Anger Rises In Flooded Bangkok As Centre Stays Dry

[SweRob]

It sounds like everybody in central bkk is rich, tell that to the millions of people w/families who rent rooms in the 3000 - 6000 thb/month range.. inside the protected area.

[TAWP]

Do you understand this?

More or less.

b.t.w: Where are you living?

Huay Kwang - which is a very Thai area, and middle to low in the income brackets of most of the people living here.

[surangw]

anger or jealousy ?

[Squigy]

It sounds like everybody in central bkk is rich, tell that to the millions of people w/families who rent rooms in the 3000 - 6000 thb/month range.. inside the protected area.

Sounds like the "Occupy Wall St" philosophy is on the cards here. Poor versus Rich!

[Ijustwannateach]

Sounds like the dangerous mob mentality developing (our homes have been ruined, let's blame someone luckier and destroy their homes, too!) that is part of why I've evacuated myself already.

If 'letting the water flow' (assuming this is something they actually have a choice about doing, and not something just as ambiguous and dodgy as everything else they've said) could actually work and they were pretty sure about it, then yes- why not. Otherwise, what's the point of cutting off the nose to spite the face?

The lesson should be learned for all those managing risk in this country: occupy the ground floor at the risk of losing everything, because no Thai government apparently has the power or will to do anything about it. And I was looking forward to living in a house here someday...

[wellred]

Someone please correct me but I thought now that high tide was over till next month they have this window to dart pumping water out of those areas to ease the pressure on the flood walls?

[manarak]

In comparison to the amount of water heading for the sea from the north, the "protected" areas are minuscule. The chances are that if the CBD were allowed to flood, the water levels in the already flooded areas would drop for a day or two and then rise again to where they are now.All that would have been achieved is the destruction of billions (of dollars) in infrastructure, the water supply, historical sites, and the main communications and business hub of the country (including the internet connection to the rest of the world).The rich would not be affected (they never are), because they can afford to be somewhere else, and their insurance will pay for the water damage. As always, it will be the poor and working class that will suffer.And no, I do not live in the city centre, although I haven't been flooded out of my ground floor apartment - yet.

Its blocking the natural flow of water, the fastest route forcing it in higher area's and making them flood even more. If they did not the water would flow faster. I understand them protecting BKK but that does not make it any less painfull here.

They should compensate all those who they sacrifice. Preferably by taxing the BKK people. I dont need a dime but sounds like a fair idea if your sacrificing people getting compensated by who they are sacrificed for. Maybe that will speed things up because when it cost money things can go fast.

As far as taxes are concerned, I think what you propose is already happening. Let's estimate how much tax money is generated by the CBD compared with the flooded residential areas....

... and future generations will be enslaved too (900b) ... this is the master plan ... ask me if you want to know more ...

Yes, I want to know more please.

I really don't see the links between slavery, the CBD and the flooding.

enlighten me.

[FOODLOVER]

BANGKOK, Oct 23 – Initial damages from the flood crisis on the Thai economy are likely to exceed 400 billion baht, excluding successive impacts and chain of effects to providing goods and service to customers, said Pornsil Patchritanakul, Deputy Secretary-General of the Board of Trade of Thailand.

If flooding hits Bangkok's business areas, the damage could climb another 120 billion baht per month, as the capital's Gross Domestic Product (GDP) is about one trillion baht each year.

http://www.mcot.net/...age/284528.html

Annual GDP for the entire nation:

GDP (2010 prelim.): $317 billion or 9.83 trillion Baht.

How many chickens is that?

[Buchholz]

BANGKOK, Oct 23 – Initial damages from the flood crisis on the Thai economy are likely to exceed 400 billion baht, excluding successive impacts and chain of effects to providing goods and service to customers, said Pornsil Patchritanakul, Deputy Secretary-General of the Board of Trade of Thailand.

If flooding hits Bangkok's business areas, the damage could climb another 120 billion baht per month, as the capital's Gross Domestic Product (GDP) is about one trillion baht each year.

Puts into perspective Thaksin's African gold and platinum mines worth 1.63 trillion baht.

.

.

Edited November 1, 2011 by Buchholz

[FOODLOVER]

BANGKOK, Oct 23 – Initial damages from the flood crisis on the Thai economy are likely to exceed 400 billion baht, excluding successive impacts and chain of effects to providing goods and service to customers, said Pornsil Patchritanakul, Deputy Secretary-General of the Board of Trade of Thailand.

If flooding hits Bangkok's business areas, the damage could climb another 120 billion baht per month, as the capital's Gross Domestic Product (GDP) is about one trillion baht each year.

Puts into perspective Thaksin's African gold and platinum mines worth 1.63 trillion baht.

