jayboy

It seems like good advice and I used to think like this but it's wrong. The secret is to eat much less. That's it.Fasting,cutting down carbs, eradicating booze and other methods are ways to achieve the objective. Burning calories through exercise is good and will make you fitter, but it doesn't really make you thinner (often just hungrier)

As someone who has respected your views over the years on this forum, I think you may have underplayed the unhealthy relationship with part of the left with political Islam. Here is just one analysis.I could have chosen from many others. https://unherd.com/2018/04/many-left-wing-progressives-protest-pope-silent-islams-totalitarian-tendencies-victims-cowardice-overwhelmingly-women/

The reality is that the generously built foreigners with tattoos and ugly regional accents one sees trundling around Pattaya are not 99% of the time accompanied by beautiful young women.They tend to be accompanied - often holding hands - by ladies who (let's be chivalrous, no need to elaborate). Suffice it to say not visions of loveliness and youth. There are of course many beautiful young women from poor backgrounds often with intelligence and charm who start off in the bar world.But they never last long because they get snapped up extremely quickly by better prospects than the typical Pattaya client.As a general proposition the exceptionally gifted girl tends to rise rapidly in the social scale and has done in every society and throughout history.Furthermore they very quickly come to understand their worth.

You make some very good points and one would need a heart of stone not to recognize the joy that some of these relationships bring.But self awareness is always useful.

We're talking of clients/prostitutes here, not "happy couples" in the normal sense.

It depends what you and your companion look like together.Everybody likes to see attractive young lovers hand in hand.Nobody wants to see a tubby Pattaya bloke invariably tattooed grasping the hand of a bored young Isaan working girl. On the other hand I rather like seeing the same kind of Pattaya sexpat waddling along with a Thai companion of similar age and weight and indifferent looks.Clearly they have something meaningful going.As Pascal said, “The heart has its reasons which reason knows nothing of... We know the truth not only by the reason, but by the heart.”

US Ambassadors are not addressed as Excellency by American citizens though foreigners often do because Excellency is a standard address for Ambassadors of every country.Being a Kingdom has nothing to do with it.But you are right the use of Excellency in this instance does seem a bit odd since it's contained in a communication from the American Embassy to American citizens.By the way I don't think the use of the Excellency address is anything to do with self promotion - it's just standard diplomatic etiquette.

Why?

There are still banks in the Channel Islands - and probably the Isle of Man - that specifically cater for expats.However they will still want your overseas tax identification number and will keep on pressing for it.I suppose in extremis they might close your account if you don't provide one (though I have never heard of such a case). Additionally they will sometimes ask why exactly you need an offshore account with the clear implication they will close it if you don't satisfy with your answers.I think they are looking for a minimum balance (I'm guessing about £ 50,000), evidence of activity etc.

I've had a few discussions with doctors in the UK on the subject of BP numbers during annual physicals, one with a rather grand Harley Street specialist. I think I can say they were unanimous that we should aim for 120/80 or lower, and interestingly - because contrary to received wisdom - there should be no particular reason this target should be changed for older people. So on the above basis, 140/95 isn't really good enough. I accept my information is second hand and am perfectly happy to be corrected.

Not that I can see

The vast majority was perfectly legal.You didn't like immigrants to the UK so you decided to be an immigrant somewhere else.Hypocrisy is off the scales.

I have never fully understood what criteria doctors use to prescribe different kinds of blood pressure medicine. There are so many types of BP drugs working in different ways.Obviously doctors will consider overall health, possible side effects, any underlying conditions etc etc But my question is whether if a drug/combination of drugs combined with healthy personal habits (little alcohol.no smoking, appropriate weight, lots of exercise etc) achieves acceptable BP readings, does it much matter which of the infinite drug possibilities is followed? I ask because for various reasons I consulted two excellent doctors in a six month period and they came up with two totally different prescriptions.I had mildly elevated BP but now 120/80 or thereabouts.

That's not a fair question since it should really be addressed to citizens of Thailand. As to Thailand the masses have turned out before to protest the greedy selfish elites that have made Thailand one of the most unequal societies on earth, risking and in some cases losing their lives - but it was long ago. I really don't know how the progressive elements in Thailand are now prepared to challenge in the courageous manner of their predecessors.To be frank there's not much sign of it. Yet the same enemies are plain in view, huge and hateful. As Thomas Jefferson said, " The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." There is something very distasteful about foreigners calling on Thais to take dangerous action, so I will avoid that. But the way forward is I think very clear since it's obvious the ruling elites are determined to crush democracy.

