.png.3b3332cc2256ad0edbc2fe9404feeef0.png)
quadricorrelator
-
Posts
179 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Downloads
Posts posted by quadricorrelator
-
-
Eventually the casino accountants will move Khun Suchart's account receivable to Bad Debt Expense in the ledger. The bad debt can then be written off against income thus lowering the casino's tax liability. K. Suchart may wind up cheating the citizens of the State of Nevada out of tax revenue.
This is fascinating. It's true that the casino lent money to the gambler, but no money really left the casino so it didn't actually lose any money. However, for tax purposes, they can say they lost 4 million dollars, so their bottom line increases as a result of this.
Is this correct?
How much will their taxes decrease as a result of this write off?
I probably don't understand tax law, business, gambling. But, it seems like this is a tax loophole to me. My thinking is this: If the casino actually gave the guy money, and they lost the money from their business, then it would be fair to write it off. But, no money left their bank.
It does not seem the same as if they actually have less money now.
You're confused because the casino is wearing two hats. They're acting as loan agent and casino.
Example. I borrow 10,000 from a bank and lose it in a casino. I don't repay the loan.
The bank is out 10,000.
I borrow 10,000 from a casino. I lose it in the same casino. I don't repay the loan. The 'loan' side of the casino is out 10,000.
OR put another way......if I HAD REPAYED THE LOAN the casino would have 10,000 more.
Once a loan is made......if it's not paid back.....it's a 'bad debt' write-off. It does not matter where the money loaned went.
I think I understand what you are saying.
What is to stop anyone from doing this? A person could have two businesses. He could make a loan from one to the other, but then not repay it. Could he then declare a tax loss on the loan business? Does the company that received the loan have to pay taxes on the loan? If so, that would kill this plan.
If fact, he could also make a loan from the second business to the first business. The businesses could loan each other money, but default on all the loans.
-
Eventually the casino accountants will move Khun Suchart's account receivable to Bad Debt Expense in the ledger. The bad debt can then be written off against income thus lowering the casino's tax liability. K. Suchart may wind up cheating the citizens of the State of Nevada out of tax revenue.
This is fascinating. It's true that the casino lent money to the gambler, but no money really left the casino so it didn't actually lose any money. However, for tax purposes, they can say they lost 4 million dollars, so their bottom line increases as a result of this.
Is this correct?
How much will their taxes decrease as a result of this write off?
I probably don't understand tax law, business, gambling. But, it seems like this is a tax loophole to me. My thinking is this: If the casino actually gave the guy money, and they lost the money from their business, then it would be fair to write it off. But, no money left their bank.
It does not seem the same as if they actually have less money now.
-
I used to count cards in vegas using a level-one point count system. Later I got a good job and quit counting as counting cards is much like a job itself. After I retired I was going to get back into counting (after being away from counting for over 15 years). I went to the 'Gamblers Book Club' to check out if things had changed as far as counting systems. WOW HAD THEY.! The systems now are easier to use/learn and the % return is greater!
I just couldn't get into it though. Didn't really need the money and casinos don't hold a fascination for me. Moved to Thailand instead.
The bas_tards murdered the greatest counter of all time....Ken Uston.....RIP.
I never heard of Ken Uston, but just looked him up. He seemed to have been an incredible person who was highly successful at a traditional career, but gave it all up because of his interest in gambling and card counting. It said he died under mysterious circumstances of a heart attack in a hotel.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ken_Uston
"Uston was accepted to and began attending Yale University at the age of 16 years. After graduating from Yale, he later earned an MBA from Harvard University. After moving to San Francisco, California he quickly climbed the corporate ladder to become the youngest Senior Vice-President in the history of the Pacific Stock Exchange.[citation needed]"
-
It's a sad, sad day for Vegas when the accountants took over running the show and the Mafia was edged out.
If they were still running Ceasar's Palace like the old days, good ol' Suchart never would have made it out of town... and for trying to skip out, they'd have busted both knee caps, knocked out his teeth, and shoved unmentionable items into his unmentionable places.
