jayboy

6 hours ago, Chelseafan said:

 

She was always going to jump ship at some point but she cynically waited until she got elected to enjoy those 5 years as an MP.

If she had any principles then she would resign and call a by-election, that way we can see if her constitutents agree with her

 

 

She was treated abominably by the Labour Party and Starmer was too feeble and cowardly to support her.I don't think the cynicism you mention was a factor.After all, she received a huge majority in the General Election when it was known she was at odds with the party.

As it happens ,I know the constituency very well and if she decided to run as an independent she would in my view win quite convincingly.One unknown factor is which way the large university student would jump, at least those on the register.She has a large personal following which crosses party lines.I'm well aware that independent MPs rebelling against major parties don't normally do well in elections - but in this case the large Tory/Reform sections of the electorate would see this as an opportunity to bash Starmer, now even more unpopular in the country than Liz Truss.

3 hours ago, Cameroni said:

I can assure you I've worked in the most prestigious law firm in the world

In what capacity?

Thanks.I understand it covers Thai Baht and can be used to withdraw from Thai ATMs.But I’m not sure if it can be used as a debit card.Of course one would have to allocate Thai currency but I believe if you don’t it would automatically make the local currency conversion from Sterling.

Does anyone have experience of this card? If so would they recommend it?

10 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

But this brouhaha isn’t that, it’s a smear campaign, and one that ignores completely what has and continues be bunged into pockets on the other side of the house.

Four legs good two legs bad

2 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Like ‘Animal Farm’ your account is fiction.

That's what the Stalinists said about Animal Farm since it opened a window on their hypocrisy and cruelty.But you're right, Animal Farm was a work of fiction but its message and honesty echoes to this day.As to Starmer, it's still early days and I'm reasonably confident he can get over his poor start.You perhaps should take a lesson from Animal Farm.It's foolish to bleat Tories bad Labour good regardless of circumstances.Sometimes our side gets it wrong and it's time to take responsibility, fix matters and move on Or we can behave like those sheep in Animal Farm - four legs good two legs bad,

58 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Do you believe non of the corrupt theft of public funds under the last Government should be pursued?

This is turning into something from Animal Farm.Labour spent the last five years screaming " The Tories are neck deep in sleaze.We will change that.Now the line is," they did that, why cant we?"

10 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Please explain what is wrong with working people earning a decent wage, which incidentally isn’t huge?

Nothing.But generous pay increases (legitimate for doctors, much less so for train drivers) should always be negotiated to ensure improvements in productivity and efficiency.This government has caved in to train drivers and junior doctors without any kind of conditionality, and at the same time cut pensioners winter fuel allowance.There some reasonable arguments for and against, and I'm certainly not getting on a soap box.But by God this government is proving rotten at politics.Meanwhile the hapless Starmer, armed with his donated specs and suits, is seeing his popularity rating drop below that of Rishi Sunak.

The most striking aspect to me in this story is how poorly paid is the British Prime Minister at about £ 170,000 pa.It in my view should be at least three times that amount.The Singapore PM gets six times that amount.There is no real private sector equivalent but an industry leader would get £ 1.5 -2 million p.a.If you wan t the best people they need to be paid well - it's an incredibly demanding job.

On 9/17/2024 at 5:50 PM, flexomike said:

Well of course the country doesn't run on expats, but a lot of small communities are greatly helped by the money that they spend, mom and pop shops hiring laborers supporting all the businesses in the neighborhood. Thailand as a country will not be hurt by expats departing but a lot of people will be. I have several people that I hire on a regular basis and if I leave they loose my financial input.

You may well be correct.However you can be certain beyond any doubt that the benefits you describe (and with which I agree) are of no relevance or interest to the politicians and officials who determine tax policy in Thailand.

9 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

Nope... they mean Thai women... Because outside of your world there are perfectly normal mixed relationships between Western Men and Thai Women.... and those women have normal jobs, living normal lives, in normal relationships etc... 