This was the British response - predictably anemic and cowardly compared with that of the US In response to the Thai Constitutional Court’s decision to dissolve the Move Forward Party, an FCDO spokesperson said: Pluralism and freedom of speech are central principles of democracy. The dissolution of another major political party in Thailand is therefore a setback for these principles. We encourage all parties to uphold democratic rights and representation.

You may well be right but I don't think we know for sure. To be clear, we are talking about 180+ day foreign residents in Thailand (with no Thailand originated income) who only remit funds from their home countries which originated pre January 2024 and are therefore non assessable and not subject to Thai income tax. I expect most in this category should in theory have submitted Thai tax returns in the past but the vast majority didn't, and there is no evidence the Thai RD expected them to. However in the current tighter tax climate I have yet to see any evidence that expats in the non tax paying category (see above) don't have to submit a return even if there is no assessable income to declare.I'm in that category and don't propose to submit a tax return for 2024.I don't yet have complete confidence this is okay but the downside is insignificant.

I was making a different point.In brief, anybody who has to resort to using ATMs or foreign credit cards in an attempt to minimize Thai tax is by definition a low earner.In which case there is no or very little tax to pay anyway.In other words it's not really worth it.

I think debate on this issue has lost sight of the reality regardless whether ATM withdrawals/foreign credit card purchases are taxable or traceable by the RD.The reality is that for the vast majority who believe using these methods is important for removing or significantly minimizing their Thai tax bill are by definition low earners who would have very little tax to pay anyway.

It's a victory for the Left.Shapiro is the more impressive man and also the favorite of the Democratic leadership.Kamala Harris, conscious of her younger supporters and the more progressive elements generally, may have become nervous about Shapiro's Jewishness and strong support for Israel.In my view Harris/Walz doesn't look like a balanced ticket but she has the wind behind her and will probably prevail in November.

To compare one situation with another is not whataboutery unless it is a deliberate attempt to deflect attention.I don't think that is the position here; it's more to underline selective indignation on the part of the established political and media class who regard the white working class as the very bottom of the pile, particularly the young and poorly educated. One cannot expect a great deal of penetrating analysis on this forum but I was struck by the remarks of the centre-right commentator Tim Montgomerie: "Britain now has a significant underclass (there may be a better word to describe it)? 10% to 15% of the population who are/feel completely cut off from the rest of the population. They are poorly educated. They are intergenerationally welfare dependent. They live in communities where anti-social behaviour is normal. Where family structure and virtue has collapsed. We all pay them money. We police them. But we don’t really care about them. We have no grand desire - let alone plan - to change this. We can afford this underclass - even though it means huge misery and lost human potential." It is these people that are fueling the current riots.Surely the big question - leaving aside the asinine forum squabbling - is how to we deal with these people, educate them, give the hope and make their lives better.To date the government hasn't appeared to consider any of this.It can be forgiven because the need now is to restore order - but what happens next? Will the problem go away by itself because the wicked Tories are no longer in charge?

No, it's a precise equivalence.Government might well have handled matters better but they did not cause the problem. Sure - the calm tranquillity of our cities bears witness to that.If pesky reporters ask questions about two tier policing, a Chief Constable smashes the microphone to the floor.

You say spot on , but it's far from clear what Dame Sara Khan has in mind.She blames recent governments for ignoring warnings and promoting civil strife through a culture war agenda (latter part is highly dubious). Surely, even accepting her premise, it's a bit like blaming an inattentive physician for a patient's cancer.The physician can certainly be faulted but the cancer acted independently.Wouldn't be worth spending a bit more thought why UK's very serious social problems arose in the first place.

https://www.ohchr.org/en/hr-bodies/hrc/current-members By my count at least 15 current members have worse human rights records than Thailand.The Move Forward party should not be banned (actually it should be in power) but I don't see the argument in linking the issue to the UNHRC.

Not in Southern Thailand they don't.

I disagree.Let's look at the language that Starmer used - “Be in no doubt: Those who have participated in this violence will face the full force of the law,” Mr. Starmer said, noting that the police would be making arrests and that charges would follow. “I guarantee you will regret taking part in this disorder, whether directly or those whipping up this action online and then running away themselves. This is not protest. It is organized, violent thuggery.” I believe that most British people strongly support this approach.But there remains a niggling question - why is this approach only used for white working class people while for other thuggish mobs it's okay to ignore or "take the knee."