Just now, OneMoreFarang said:

Many Thai kids have "no father". More precisely the father ran away and never paid for anything.

When the father is an old guy who leaves the mother and child some money then that is probably already a better alternative.

 

When I was young, I had a friend with old parents (difficult to say how old, maybe 70 when he was 20). He was very balanced - maybe because his old and experienced parents. 

Thailand might have more fatherless children than most other countries but it's not just here with that problem, as I saw it in the US also.

Just now, thaibeachlovers said:

You keep on talking about the ideal. Mostly life isn't ideal and neither are people.

 

I never rebelled. I was either in boarding school or working, to be rebelling against anything.

Every teen needs to rebel to become independent of their parents. The ideal is around. It's just that there are so many families that are struggling because fathers either are absent or don't give a <deleted> to do anything besides work.

3 minutes ago, fredwiggy said:

No, they're controlled and fed BS and follow like sheep because of free health care and their low wages barely gets millions by.

Nice deflection, but nothing to do with not giving other people's money to parents.

1 hour ago, georgegeorgia said:

you think it's shameful and selfish to have children past say 65?

No mate, no shame. 

 

What colour were the kids, may not be his kids.

Somchai's kids, he's flown the coop. 

 

Why don't try it, have a kid. I don't see too many infants running around Flybird. 

 

Just now, thaibeachlovers said:

Nice deflection, but nothing to do with not giving other people's money to parents.

I don't deflect. People work and pay taxes so they might be helped someday. That's one reason there are taxes. Many never need the help, just like paying insurance.

2 minutes ago, fredwiggy said:

Every teen needs to rebel to become independent of their parents. The ideal is around. It's just that there are so many families that are struggling because fathers either are absent or don't give a <deleted> to do anything besides work.

Sooooo, you agree that some people should not have children. I'm happy you admit that.

Up to me nobody would be allowed to have children if they couldn't prove they were financially and psychologically fit to do so.

The one child policy was the only thing I thought good about communist China.

 

Don't imagine that I have no experience of raising children. I was a step parent for years of 2 kids. Not something I wanted to repeat with my own.

@georgegeorgia goes full Walter Mitty!

 

By the middle of next week, you will be saving the world and will have been awarded Thai citizenship along with an aristocratic title and a hunting estate for your altruism and heroic deeds!

 

If you want your trolling fantasies to have legs, you need to tone them down a bit.

 

But thanks for the laugh.

1 hour ago, georgegeorgia said:

I took the opportunity to walk up behind him , and spoke quietly into his right ear 

"Get a life " I said quietly "get a life's

What business is it of yours what other people do with their life? Only an antisocial individual with mental issues would allow their mind to wander into such dramatic territory.

6 minutes ago, fredwiggy said:

I don't deflect. People work and pay taxes so they might be helped someday. That's one reason there are taxes. Many never need the help, just like paying insurance.

There are worthwhile things to use tax for. Using my money for other people's children is not one of them

15 minutes ago, fredwiggy said:

Thailand might have more fatherless children than most other countries but it's not just here with that problem, as I saw it in the US also.

NZ too. Choka with unmarried solo mums, IMO.

It’s not ideal having kids at that sort of age, but the one that needs to get a life is the op. What a misfit. 

3 minutes ago, novacova said:

What business is it of yours what other people do with their life? Only an antisocial individual with mental issues would allow their mind to wander into such dramatic territory.

Spot on. Unfortunately Thailand attracts these types in droves. 

Raising children is hard work.

A lot of parents don't do a great job because they're too busy working or simply don't care or understand how much work is really needed. 

So having a child a bit older makes sense since you're more mature and don't need to work as much and have savings.

But there is such a thing as too old. 

 

Just now, thaibeachlovers said:

Sooooo, you agree that some people should not have children. I'm happy you admit that.

Up to me nobody would be allowed to have children if they couldn't prove they were financially and psychologically fit to do so.

The one child policy was the only thing I thought good about communist China.

 

Don't imagine that I have no experience of raising children. I was a step parent for years of 2 kids. Not something I wanted to repeat with my own.

I didn't imagine anything about you. Being a step parent is being a parent, but it matters how much you put into it. Just living in the same house with the kids and paying for food you also eat isn't being involved, and step kids need a dad as much as the children who have one, especially if their own dad took off and isn't involved. having a good male role model is as important as having a full time mother, or even more so in some ways. Of course having enough money to take care of a child's needs is important, but not near as important as actually being around while they grow up. There are countless poor families that have well adjusted children because both parents do their share of child raising, and just as many rich, spoiled kids who grow up with parents who just give them things to shut them up and aren't involved otherwise. A far as being psychologically fit, the world would not have near as many people if the parents of many children abstained from having them because they aren't mentally capable.

Just now, thaibeachlovers said:

There are worthwhile things to use tax for. Using my money for other people's children is not one of them

All taxes go into all people's needs. This can be health care, child care, road repair, signs, police forces, military, and the like. You might not need help in one way, but you surely need it in others. Saying that means you think children aren't as important as those other things. They are the future of our world, and need any help they can get, especially single parents where the other "parent" left because all they were was a sperm or egg donor and didn't care about the child besides what money they might get from it. Speaking from personal experience here.