.

.

That's a lot of chickens.

[robblok]

Someone please correct me but I thought now that high tide was over till next month they have this window to dart pumping water out of those areas to ease the pressure on the flood walls?

That is my whole grievance with BKK.. always moaning the canals are not designed for this ect ect. Sure they are not but they can help. But so far BKK is too afraid to risk even a little bit.

I don't want them to flood the city, i want them to help. They had chances before it was bad like this. They did not do it.

Its BKK that is blocking everything you can see it on the images from the satelites. Other then that yes the waterfront is wide but draining water from the middle will also guide the water from the edges to other area's

[zydeco]

I don't (didn't) live in a flood plane. My area was turned into one to protect people's right to live it up at the malls on Sukhumvit.

I think the people who have been flooded have a legitimate grievance and if I was in their position I'd probably want to smash down the barriers and dykes too. But your last sentence is ridiculous. If you honestly think the people in the "dry zone" are whooping it up and buying Rolexes in celebration then you are sadly mistaken. Unfortunate as it is, this government (who are the Reds - the rural poor remember?) has taken the decision to try and save Bangkok at the expense of others. We had no part in that decision. Most of us would agree to take on water to alleviate the suffering of those outside. But Bangkok is a city of 10 million people and it powers the economy. If it were to flood Thailand would be crippled. Tens of thousands - maybe hundreds of thousands - would be out of work. It would take years to recover and that would affect all Thais. Right or wrong, that is the truth of it. So please take your self righteous divisive nonsense and stick it your dyke.

Ridiculous, eh? Well, I evacuated over On Nut two days ago. The night I got here I was taken by my friends to the new mall, Terminal 21, for dinner at Tony Roma's since I hadn't had anything much to eat in almost a week. The mall looked like a salmon run, with people buying and shopping with a frenzy. Fully stocked Lotus over here on On Nut, too, unlike the one in Salaya which was sold out of water almost two weeks ago. Also canals over here are practically EMPTY. I'm seeing the BOTTOM of drainage pipes. Why?

BTW, someone answer me this. The floodwater from the Mahasawat was supposed to go into Nakhon Pathom and the Tha Chen above Nakhon Chasi. But that area is relatively dry. According to all the pre flood maps that area was supposed to be under 1 to 2 meters of water and Phutthamonthon was supposed to get only 20 cm to 50 cm. So, why is Phutthamonthon under 1.5 meters and Nakhon Chasi is dry? Who plugged up the Mahasawat and diverted the word south in Phutthamonthon?

Edited November 1, 2011 by zydeco

[geriatrickid]

I get accused of being a Redshirt in these threads, so I shouldn't be supportive of the strategy to save Bangkok, should I?

I am glad the authorities are trying to protect Bangkok. . It is the right thing to do. Bangkok is the nerve center of Thailand. Sure, it would have made sense to not be so centralized and sure it would have made sense to have proper urban planning, but the reality is that Bangkok is the most valuable urban asset in the nation and the government cannot reverse urban strategies made over the past 50 years.. The city is filled with refugees from flooded areas. it is filled with the key financial and service industries that will help Thailand recover and that are keeping Thailand functioning. Yes, houses are flooded outside the protective ring, but inside the ring it would be highrises with thousands that would be flooded.

Some argue that the pain must be shared. That is a shortsighted and selfish approach. The flooded areas are damaged, and the property damage cannot be reversed by causing more property damage in Bangkok. If Bangkok is flooded the people have nowhere to go. What do the proponents of flooding Bangkok propose done with the 10 million or so people in the so far undamaged or slightly damaged areas? Keeping this population going provides a foundation for rebuilding after the floods, it also means that more resources can be directed to those in need. From a cost benefit analysis, keeping Bangkok working and functioning is the right decision. Flooding in Bangkok would mean the loss of key medical centers and if that happens thousands of people will die as they are denied medical care. Where do you think many of the patients from the flooded areas were taken? The decision to protect Bangkok is politically damaging to the national government, but it shows that the government is able to make the tough decisions even if it means alienating its key supporting districts. People wanted political unity, well they are getting it as the military and the Democrats are providing their tacit support to the government.

