The Boss Says Evacuate, So You Stay

[jimbeam1]

I live here, work, pay rent etc. I have just as much right as anyone else to stay put, as although I am a foreign national I am also a "local."

Perhaps during Katrina the locals should have vented their anger on any asians who did not evacuate, and according to your logic would be right to do so. Would you like to see a group of Thais working in New O being savagely beaten by a gang of african americans?

Geez, get a life.

That's a big leap in logic, comparing Bangkok with Katrina. To my recollection there was a period during the approach of Katrina where people were saying " We're staying, we'll tough it out ", then they got hit with the worst natural disaster in modern US history, mainly due to the failure of the levees.

No one is suggesting that is going to happen to BKK, and your comparison is foolish, and your next crack about savage beatings gives an insight into the workings of your mind. Not a pretty sight.

I would suggest to many of the posters that the troll in the garden are the people who are not taking this issue seriously enough. In fact some people are not aware that the governor of Bangkok has ordered the evacuation of three districts already.

He's the governor, he's the boss......his orders will have an affect upon you whether you like it or not.

The British Foreign office has advised against all but essential travel to the flood affected areas in Thailand, and stated that local authority advice should be followed. I don't know what advice other countries have handed out to their citizens.

So that now begs a question.........are you now insured? We all know that insurance companies will sneak through any hole in their policy. So let's go back to the governor ordering evacuation, you stay, you get hurt, and you try to claim on your insurance.....................fill in the details yourself.

Some of you guys that are insisting on staying are the real trolls. Please note, I said some, not all, just some.

ps To the previous poster that asked, I left BKK 10 days ago. I don't have to be there just now so I am not there.

You asked the question are we being selfish staying in Bangkok. Why do you not like the answer no.

Your own admission The Boss has ordered the evacuation of THREE districts already. That is nothing compared to the 53 districts there are in Bangkok.

You say that you left Bangkok 10 days ago. What district of Bangkok do you live in?

jb1

Edited October 29, 2011 by jimbeam1

[Bangkokhatter]

Blether, you stated you left 10 days ago because you had no REASON to be here, am very happy for you...but most of us do have a reason to be here and it's why we are staying. Maybe if the Govenor orders my district to be evacuated I will re-evaluate. Go and troll somewhere else !

[theblether]

Sorry, asking a pertinent question is not trolling.........the question is are you being selfish?

If the answer is no then fabulous, if the answer is yes then .......up to you!!

I had no compelling reason to stay so I moved......up to me!!

By the way.......I bet there are a few people that didn't realize that there insurance is under threat by staying.

[dave111223]

and how do you think the Thais will react when there really is a crisis of water supply and you've bought the last bottle off the shelf in front of them?

Do you really think of Thais this way? You must have trouble living here (flood or no flood)?

[bangkockney]

I left along with everyone else in my moo ban. We managed to get out moments before they closed all roads to our property. Would have been a major cock-up if we stayed and became trapped, especially with a 2 year old.

I'd of happily stayed if I lived alone, but with a young child it would have been irresponsible to do so.

As soon as the Colnel who lives opposite brought soldiers in to move his family we knew it was time to go.

Edited October 29, 2011 by bangkockney

[SICHONSTEVE]

And some people do not believe it will be that bad.....

Also which 'BOSS' are you talking about...

surely not Yingluck

Bangkok's Governor Sukhumbhand Paribatra........he issued a call to evacuate today.

Well then, probably time to listen - I would work on the principle that what the governor say's is true whereas Yingluck and her useless "non-team" are either covering something up or just getting it wrong!!!!:jap:.

[IMA_FARANG]

Update:

Day 5 since "advisd to evacuate" warning.

Still no water seen anywhere on Ladprakhao Road.

Begining to suspect I won't.

[SweRob]

Quite the opposite. International companies are terrified of closing down as that will leave a black mark on Bangkok's ability to be a productive place for business; even though the local branches are aware the disruption to their staff. Though I don't work for an International Company, I have to stay and work as 1, I need the money and 2 the company I work for can't afford to close down.

Also, your first point, is basically saying 'bad bad farangs, local needs come first'. If there was a disaster in the UK, do we put Brits first? Ignore the holiday makers who are hurt or foreign investers? No. We work to get through this together. It's not a Thai vs Farang thing which you're trying to create.