1 hour ago, sqwakvfr said:

If an old man has kids with a younger woman then at least leave enough money for the family to pay for the essentials of life when one dies.  I wonder if the 69 year old had life insurance or savings that will provide for the family?  I knew a guy who had his second family in his mid 50's.  He died at 62 when his daughter was 5 but he had life insurance, his pension was split 50/50 with the wife #1 and #2 and the he left a significant amount in investments.  

If a Yank ... kids (wife) will get check from Soc Sec till done Uni 👍

 

And in TH, that's enough to support the family, as it's an extra check every month, added to the retirement check, after born.  

Well I chose not to have children at a very early age, and it was the single wisest decision I've ever made in this lifetime, after all the last thing in the world that this planet needs is another child right now.

 

In terms of having a child at that age it is certainly selfish, but I guess it depends upon the means that one has and the level of comfort and financial security one can leave behind when one departs this place. The best approach I've ever heard is from a friend of mine who had two kids in his early twenties he told me by the time he was 40 both of his kids have grown up and he was able to watch them become really successful human beings. The other issue is that these days many many people have completely forgotten the lost art of parenting, so having a kid does not on any level ensure that the kid is going to be successful or productive, nor healthy.

 

The last element is that I would guess the majority of men who have kids at that age do it because the Thai girlfriend wants it they're not doing it because they need it so is it a morally correct decision or is it simply the decision made by a relatively weak man who's being led around by his nose?

14 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

There are worthwhile things to use tax for. Using my money for other people's children is not one of them

I'd rather see my tax dollars going to families in need, than war mongers killing people for profit.

 

Since technically 'disabled'. who am I to argue with the experts, for the past 24 years, my family & friends can sleep easily, knowing their tax $$$ went to support my retirement, for the past 24 years, as I collected all my tax $$$ back 

 

No better feeling that being a blight on society 😎

Pay backs are a bitch.

4 minutes ago, fredwiggy said:

Saying that means you think children aren't as important as those other things. They are the future of our world, and need any help they can get, especially single parents where the other "parent" left because all they were was a sperm or egg donor and didn't care about the child besides what money they might get from it.

Our lords, ladies and masters don't treasure human life, given the alacrity with which they will conscript young men to go die in some pointless war.

 

If I thought children were important don't you think I'd have had some of my own?

 

The future of our world. LOL. If the future of our world depends of people, we've more than enough, unless one thinks only those of our own colour and ethnicity count.

 

especially single parents where the other "parent" left because all they were was a sperm or egg donor and didn't care about the child besides what money they might get from it.

That's what maintenance is for, so the father pays for his child.

1 minute ago, KhunLA said:

I'd rather see my tax dollars going to families in need, than war mongers killing people for profit.

I'd rather neither. I'm sick of people that don't take responsibility for themselves- can't afford children- don't have any. Only exception where both parents were going to care for child and one dies- it takes 2 now to raise a child as too expensive. If one leaves- force them to pay maintenance if they won't voluntarily- that might make a few more men use condoms.

 

 

Just now, thaibeachlovers said:

Our lords, ladies and masters don't treasure human life, given the alacrity with which they will conscript young men to go die in some pointless war.

 

If I thought children were important don't you think I'd have had some of my own?

 

The future of our world. LOL. If the future of our world depends of people, we've more than enough, unless one thinks only those of our own colour and ethnicity count.

 

especially single parents where the other "parent" left because all they were was a sperm or egg donor and didn't care about the child besides what money they might get from it.

That's what maintenance is for, so the father pays for his child.

The people we vote for are mostly narcissists that want power, and do what they need to do for votes. Promises made, some kept. Some wars are necessary, as history has shown, or you and I would be under Romes, England's, Japan's or Germany's power now., with maniacs in charge.

 

If children weren't important, you wouldn't be here, especially if you're contributing to society. Granted, many have children and only are takers, but that's why we need givers, and parents who are givers, to raise more givers, so the world could improve, if that's at all possible, seeing there are many who only are here to profit from others.

 

Both parents are supposed to "pay" for their children, and seeing this doesn't happen all of the time, this is why taxes pay to help those single parents who mated with losers.

20 minutes ago, fredwiggy said:

A far as being psychologically fit, the world would not have near as many people if the parents of many children abstained from having them because they aren't mentally capable.

and the world would be better off for that. Every extra mouth is more exploitation of natural resources, more pollution, more congestion, more unlivable cities, more crime, more sickness etc etc.

Far as I'm concerned we were all better off when only 3 billion people lived on Earth.

Just now, thaibeachlovers said:

I'd rather neither. I'm sick of people that don't take responsibility for themselves- can't afford children- don't have any. Only exception where both parents were going to care for child and one dies- it takes 2 now to raise a child as too expensive. If one leaves- force them to pay maintenance if they won't voluntarily- that might make a few more men use condoms.