[webfact]

DEPT Bkk gov no longer sure the 19 districts will be safe frm #ThaiFloodENG after locals forced govt to open Sam Wa floodgate /Via TPBS /TANN

RT @Tulip_Oum: 11dist effected by hi-tide; Dusit-PraNakorn-Sampantawong-BangRak-BangkorLeam-Yannawa-Klongteuy-PraKanong-Klongsan-BangkokYai-Bangna~@nnanews

It's mean chance is it'll get fully flooded, according to the info. RT @RogerHaslock: @Tulip_Oum @nnanews I'm in Bang Khae, no flooding here

[whybother]

Ridiculous, eh? Well, I evacuated over On Nut two days ago. The night I got here I was taken by my friends to the new mall, Terminal 21, for dinner at Tony Roma's since I hadn't had anything much to eat in almost a week. The mall looked like a salmon run, with people buying and shopping with a frenzy. Fully stocked Lotus over here on On Nut, too, unlike the one in Salaya which was sold out of water almost two weeks ago. Also canals over here are practically EMPTY. I'm seeing the BOTTOM of drainage pipes. Why?

BTW, someone answer me this. The floodwater from the Mahasawat was supposed to go into Nakhon Pathom and the Tha Chen above Nakhon Chasi. But that area is relatively dry. According to all the pre flood maps that area was supposed to be under 1 to 2 meters of water and Phutthamonthon was supposed to get only 20 cm to 50 cm. So, why is Phutthamonthon under 1.5 meters and Nakhon Chasi is dry? Who plugged up the Mahasawat and diverted the word south in Phutthamonthon?

I live in Huay Kwang and I haven't seen a fully stocked supermarket in nearly 2 weeks, and there certainly hasn't been any water. I doubt On Nut would be any different given that there have even been shortages reported in non-flooded areas well outside Bangkok.

I heard people "were living it up" in Central Rama II. Those rich elite over there are unbelievable! Thai's love shopping. They will go shopping whenever they can. It is nothing to do with "protecting peoples right to live it up".

[frodo]

DEPT Bkk gov no longer sure the 19 districts will be safe frm #ThaiFloodENG after locals forced govt to open Sam Wa floodgate /Via TPBS /TANN

They may as well open all floodgates now. A precedence has now been set. Mob rule.

Edited November 1, 2011 by frodo

[zydeco]

Ridiculous, eh? Well, I evacuated over On Nut two days ago. The night I got here I was taken by my friends to the new mall, Terminal 21, for dinner at Tony Roma's since I hadn't had anything much to eat in almost a week. The mall looked like a salmon run, with people buying and shopping with a frenzy. Fully stocked Lotus over here on On Nut, too, unlike the one in Salaya which was sold out of water almost two weeks ago. Also canals over here are practically EMPTY. I'm seeing the BOTTOM of drainage pipes. Why?

BTW, someone answer me this. The floodwater from the Mahasawat was supposed to go into Nakhon Pathom and the Tha Chen above Nakhon Chasi. But that area is relatively dry. According to all the pre flood maps that area was supposed to be under 1 to 2 meters of water and Phutthamonthon was supposed to get only 20 cm to 50 cm. So, why is Phutthamonthon under 1.5 meters and Nakhon Chasi is dry? Who plugged up the Mahasawat and diverted the word south in Phutthamonthon?

I live in Huay Kwang and I haven't seen a fully stocked supermarket in nearly 2 weeks, and there certainly hasn't been any water. I doubt On Nut would be any different given that there have even been shortages reported in non-flooded areas well outside Bangkok.

I heard people "were living it up" in Central Rama II. Those rich elite over there are unbelievable! Thai's love shopping. They will go shopping whenever they can. It is nothing to do with "protecting peoples right to live it up".

Doubt it all you want. But I have seen it with my own two eyes. I'm in On Nut right now, on Soi 50, and the Lotus is a 5-10 minute walk from here. The fact is you don't know what you're talking about. I was trapped in Phutthamonthon two days ago and am seeing the contrast between there and here with my own eyes. Until you have been in my shoes--and rob's and h90's and others, perhaps you should just shut up.

[whybother]

Ridiculous, eh? Well, I evacuated over On Nut two days ago. The night I got here I was taken by my friends to the new mall, Terminal 21, for dinner at Tony Roma's since I hadn't had anything much to eat in almost a week. The mall looked like a salmon run, with people buying and shopping with a frenzy. Fully stocked Lotus over here on On Nut, too, unlike the one in Salaya which was sold out of water almost two weeks ago. Also canals over here are practically EMPTY. I'm seeing the BOTTOM of drainage pipes. Why?

BTW, someone answer me this. The floodwater from the Mahasawat was supposed to go into Nakhon Pathom and the Tha Chen above Nakhon Chasi. But that area is relatively dry. According to all the pre flood maps that area was supposed to be under 1 to 2 meters of water and Phutthamonthon was supposed to get only 20 cm to 50 cm. So, why is Phutthamonthon under 1.5 meters and Nakhon Chasi is dry? Who plugged up the Mahasawat and diverted the word south in Phutthamonthon?