But now that Disneyland types and accountants run the show... they file a legal claim against him in the courts.
btw, unpaid marker by Nevada law is the same as bouncing a check...
btw part II, Suchart is Managing Director of a Travel Agency and a member of Thailand Travel Agents Association as listed here:
http://www.ttaa.or.th/member/member_ordinary.htm
good luck hiding out and finding refuge here.... his "odds" are at least better these days...
the Mafia of old would put a hit out on him, regardless of where he ran off to.
The old thugs are all rolling over in their graves.
Apparently, card counters still get roughed up by Casino security, even though card counting is legal. There was a documentary called "The Hot Shoe" about a card counting (this particular group originated at MIT where they have a club, I knew one of the guys from one of my classes. He gave up engineering for card counting). One of the card counters got physically beaten. When interviewed, he advised, "Call the Las Vegas police if you are detained for card counting. Whatever you do, don't let them take you in the back room."
Some of the clips from the movie are here:
-
This incident won't hurt the casino's profitability because they never actually gave out any money. No money left the casino. It has the same financial effect as playing with monopoly money. There are other side effects from damaged casino reputation, but this incident doesn't seem to hurt the casino's bottom line in the short run.
I don't know how the casino made the decision to loan him the money. I imagine they had the impression he had the capability and integrity to pay back the money. He must have convinced them he was wealthy and reliable. I don't think the casino would loan 4 million dollars to just anyone. I am curious to know how he gained their confidence. I am also curious to know if he has a criminal history.
I guess it's bad for the casino because there is nothing to stop foreigners from gambling, taking the money if they win, but skipping town if they lose. There is no down side for a foreign gambler. Even if you won at a low odds game a single time, you would win a lot of money if your initial bet was 4 million. You could go from casino to casino, winning about 50% of the time (if you choose the right type of game).
The article says that the casino is taking a calculated risk. Perhaps they know (from experience) how many people skip out, but how much they gain from this approach (of lending out money). In the end, then may decide that they win more than they lose with this approach.
The casino may try to stop this type of crime, but evidently, it doesn't bother them too much because they continue to loan out money. They must make more money than they lose.
Even if the casino doesn't get payed back, it doesn't hurt them too much since they aren't giving out any money. There is only an upside for the casino. If they lose, they don't lose anything, but it they win, there is a known probability they will get paid quite a bit.
-
BANGKOK: -- The total number of expatriates with work permits in Bangkok has increased by almost 9,000 in the last year,
This news article gives enough information to allow several calculations.I conclude the following:
1. There are 65,250 foreigners with work permits in Thailand
The article tell us about Bangkok, not Thailand.
I have not had time to check the calculations in the rest of your post. Probably OK!
Thank you for the correction.
Based on your correction I conclude that between .5% and 1% of the Bangkok population consists of foreigners with work permits.
-
This news article gives enough information to allow several calculations.
I conclude the following:
1. There are 65,250 foreigners with work permits in Thailand
2. 14,355 of these foreigners with work permits are Japanese
3. If the rate of increase remains at 16%, then the number of foreigners with work permits will double every 4.5 years. In that case Thailand would have 130,000 foreigners with work permits in 2011. This is about .2% of the total population, but about 1.5% of the population of Bangkok.
4. The increase in foreigners with work permits is far outpacing the Thai population growth. This means that the ratio of Thais to foreigners with work permits will decrease, if the rate of increase of foreigners with work permits remains constant.
Calculations follow.
1.
If an increase in 9000 work permits corresponds to a 16% increase in work permits, then we can find the total number of work permits by the following:
(work permits this year - work permits last year)/(work permits last year) = .16
=> 9000/(work permits last year) = .16
=> work permits last year = 9000/.16 = 56,250
=> work permits this year = work permits last year + yearly increase = 65,250
2.
We can also calculate the number of Japanese with work permits since the article states that 22% of the foreigners with work permits are Japanese.
Number of Japanese with work permits is .22*65350 = 15355
3. Rule of 72 gives the number of years to double at the existing growth rate
4.5 = 72/16
-
Conditions in Thailand seem to change quickly and unpredictably. It seems to make the future precarious for some of us.
