think it is important that it stays here as it is relevant to Chiang Mai because of the pollution that occurs in March and April.)

Burmese farmers face flood threat

By Nessa Tierney

One Planet, BBC World Service

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7363778.stm

With dense green forests on both banks, and a clear blue sky overhead, the Salween River is peaceful when the motor of our long, narrow boat is switched off.

This river is the main artery of Karen State in eastern Burma, and an almost completely unspoilt, incredibly biodiverse environment.

We see little traffic on our journey; a couple of other wooden boats carrying goods, and one with a cargo of buffalo that my guide says are being smuggled from deep inside Burma for sale in Thailand. The peace, however, is deceptive, as this area is essentially a war zone.

I have crossed into Burma illegally from Thailand because the repressive Burmese regime does not grant visas to foreign journalists.

The authorities certainly do not want the outside world to have access to Karen State, a division of Burma that borders Thailand.

Nature's role

The Karen opposition forces have been fighting for self-determination against the government for almost 60 years.

They have few areas of control left; the Burmese military regularly launch attacks on villages in an attempt to force people to relocate to Burmese-controlled areas.

Estimates say hundreds of thousands of Karen have been displaced. Many hide in the jungle; up to 200,000 have made their way across the border to refugee camps in Thailand. Others find relative and temporary safety in camps in Karen State set up by the Karen National Union (KNU), the political wing of the opposition.

These displaced people bring reports of human rights abuses by the Burmese army: rape, torture and forced labour.

I met Paw Wah in a refugee camp beside the Salween River.

"They tied my husband to a tree, with a rope," she told me, "then they beat him. He is still vomiting blood.

"They said he was helping the KNU soldiers, but this wasn't true".

The area's natural environment plays an important role in the conflict. The Karen have a unique way of managing their resources, especially their forests. They practise a form of rotational farming which involves burning areas of forest for planting. They hunt wild animals and gather plants for food and medicine.