 

Don't get touchy and in any case it's not "my world". I was referring, as I would have thought  obvious, to the way Thai women are often discussed on this forum by punters.Of course there are plenty of relationships which are "normal" to use your expression - though there are also plenty of  long standing "normal" relationships with Thai women encountered in the entertainment industry. (perhaps less so than in the past for reasons due to Thailand's increased prosperity)

1 hour ago, NorthernRyland said:

 

You do you see young guys getting Thai girls way hotter than they could pull back home. That's just a fact. Not losers they're just taking advantage of the situation that presented itself. The girl in the video is clearly fuming because she's been out competed by Thai women and instead of taking it with grace she lashes out at the men.

 I love the way some people say "Thai women" when they mean Thai prostitutes.

Do  expatriates in places like Pattaya sometimes have liaisons of varying lengths. with attractive young prostitutes? Yes, sometimes especially if it is with uneducated farm girls. That doesn't have any relevance to the reality that most of these expats are losers - under educated,under funded, tubby, tattooed and charmless. Anybody can get laid in Thailand and it's nothing to boast about.

As an aside on the bar girl front, the combination of girls with great looks, sharp intelligence and ambition does exist though much less so these days given Thailand's increased prosperity.No girl of this type would give a second glance to the typical expat loser : they have more attractive and richer targets in mind. Clever beautiful girls even from lowly stock tend to rise up the social scale rapidly in every society.

On 9/18/2024 at 8:39 PM, DougieMax said:

I don't agree, not entirely at least. Many, if not most, have had girlfriends and wives, and that is exactly why they have decided to look elsewhere. Western women are just too disagreeable to be around. The small number that are actually attractive are far too entitled and unattainable for 90% of men. The rest really don't bring much to a relationship either. A woman with a triple digit body count can't bond with a man and is probably sporting a petri dish of germs and fungi. Shameless women do not make good partners.

You do realize that this sort of post simply affirms the proposition of the girl's loser comment? She is obviously an uninteresting airhead but the essential truth of what she is saying is hardly in doubt.If there are any farang in Pattaya and similar expat hangouts with a modicum of self awareness, just look around.Thailand doesn't attract successful expatriates much - financial compensation generally being too low and not sufficiently developed.The exception might be bright youngsters seeking a couple of years experience, and of course a few scholars and journalists. At a higher level than Pattata sexpats, the Bangkok foreign community has few genuine stars and the watchword is mediocrity.

10 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

A topic that has become popular to discuss in the U.S. is generational wealth.

The truth is that many black Americans have generational wealth similar or greater than typical other than black Americans.

But a disproportionate percentage of them don't.

It's not only slavery but mortgage red lining, etc.

If there are government policies that could level the playing field for historical damages to some extent (nobody is expecting perfection or full payback) what is the problem exactly?

No problem at all.In fact the policy  of shoveling cash for reparations to Blacks for historical damage incurred over a hundred and fifty years ago is a vote winner.One can only imagine the enthusiasm for such a policy among white and Hispanic voters in the vital swing states such as Nevada, Georgia, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin,Michigan and Arizona.I am sure they will give this excellent policy priority over their own economic hardships.Go for it, Kamala.

Sir Isaiah Berlin, Social and political theorist,philosopher and historian of ideas.

On Churchill

"Like a great actor— perhaps the last of his kind—upon the stage of history, he speaks his memorable lines with a large unhurried and stately utterance in a blaze of light as is appropriate to a man who knows that his work and his person will remain the object of scrutiny and judgment to many generations. His narrative is a great public performance and has the attribute of formal magnificence. The words, the splendid phrases, the sustained quality of feeling, are a unique medium which convey his vision of himself and of his world, and will inevitably, like all that he has said and done, reinforce the famous public image, which is no longer distinguishable from the inner essence and the true nature of the author: of a man larger than life, composed of bigger and simpler elements than ordinary men, a gigantic historical figure during his own lifetime, superhumanly bold, strong, and imaginative, one of the two greatest men of action his nation has produced, an orator of prodigious powers, the savior of his country, a legendary hero who belongs to myth as much as to reality, the largest human being of our time"

.

On 9/12/2024 at 8:25 AM, Raindancer said:

I wouldn't worry too unnecessarily. 

 

If you are married over 65, you will have allowances of 560k, which includes the first 150k, ( non taxable).

 

As the max UK state pension is currently £220 per week (£11660) per annum, equates to 513k thai baht @ 44 baht to the £, you will be OK.

 

Even £ 11660 (@ 46 baht = 536k pa to the pound) is still under the 560k per annum allowances. 