These recent changes make me wonder if there will be future rule tightening in other areas. I wonder if they could make it more difficult to get a retirement visa by changing the retirement age to 55 or increasing the amount of money needed, etc. etc. There could be all kinds of other changes as well.
I believe that the Thai government makes policy changes because they feel it is in the best interest of the country. Any change, even a very good one, will cause some pain for some groups of people. Good policy makers try to minimize the pain, but they are focused on improving the lives of the greatest number of people, and in improving the country's future prospects.
A few groups are always going to get hurt, but supposedly this is necessary for the greater good.
I realize that no policy making process is pure or free from individual self-serving politics, but overall, I believe that policy makers are trying to help the country.
On the positive side, I have to wonder if the tightening of regulations in immigration, land ownership, etc. have come about because Thailand has advanced to a point where they can afford/need more controls and organization.
-q
-
T,
I am sorry things worked out this way for you. It seems like you are handling this as well as anyone could handle this difficult situation, and you are doing all the right things.
May I offer a possible way to extricate yourself from this?
If you can afford to walk away without ever seeing her again, then that might be the safest way. You could do the following once your are absolutely sure you want to end it:
1. Close out your joint bank accounts immediately.
2. Tell your girlfriend/wife that you have fallen in love with someone else in your home country and that you won't be coming back to Thailand. Apologize, etc. Leave no wiggle room. It's over.
This accomplishes the following:
1. It leaves no room for hope for your girlfriend/wife.
2. It explains why you aren't ever going to see her again.
3. It prevents her from trying to come after you because you are too far away.
4. It reduces the chances she will try to track you down in Thailand because she thinks your life is in your home country, so she won't look for you in Thailand.
5. It protects Meow.
6. It avoids emotional scenes and hysterics.
7. It ends the situation quickly and decisively so you can start to take care of yourself and recover without interruptions or setbacks.
This plan involves telling a lie, and that might not be for you. But, this lie may be justifiable if it helps protect your life.
-q
-
I have had books shipped from Amazon on at least 10 different occasions. I never had a problem with books getting lost or damaged. Customs never charged a fee either.
I believe Amazon used UPS or Fedex so the package location can be tracked over the internet. In fact, the last leg of the delivery was by motorcycle courier. I knew to within the hour when to expect the package.
I think it took about three for four days for the books to arrive. I used expedited shipping and they added 25% to the cost of the books for this.
I think it might be a good idea to order the books as soon as you know which ones you will need. If you have problems, then you may have to re-order and that will also take time.
If you don't use expedited shipping Amazon may quote eight weeks for the delivery time.
If you already own the books, you could still use Fedex or UPS, but I don't know what the cost would be.
-q
-
I understand the desire to share our good fortune with others. I am certain that it is wonderful when a person's level of financial security improves so that 1) the level of financial worry significantly decreases, 2) and the freedom to pursue their interests increases. This is a very meaningful change for a person.
Unfortunately, it appears that there can be a cost to sharing knowledge of our good fortune with others because it can be disturbing and upsetting for those who are less fortunate.
My view, is that the disclosure of financial information often creates feelings of jealousy, envy, and resentment. This can cause people to grow further apart, rather than closer together. These kinds of discussions can bring out the worst in people.
Given any two people, one person will almost always be better off than the other. It is easy for one person to feel bad.
Disclosure of financial information seems to create unnecessary risk, and does not seem to offer much significant benefit. I don't think that the exchange of financial knowledge will change how much people like each other, but it may interfere with their friendship.
-q
-
I miss:
1. Fresh air
2. A more extensive math/physics/electronics library and access to purchasing books more cheaply and reliably.
3. A lower level of paranoia
4. Lower noise level
I cope in the following ways:
1. I live with the polluted air
2. I brought much of my library with me, sometimes order through Amazon, and sometimes I can find books at the Chula bookstore.