 

 

Men don't use condoms because they aren't thinking, or caring, of the possible outcome of sex. Yes, if you aren't capable of raising a child, use protection, and that means from both sides. Thailand has thousands of men that will never pay child support, and the court system is to blame for this, because they also don't care about the children here. This is seen daily on the roads and in schools, so the court is just another system that doesn't work here. You make people pay for the children they make, and they'll think twice about having unprotected sex.

3 minutes ago, fredwiggy said:

The people we vote for are mostly narcissists that want power, and do what they need to do for votes. Promises made, some kept. Some wars are necessary, as history has shown, or you and I would be under Romes, England's, Japan's or Germany's power now., with maniacs in charge.

 

If children weren't important, you wouldn't be here, especially if you're contributing to society. Granted, many have children and only are takers, but that's why we need givers, and parents who are givers, to raise more givers, so the world could improve, if that's at all possible, seeing there are many who only are here to profit from others.

 

Both parents are supposed to "pay" for their children, and seeing this doesn't happen all of the time, this is why taxes pay to help those single parents who mated with losers.

I see that you are an idealist, so I see no point in continuing. Have a nice day.

Just now, thaibeachlovers said:

and the world would be better off for that. Every extra mouth is more exploitation of natural resources, more pollution, more congestion, more unlivable cities, more crime, more sickness etc etc.

Far as I'm concerned we were all better off when only 3 billion people lived on Earth.

Yes, but there isn't any way that's going to change, as selfishness is part of many people's makeup. Consequences should be immediate, but aren't because someone's always going to be paid to look the other way. You're part of this world, and are a part of that over population, so what can you do about it now? There are ways to help our planet survive, and it all starts with having a zero population growth, but this isn't what people want, because it involves control.It has to be a majority thinking the same way, and getting rid of those that don't, starting with some world leaders who are very disturbed individuals that should have never been allowed into power.

6 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

I'd rather neither. I'm sick of people that don't take responsibility for themselves- can't afford children- don't have any. Only exception where both parents were going to care for child and one dies- it takes 2 now to raise a child as too expensive. If one leaves- force them to pay maintenance if they won't voluntarily- that might make a few more men use condoms.

I'll agree with that ... IF  you can't afford to have them, then don't.   Part of why I never did, before retiring.   Playing parent after retirement was an unplanned surprise, and one of, if not, best part of my life.   Easy since having the time & money to do it right.

 

But if sh!t happens, and you need assistance, then good use of my tax $$$.

Just now, thaibeachlovers said:

I see that you are an idealist, so I see no point in continuing. Have a nice day.

Actually I'm very practical in thinking, and things would change if different people were in power.Greed destroys thinking, and the world around us. Take away the big money makers, and the problems start to disappear. Keep feeding them, and their control lives on.

Just now, KhunLA said:

I'll agree with that ... IF  you can't afford to have them, then don't.   Part of why I never did, before retiring.   Playing parent after retirement was an unplanned surprise, and one of, if not, best part of my life.   Easy since having the time & money to do it right.

 

But if sh!t happens, and you need assistance, then good use of my tax $$$.

Yes, I love my 8 year old daughter, and she's the only reason I'm still living here. I would never wan to go back to a place without her, as she's a really smart character who I see doing well as soon as I get her out of this country.

2 minutes ago, fredwiggy said:

Yes, I love my 8 year old daughter, and she's the only reason I'm still living here. I would never wan to go back to a place without her, as she's a really smart character who I see doing well as soon as I get her out of this country.

They can do well here.  But it really is a struggle, as companies just don't want to pay anything, even if having a Uni degree.   Daughter is doing good, but works too much.  If not having her own things, RE & own business, then building equity for the future would be near impossible.

 

From what I'm reading, not much different than what youngins are facing world wide, if not extremely motivated to be self sufficient.  Doesn't come easy for everyone.

 

Simply being a 'working class hero' isn't enough in today's world.  It was hard enough for most in my time, especially if having kids.

Just now, KhunLA said:

They can do well here.  But it really is a struggle, as companies just don't want to pay anything, even if having a Uni degree.   Daughter is doing good, but works too much.  If not having her own things, RE & own business, then building equity for the future would be near impossible.

 

From what I'm reading, not much different than what youngins are facing world wide, if not extremely motivated to be self sufficient.  Doesn't come easy for everyone.

 

Simply being a 'working class hero' isn't enough in today's world.  It was hard enough for most in my time, especially if having kids.

It's not just the schools here that are far behind. It's also the way of life, and inferior thinking of women in general, and that won't change in our lifetimes. She will have a much better life in the US, and much better future with a career. Living here her chances of finding a decent mate who will not only support her but any children are very slim. My daughter can make more in an hour then they get here in a day, and yes, even though things cost more there, it makes up for it with the much safer road conditions and freedom she will have. I've heard many years before i came here how women are looked at here, and it's been proven ever since. I want better for her.