youreavinalaff

How much salary/wealth would one need to have to fit your idea of "rich"?

That's up to you. I haven't watched either for decades. Still lots to talk and joke about while having a beer or three.

I've always stood by the " no talking about sex, religion and politics" in pubs. When I go to the pub I want to enjoy myself. This new law won't affect me.

I've always thought the biggest dicks in the world were on AN.

Do it yourself. Speak as you go. Learning by doing.

Why would I? I'm just saying, if you have issues, complain to the people you have issues with.

Irrelevant to your original post. You're yet to post a link showing rates around 9% for 90/91.

The original poster you quoted said his mortgage rate in 1990 was 15.4%. You said that was wrong. The link I posted shows he wasnt wrong. You now say only new mortgages would pay that. The link I posted shows the rates as variable rates. So, no, not just new mortgages but those on variable rates also. If you read the link fully, you'll see fixed rates were averaging over 13%. Well above your unsubstantiated figures. Once again, the poster you quoted is correct. You are incorrect to question him/her. As my link proves.

"SVR peaked at 15.40% in 1990 — throughout the year the 'average' SVR was 14.30%, but the average fixed rate mortgage was available at a lower amount of 13.75%." Link https://www.mpamag.com/uk/news/general/15-years-since-the-peak-of-mortgage-rates/365633#:~:text=* In October 1990%2C a month,between February and November 1990.

He said in 1990/1991 his mortgage rate was 15.4%. The rate did reach that level during 1990. You then changed the date to only 1991 and used "average" in attempt to debunk his claim. His claim is correct.

He said 1990/1991. His figure of 15.4% is accurate. I can't see where he said "average".

I know it's not "always cold". I've had hot. You are having a laugh if you think you've been to every coffee outlet in Isaan.

No, it isn't.

So, 90% of the time you receive what you ask for. Why come on here and complain? Especially if you can't be sure that 10% could be misunderstanding, bearing in mind you are in a multi lingual area.

I've lived in Isaan for 21 years. This is not my experience. You speak in plural. How many times has this happened? You do know that Isaan isn't just Thai and Laos, don't you?

Why do you ask? What is your theory?

Whilst reform have decent ideas regarding immigration, I wouldn't trust them with anything else. Their grandstand policies of raising the tax threshold to £20k and minimum wage to £15+ will trash the economy and public services and create an even bigger mess than there is now.

Reads like he should stay under his bridge.

I have experienced what I was referring to. Many times. That's why I posted my opinion.

Not at all. Part of growing old is some pain, some memory loss and needing help some of the time. When it becomes constant, that's when it's time to go. In my opinion, of course.

"How long do you want to live?" Until I'm in constant pain, can't remember who my own wife and kids are or need constant care. It's then time to go.

They obviously knew you were coming and offered the service to which you deserve.

Oh dear.

So many issues between you, your family and Thai people. There seems to be a common denominator. For me, being part of a family is great. Sure, sometimes they want to do something that I'm not too keen on but, it works both ways.

The post I replied to was referring to immigrants newly arriving. Those who are, apparently, creating problems with housing. Those on visas. They cannot claim benefits, as per visa rules. They also cannot be on minimum wage, unless they are working in excess of 50 hours a week to meet salary requirements for their visa. The salary requirements for visas also pushes them above the threshold for qualification for benefits. You mention being here for 10 years or more. They are not the issue. They also still cannot claim benefits unless they have been through the 5 year visa process and have applied for and been given UK citizenship.