3. I live with my increased level of paranoia. I tend to isolate myself to deal with this problem.
4. I live with the higher noise level, but carry ear plugs with me most of the time.
I think I am isolated from the Thai community because I fear deeper involvement with most Thai people (but also with many foreigners as well). But, at the same time, it keeps me out of emotional trouble. Back home, I would be in constant danger of engaging in meaningful relationships. Eventually, I would give into temptation and wind up in all kinds of trouble. In that case, I would have emotionally traumatic episodes whose damaging effects would last for years, and it would distract me from accomplishing anything. In this environment, I am relatively unemcumbered by emotional distractions so I can pursue my interests more effectively.
-q
-
I think there are indirect ways that the marriage decision can have a significant financial opportunity cost/benefit.
For example, a married man may have less time to develop his career and finances because he wants to spend time with his wife. A single man has more flexibility with his time. He can work late at night without problems etc.
In some marriages, the conflicts and crises between partners can be so distracting that the man becomes less effective at his work.
I think both of these effects compound with interest (over time). A single man might pull far ahead of where he would have been, had he got married.
But, sometimes, a marriage can help the financial situation. Some men have better careers if they are married for many reasons. For example, some men have more work distraction problems if they are single. They may be distracted by loneliness, depression, or spend excessive time going out trying to fill a need. Or, he may just function better at work, if he is married to the right woman.
There are many possibilities in my opinion.
I think the financial opportunity cost/benefit depends on the individual. In my case, my best guess, is that a marriage would have come at a great finance opportunity cost. There is no way I can know for sure because I can only run the experiment once.
I still might get married in the future, but I don't know.
-q
It has been a few years since I worked in a corporate environment as I opted to start my own business after countless corporate frustrations. But I can remember working for Holiday Inns and being told by my boss if I wanted to move out of hotel management and be a corporate VP I had to be married. He said in no uncertain terms that regardless of my performance if I was not married I would never climb the next step of the ladder.
In America another large reason to get married is health insurance which in most cases will not include a live in but does include a wife. In all of my marriages my spouse was a big negative in my work performance. My work caused one divorce and was a contributing factor in one other divorce.
If my current Thai lady were to insist on marriage I think it would be a deal breaker for me.
Every time I get married the next day I wake up with a women I have never met before (I don’t mean any dalliance here).
Maybe it is just my bad luck or bad choice of partners but the woman I asked to marry me never turned out to be the same woman I married.
I have never married a woman that I have not lived with for at least one year. I figured I had a reasonably good idea of what the relationship would be like after marriage but in each case I was completely wrong.
Hi kerryk,
I am fascinated by the idea that the relationship changes as soon as the marriage committment is made. I am amazed that things can change so quickly, even after you knew the ladies for over a year. How can this happen?
Do you think the women were hiding a part of themselves until they accomplished their goal of marrying you?
Six years ago, I had a girlfriend whom I thought about marrying. She had already been married twice. She said that both times, her feelings changed towards the man as soon as the marriage was legally completed. Her feelings changed immediately after the marriage. Of course this frightened me.
My younger sister had a similar experience. She had a boyfriend for two years. As soon as they moved in together, he became very controlling. This personality trait was not exposed until they moved in together.
How can we ever be sure?
At the time I was considering marriage (six years ago), I felt that I had two bad choices, and I had decide which was the least bad. I predicted that if I married my girlfriend I would wind up broke and lonely in five years. But, if I didn't marry her, then I would only be lonely. So, I decided not to marry her (actually the decision was not quite as I am describing, the decision was probably more based on my various fears than rational thinking).
It was very difficult to break off the relationship because I loved her. But, I was afraid of many things. One of my fears was that her feelings towards me would change. I had the sense she would become more demanding. I worried that there would be conflicts in spending philosophy. I felt she might have been hiding parts of herself.
I was also worried about all of these things occurring in my own personality as well. I am not sure I know myself well enough to predict my own long term response to a marriage.
-q
-
I think there are indirect ways that the marriage decision can have a significant financial opportunity cost/benefit.