Humans are humans, never mind where we come from; we all have to survive. If a Thai gets upset that the last bottle of water was bought by a farang and not a Thai, then that Thai is just being racist, pure and simple.

Not sure I follow your logic, as you are implying that companies need to justify their presence in Thailand and are terrified to shut operations temporarily. Why would a company need to justify their presence and be terrified that the country was struck by a natural (and man made) disaster? Any division of any company only comes under scrutiny if they are non-productive and losing money. The multinational company I work for has regional offices in Bangkok. They shuddered the offices a week ago in BKK and moved to Pattaya temporarily. No harm, no foul, just carrying on business as usual.

As for the OP, your argument is flawed in that you make the assumption that "most" farang have the capital to evacuate. Why would you make that assumption? I know many farang in Thailand who are just regular working stiffs and not on a corporate package or pension.

I disagree with you

In this case the Governor of Bangkok is ordering evacuation, if any farang has got themselves into a position that they cannot financially afford to evacuate then they are in a sorry state. I understand a relocation back to farangland would cost serious money for many however a few hundred baht would get you out of the city, a few thousand baht would see you through for a while in another Thai location. If you cannot afford to respond to an emergency then your living too close to the edge.

So how long have you been evacuated now? 3 weeks? taking a toll on your economy by living in the resort?

[travelmann]

Update:

Day 5 since "advisd to evacuate" warning.

Still no water seen anywhere on Ladprakhao Road.

Begining to suspect I won't.

And still no water???

[Hawkman]

I showed this post to my Thai colleagues at work and they just laughed. They were really suprised to think that some farang would think Thais would be upset if farang decided to stay and work or whatever; as for the water bottle comment, a couple even said you're more likely to find Thais buying up more water than farang.

I was then told in blunt terms, they would be really offended if I had just jetted off, leaving extra work for them and having to pay me to do no work; seeing as my place and our work place is completely dry too.

Thais seem more annoyed at Thai people who have just dumped their cars wherever they like than farang buying bottled water.

[flemmie]

Additionally, by staying we were able also to assist many thais (25% of my staff) to relocate to serviced apartments (in the BCD) all at the company's expense. I doubt this would have been decided if we would have left.

[theblether]

I showed this post to my Thai colleagues at work and they just laughed. They were really suprised to think that some farang would think Thais would be upset if farang decided to stay and work or whatever; as for the water bottle comment, a couple even said you're more likely to find Thais buying up more water than farang.

I was then told in blunt terms, they would be really offended if I had just jetted off, leaving extra work for them and having to pay me to do no work; seeing as my place and our work place is completely dry too.

Thais seem more annoyed at Thai people who have just dumped their cars wherever they like than farang buying bottled water.

The question asked is.....are you being selfish by staying in Bangkok? Your in a dry area of Bangkok so your of the opinion that you are not? If so, great. There are many people now regretting their decision to tough it out as they have been effectively trapped in flooded areas for weeks. Maybe in retrospect some more people should have got out when they had the chance.

By the way, it seems to be the case that the answer to keeping BKK dry was to make the rest of the country suffer more, I wonder what the people in those areas think of that policy?

[SweRob]

But dont you think its better to evacuate when your area actually is close to flooding? Why panic and get out of dodge 4-6 weeks to early? Thats being irrational.

[theblether]

But dont you think its better to evacuate when your area actually is close to flooding? Why panic and get out of dodge 4-6 weeks to early? Thats being irrational.

Well no, I didn't find the need to panic, you see I looked at the situation logically. Everyone was predicting a river of sh*t heading my way. The only question was when it was going to hit. Anyway, I thought to myself......." I don't need to be here, so I'll leave just now ", just like thousands of other people who left at the same time.

So I casually picked up the phone, got myself a flight......and left!! Now you appear to have chosen a path where you will wait till the last minute before you leave......good for you. Maybe you have some self image of being a stoic survivor of the Great Flood of 2011. Maybe you want to sit in a bar in a years time and boast about how you rode out the storm, I don't know......up to you?