But surely the majority of  UK expat retirees are not just living off their state pensions.So there is a legitimate concern for most.

https://www.thetimes.com/comment/columnists/article/harris-still-trailing-where-it-matters-most-xswnlvhpb

12 hours ago, verylostdog said:

I also have a Thai ID card

What do you mean by this?

1 hour ago, Lorry said:

Sorry, sounds good but 2 mistakes:

 

"Covid symptoms (they would have to be worse than normal)"

Paxlovid is meant for light and moderate cases. It's not meant as a treatment once things have gotten bad.

The approach is not "let's wait and see, maybe it will get better by itself".

The approach is "It is decided a priori: if I get Covid I will take Paxlovid. So, if I have symptoms,  I test for Covid asap, and often, because Paxlovid needs to be taken early in the course of covid."

Paxlovid is a bet on the future course of the illness. It's an insurance. 

 

Second, you didn't even mention you would check for interacting medications. This is more than just reading a leaflet. 

If there are, how would you know how to manage them? Reduce their dosage,  stop them,  substitute others, just observe, refrain from taking Paxlovid?

There are a lot of interactions with heart-related medications,  which many old men aka AN members take. 

Thanks for the corrections which I completely accept, and both your points are very well made.

So I suppose it's a question of subjective judgement if one is over 65 and without the kind of ailments that would make the decision more straight forward.

On 9/7/2024 at 11:09 PM, Lorry said:

 

I would never dare to advise a patient to carry Paxlovid just in case. 

Not sure about that.I would have thought for vulnerable groups including the over 65s it would make sense to hold  a stock of Paxlovid. I don't think, given the ease of self testing, that anybody would take Paxlovid just in case.I can envisage myself if having tested positive and experiencing Covid symptoms (they would have to be worse than normal) taking Paxlovid.The barrier is not so much the cost but getting hold of the stuff in the first place.

Just now, James105 said:

So what do you think of people like Starmer who knowingly plan to implement a policy that will kill pensioners before their time?   

Government is all about compromise and striking a balance between the ideal and what is practical/affordable/fair.In other words politics is the art of the possible.It doesn't matter whether a government is far left or the opposite.In healthcare for example the NHS cannot provide every expensive drug to every person that needs them.Thus some people are going to die before their time because they do not have access to these life saving drugs.Should the government be accused of "killing people"? I don't think so in this case.

Is it correct that foreigners that do not need visa free travel (eg those with Permanent Residence) will still have to obtain an ETA? Logically they shouldn't but I have feeling they will. PRs tend to be forgotten in this kind of policy change.

If the process is as easy as Singapore, no problem.

38 minutes ago, James105 said:

Starmer is out of his depth.  He is an over promoted middle manager which is why he jumps on nonsense like the price of Oasis tickets rather than concern himself with the realities of being in government and the real and difficult problems facing the UK.   

I think you are being a little unfair.Starmer is more than an over promoted middle manager since afte all he was Director of Public Prosecution which has Permanent Secretary rank.He has the necessary intellect, capacity for hard work and human decency for the PM post.The trouble is he doesn't really have anything else, specifically any kind of charisma or the "vision thing". Everything is blamed on the Tories who certainly left the country in a mess, but the "black hole" he constantly talks about is somewhat economical with the truth.Labour knew pretty well what was the country's financial position before the election and the black hole spiel is essentially cover for inevitable tax increases.The British public is not thick and Starmer's terrible personal ratings reflect dislike of his slippery language.Still it's early days.

I think a lot of Labour supporters (the James O'Brien/Alistair Campbell syndrome) are going to be caught out if they are totally uncritical of the government.Much better to indicate support -if that's their position - but to comment critically where appropriate.

1 minute ago, Chomper Higgot said:

As I said earlier, Labour MP’s May well defeat this proposal when it comes to a vote.

You don't have much of a handle on British politics, do you? The vast majority of Labour MPs will put their reservations to one side and vote with the government.

3 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

In the meantime ‘means testing benefits’ for all its faults is a means of ensure resources are directed to those in need and away from those who don’t need.

Tory philosophy which Mrs Thatcher would enthusiastically endorse.Actually I would support it too and extend the principle in many aspects of British economic policy including the NHS.