For example, a married man may have less time to develop his career and finances because he wants to spend time with his wife. A single man has more flexibility with his time. He can work late at night without problems etc.
In some marriages, the conflicts and crises between partners can be so distracting that the man becomes less effective at his work.
I think both of these effects compound with interest (over time). A single man might pull far ahead of where he would have been, had he got married.
But, sometimes, a marriage can help the financial situation. Some men have better careers if they are married for many reasons. For example, some men have more work distraction problems if they are single. They may be distracted by loneliness, depression, or spend excessive time going out trying to fill a need. Or, he may just function better at work, if he is married to the right woman.
There are many possibilities in my opinion.
I think the financial opportunity cost/benefit depends on the individual. In my case, my best guess, is that a marriage would have come at a great finance opportunity cost. There is no way I can know for sure because I can only run the experiment once.
I still might get married in the future, but I don't know.
-q
-
What would the cost be for a student with a typical load (I assume that would be four or five courses) in a typical field (science or humanties)?
Do the universities charge by the course?
Yes, I am talking about Thais taking Thai classes (not international).
Thanks,
-q
-
What is the tuition (undergraduate) for the following universities?
Which ones are public and which are private?
Mahidol
Chula
Thammasat
Kasetsart
Assumption
Thanks,
-q
-
Quadricorrelator,
I think you are very close to being correct here although I haven't checked your actual numbers yet....maybe I'll look on the internet for a statistics site to see if I can verify them. I would like to point out that a population with a mean of 85 and a std. dev of 15 will not have the same shape as a population with a mean of 100 and a std. dev of 15 because 15 is bigger relative to 85 than it is to 100. If you want the bell curves to have the same shape then you need to have a mean of 85 and a std. dev. of approximately 12 (85%of 15) to compare with a mean of 100 and a std. dev. of 15. I am not a statistician but I'm reasonably sure that this is correct....not absolutely sure.
Chownah
P.S. There is another factor to consider....since IQ's are only allowed from 0 to 200 then if the mean is not exactly 100 then there is a bias which would, even in theory mean that a distribution based on a mean other than 100 would not be symmetrical and therefore not bell shaped. Another confounding factor is that it is difficult to measure IQ's of less than 20 since this would indicate animal like behavior I guess....but of course we are discussing a scenario with a well defined mathematical distribution and not a totally realistic one.
Chownah
Hi Chownah,
Thank you for your correction on the calculation. If you go from three standard deviations to four standard deviations then the numbers goes from .00135 to .000032. I believe that ratio should be 42. It would be necessary to go to an IQ of 145 before the IQ density difference became that severe.
I will be curious to hear of any information you learn. I will try to do some research as well.
At this time my thinking is that the standard deviation does not need to be scaled with the mean to keep the same shape. Please let me give my explanation: The Bell curve formula is K2 * e-( IQ - MEAN)^2/K2. K1 and K2 are constants which depend on the standard deviation. Changing MEAN (which is the mean IQ) will only shift the entire curve to the left or the right. If the mean is reduced then it shifts to the left, it the mean is increased it shifts to the right.
As you pointed out, it seems that a shift does bias the curve because only one of the tails will get cut off.
My impression is that the curve does have some explanatory power if the population is large enough, but I wonder if the curve is still accurate out at several standard deviations given data at the center. For example, there should only be 1 in a billion people with IQs higher than 190 (six standard deviations), but I wonder if the curve is accurate out that far with so few data points in that region.
-q
-
"To give an example of the dramatic effect of changes in average IQ on high IQ density: An IQ reduction from 100 to 85 will cause people with IQs greater than 135 to be reduced by a factor of 42."
This type of an analysis comes from studying the mathematical model used in the statistical analysis. There is absolutely no way that the change in the average IQ of a population can make any one or any group of people have lower IQ's.....the calculation of statistics in and of itself has no effect on the people the statistic is drawn from. If the average IQ in a population declines then there must be some underlying reason out in the real world for this change and it is best to look out in the real world to find what that is. For instance....if a population one year had an average IQ of 100 but then there was a drought that lasted for several years and a generation of malnourished babies was raised by the poorer half of the population...but the nourishment level in the upper half was not affected, then the average IQ would drop but the distribution of IQ's at the upper end would (all else being equal) not change. This is an example to secifically refute the quote I've reproduced above.