So what you can do is wait until the last minute and put extra pressure on the transport hubs such as they are, you will be such a hero for doing so. Well either a hero, or maybe......a touch irrational? Maybe you've watched too many disaster movies and fancy yourself getting airlifted by the last copter in town? The reality of the matter is that a vast swathe of the country is a cess pit right now, anyone that chose to get out early was not being irrational sir, far from it, and I bet there are a fair few TV members now regretting " toughing it out ". The majority of them will be silent though, not many people like admitting they made a mistake.

The problem with living on the edge is sometimes you fall off.

As I asked in the original post........ are you being selfish about staying in Bangkok?..........maybe another question should now be asked........is Bangkok being selfish by refusing to allow free passage of the water to the sea?

[theblether]

It is kind of obvious but... some people have to work.

I understand that, however the Human Resources departments of many overseas companies would have a fit at the implications of forcing their employees to work in these conditions.

When I lived in Africa, the short bursts of monsoons brought out a serious soup of sewage and disease, and that was in smallish towns and villages, I can't imagine what it is going to be like in a city of 9 million at the bottom of a gully where the effluence of 20 million is heading your way. Serious stuff.

Quite the opposite. International companies are terrified of closing down as that will leave a black mark on Bangkok's ability to be a productive place for business; even though the local branches are aware the disruption to their staff. Though I don't work for an International Company, I have to stay and work as 1, I need the money and 2 the company I work for can't afford to close down.

Also, your first point, is basically saying 'bad bad farangs, local needs come first'. If there was a disaster in the UK, do we put Brits first? Ignore the holiday makers who are hurt or foreign investers? No. We work to get through this together. It's not a Thai vs Farang thing which you're trying to create.

Humans are humans, never mind where we come from; we all have to survive. If a Thai gets upset that the last bottle of water was bought by a farang and not a Thai, then that Thai is just being racist, pure and simple.

Where in the Op was there anything which prompted : "I understand that, however the Human Resources departments of many overseas companies would have a fit at the implications of forcing their employees to work in these conditions."

It's a forum, conversations and points develop........do you think the point is not valid? Do you not think that the HR departments of Foreign conglomerates are watching with horror at the moment? Are you in business? have you ever been a Company Director with duty of care for your staff? If you have been then you wouldn't be questioning that point.

[theblether]

Quite the opposite. International companies are terrified of closing down as that will leave a black mark on Bangkok's ability to be a productive place for business; even though the local branches are aware the disruption to their staff. Though I don't work for an International Company, I have to stay and work as 1, I need the money and 2 the company I work for can't afford to close down.

Also, your first point, is basically saying 'bad bad farangs, local needs come first'. If there was a disaster in the UK, do we put Brits first? Ignore the holiday makers who are hurt or foreign investers? No. We work to get through this together. It's not a Thai vs Farang thing which you're trying to create.

Humans are humans, never mind where we come from; we all have to survive. If a Thai gets upset that the last bottle of water was bought by a farang and not a Thai, then that Thai is just being racist, pure and simple.

Not sure I follow your logic, as you are implying that companies need to justify their presence in Thailand and are terrified to shut operations temporarily. Why would a company need to justify their presence and be terrified that the country was struck by a natural (and man made) disaster? Any division of any company only comes under scrutiny if they are non-productive and losing money. The multinational company I work for has regional offices in Bangkok. They shuddered the offices a week ago in BKK and moved to Pattaya temporarily. No harm, no foul, just carrying on business as usual.

As for the OP, your argument is flawed in that you make the assumption that "most" farang have the capital to evacuate. Why would you make that assumption? I know many farang in Thailand who are just regular working stiffs and not on a corporate package or pension.

I disagree with you

In this case the Governor of Bangkok is ordering evacuation, if any farang has got themselves into a position that they cannot financially afford to evacuate then they are in a sorry state. I understand a relocation back to farangland would cost serious money for many however a few hundred baht would get you out of the city, a few thousand baht would see you through for a while in another Thai location. If you cannot afford to respond to an emergency then your living too close to the edge.

So how long have you been evacuated now? 3 weeks? taking a toll on your economy by living in the resort?

When I run out of money you start worrying

[SweRob]

I think its you that has seen too many disaster movies, not me... As to your latest question, what doYOU think? If your answer is that they should let central bkk flood then its a safe bet that you do not live here.