Hi chownah,
May I respond to three separate points I think you are making?
1. You say "that there is no way that a change in average IQ of a population can make anyone or any group of people have lower IQs."
I apologize if I gave the impression that I believe statistics causes something to change or occur. I don't believe that. I think that statistics, if used properly, can predict with some accuracy level, the percentage of people with various intelligence levels. I do not believe that statistical analysis causes anything physical to occur.
2. Statistics will give inaccurate results if applied incorrectly. In this case, I do not know the statistical distributions so I made some assumptions based on my memory of statistical distributions for IQs. I apologize for failing to state my assumptions explicitly.
If I assume that the statistical distribution is a Bell Curve, as I have, and it is not a Bell Curve (as I think you have in your example), then I will get incorrect results.
The Bell Curve assumption was not stated in the Bangkok Post article. I made the assumption based on memories I have about statistics of IQs. I made the assumption that the population is distributed according to a Bell Curve and that the IQ standard deviation is 15 points based on my memory of IQ statistics.
3. I certainly agree with you, that any change in IQ must be a result of some underlying change in the population. I don't think an average change in IQ of a large population can change for no reason.
Having said all this, let me take another shot at making my point. Please correct me if it still has problems.
Given two distinct populations, each having a Bell Curve distribution for intelligence with a standard deviation of 15 points, and one population has a mean IQ which is 85, while the other has a mean IQ of 100, then the percentage of people having IQs greater than 135 will be 42 times higher in the population with a mean IQ of 100.
How would this statement apply to Thailand or any other country if the assumptions were true?
If, for a moment, you will allow me to assume that the premises are correct, then the predictions for the difference in percentage of high IQ individuals are dramatic. It would mean that the pool of high IQ individuals from which you could draw would be 42 times greater in the higher mean IQ population. The higher IQ population would have a much greater chance of finding smarter doctors, engineers, country leaders, etc. It would seem to be a great intellectual advantage for the country.
Of course, this assumes a Bell Curve IQ distribution as well as the other assumptions I have made. I don't know these to be true, and I use them only because it is my best guess based on my memory of IQ statistics.
I don't know if the Thai Education Ministry was concerned for the same reason I am concerned. They felt it was an urgent problem according to the bulletin, but they didn't go into detail.
-q
-
You are welcome.
I remember the article from when it came out. I was shocked at the time.
I had heard many arguments regarding Thai IQ, but never saw any data. I don't have any information about who did the study, or about any criticisms of the study. And, I believe that many people still debate about the validity of IQ as a measure of intelligence, but at least it is something.
It was disturbing because a deviation of 10 points in average IQ produces very large differences in high IQ density out at the tails of the Bell curve (due to the shape of the Bell curve, it drops off much more quickly than an exponential curve). The density of high IQ people is important because it is often those people who will run the country.
To give an example of the dramatic effect of changes in average IQ on high IQ density: An IQ reduction from 100 to 85 will cause people with IQs greater than 135 to be reduced by a factor of 42.
-
yeah i would like to know where you got the information of them having lower IQ's then normal??
Donz, while I have not read that Thai students have below average IQ's, I have read that their average IQ scores are declining. This has been one barometer used to highlight the importance of changes in the existing educational systems.
Its good to see something positive about there studies instead of hearing "there degree's arent worth the paper ther writen on" garbage
Whoever says that Thai's IQ is below standard must be whacked, but this doesn't take away from the fact that the eductaion system sucks big hairy ones - doesn't matter how one looks at it.
Are there some schools and tertiary education facilities that are good? Of course.
Do the majority not reach an acceptable norm? Yes - can't hide your head in the sand.
Two different issues:
Poor educational facilities in general - - - Without a doubt!
Thais have a low IQ - - - total rubbish
The Thai Education Ministry reported that Thai IQ had dropped from 92 to 89 during the years 1996 to 2001, and planned to take urgent action to rectify this problem. It was reported in the Bangkok Post in August of 2003.
The article is here:
-
i dont think that an eye for an eye is the way to go about things raybkk. that just (in my humble opinion) fuels things. i would rather just let this blow over, and i am sure that it will eventually do so.
i am not harassing him in any way. what do you mean by that? so what if i call him a small minded island boy? its the truth. how should i have put it? narrow minded? inexperienced? chauvanistic? take your pick. whatever you want to call it, is is simply inappropriate behaviour in a workplace.
Hi Donna,
I am sorry you have had to go through this experience. I have been picked on and I don't like it either.
Given your description, it seems difficult to know how your coworker will react, although it may die out as you have predicted.
He knows that he has experienced pain as a direct result of his misbehavior towards you. He may remember this and take it into account the next time he thinks about hurting you. So, the pain you inflicted on him, including loss of face, may be of benefit towards you. He may realize that he risks losing face or feeling humiliated again if he attacks you again.
I hope that you will "boil" a little bit less each day, so that eventually this incident does not occupy your mind and interfere with your enjoyment of your work and the rest of your life.
May I mention my view on "telling the truth" and harrassment? I understand this is a very emotional issue and you are boiling inside. I am not even sure it is appropriate for me to explain my view at this time. I apologize if my comments are disturbing to you, as I do not wish to cause any further problems for you.
I certainly feel that you have acted correctly.
I wanted to point out that the boy may be "small minded", from the islands, etc. He may even deserve a good thrashing. But, it may still be considered harrassment to tell a him these things if your goal is simply to cause pain.
I am not saying it would be bad to harrass him. I am saying that the truth of a statement doesn't preclude it from being harrassment.
I think it is harrassment if I repeatedly tell a person a truth they do not wish to hear for the purpose of causing emotional pain. For example, I do not like to be reminded about my many shortcomings. I might feel hurt when I am reminded of them, eventhough they are true.
In fact, the truth can be a very effective way of attacking and hurting someone. However it is risky because it seems to increase the likelyhood they will do the same to me.
I apologize if these comments were things you do not wish to hear or find disturbing.
I wish you the best, and hope this problem disappears for you.
-q
-
I wish I could contribute more, but I am afraid I don't have a lot of information that would be interesting to most members.
Although I have been in Thailand for a few years, I still feel that my opinion is not worth much regarding most issues involving Thailand. I do post if I feel I can offer something.
-q
Quad.....No need to be so modest....
I have had a look back over your contributions and have always found them to be solid,interesting,precise and you have offered straight forward advice with sound principals and explanations...unlike some others I can think of....
You opinions are ALWAYS constructive and I am sure will continue to be ...Most Welcome......
Hi Rinrada,
Thank you for the kind words and encouragement.
-q
-
I'm still here and read thaivisa.com often. I don't post much. I have gotten some very helpful information at times, especially when I posted questions. I wish I could contribute more, but I am afraid I don't have a lot of information that would be interesting to most members.
Although I have been in Thailand for a few years, I still feel that my opinion is not worth much regarding most issues involving Thailand. I do post if I feel I can offer something.
-q
-
1. You can find sugar free Crystal Light mix in Lemonade flavor, Raspberry Ice, and Ice Tea flavors. It is sugar free, but it has artificial sweetner. You can find this product at Villa on the basement floor at Ploenchit Center next to Sukhumvit Soi 2.
There is a caffeine free version of the ice tea as well.
It cost 100 baht for 4 plastic cups. I think that is enough mix for 8 quarts, but I am not sure.
In my experience over the past year, they usually have it in stock. But, if they don't have it in stock, then you can ask the manager to order it.
2. I think Pepsi Max is sugar free and caffeine free. I am not 100% sure if it is caffeine free.
-q
Can We All Just Go To Hull For Non Im O's?
in Thai Visas, Residency, and Work Permits
Posted · Edited by quadricorrelator
It was possible in the past.