I live in Huay Kwang and I haven't seen a fully stocked supermarket in nearly 2 weeks, and there certainly hasn't been any water. I doubt On Nut would be any different given that there have even been shortages reported in non-flooded areas well outside Bangkok.

I heard people "were living it up" in Central Rama II. Those rich elite over there are unbelievable! Thai's love shopping. They will go shopping whenever they can. It is nothing to do with "protecting peoples right to live it up".

Doubt it all you want. But I have seen it with my own two eyes. I'm in On Nut right now, on Soi 50, and the Lotus is a 5-10 minute walk from here. The fact is you don't know what you're talking about. I was trapped in Phutthamonthon two days ago and am seeing the contrast between there and here with my own eyes. Until you have been in my shoes--and rob's and h90's and others, perhaps you should just shut up.

I'm not saying anything about what you guys have experienced with your flooded homes.

But Bangkok is not being protected "to protect people's right to live it up at the malls on Sukhumvit".

And if Lotus in On Nut is fully stocked, it is probably the only supermarket that is fully stocked within 100km of Bangkok.

[whybother]

I get accused of being a Redshirt in these threads, so I shouldn't be supportive of the strategy to save Bangkok, should I?

I am glad the authorities are trying to protect Bangkok. . It is the right thing to do. Bangkok is the nerve center of Thailand. Sure, it would have made sense to not be so centralized and sure it would have made sense to have proper urban planning, but the reality is that Bangkok is the most valuable urban asset in the nation and the government cannot reverse urban strategies made over the past 50 years.. The city is filled with refugees from flooded areas. it is filled with the key financial and service industries that will help Thailand recover and that are keeping Thailand functioning. Yes, houses are flooded outside the protective ring, but inside the ring it would be highrises with thousands that would be flooded.

Some argue that the pain must be shared. That is a shortsighted and selfish approach. The flooded areas are damaged, and the property damage cannot be reversed by causing more property damage in Bangkok. If Bangkok is flooded the people have nowhere to go. What do the proponents of flooding Bangkok propose done with the 10 million or so people in the so far undamaged or slightly damaged areas? Keeping this population going provides a foundation for rebuilding after the floods, it also means that more resources can be directed to those in need. From a cost benefit analysis, keeping Bangkok working and functioning is the right decision. Flooding in Bangkok would mean the loss of key medical centers and if that happens thousands of people will die as they are denied medical care. Where do you think many of the patients from the flooded areas were taken? The decision to protect Bangkok is politically damaging to the national government, but it shows that the government is able to make the tough decisions even if it means alienating its key supporting districts. People wanted political unity, well they are getting it as the military and the Democrats are providing their tacit support to the government.

Agreed. The most sensible post I've seen from you in a long time GK.

[animatic]

Someone please correct me but I thought now that high tide was over till next month they have this window to dart pumping water out of those areas to ease the pressure on the flood walls?

No.

High tide happens twice every day. As does low tide.

This was 'Highest Moon Tide',

or when the moon is closest to the earth

and pulls the hardest causing the highest of high tides.

A bad time for a flood or hurricane storm surge.

The following high tides are only marginally lower,

but each day for 2 weeks they go a little lower again,

before repeating the build up to the top of the Months High Tide.

There are some months where highest tide is higher than others,

depending on where on the earth you are and when.

Moons relative position to earth axis isn't static but constantly changing.

[animatic]

I get accused of being a Redshirt in these threads, so I shouldn't be supportive of the strategy to save Bangkok, should I?

I am glad the authorities are trying to protect Bangkok. . It is the right thing to do. Bangkok is the nerve center of Thailand. Sure, it would have made sense to not be so centralized and sure it would have made sense to have proper urban planning, but the reality is that Bangkok is the most valuable urban asset in the nation and the government cannot reverse urban strategies made over the past 50 years.. The city is filled with refugees from flooded areas. it is filled with the key financial and service industries that will help Thailand recover and that are keeping Thailand functioning. Yes, houses are flooded outside the protective ring, but inside the ring it would be highrises with thousands that would be flooded.

Some argue that the pain must be shared. That is a shortsighted and selfish approach. The flooded areas are damaged, and the property damage cannot be reversed by causing more property damage in Bangkok. If Bangkok is flooded the people have nowhere to go. What do the proponents of flooding Bangkok propose done with the 10 million or so people in the so far undamaged or slightly damaged areas? Keeping this population going provides a foundation for rebuilding after the floods, it also means that more resources can be directed to those in need. From a cost benefit analysis, keeping Bangkok working and functioning is the right decision. Flooding in Bangkok would mean the loss of key medical centers and if that happens thousands of people will die as they are denied medical care. Where do you think many of the patients from the flooded areas were taken? The decision to protect Bangkok is politically damaging to the national government, but it shows that the government is able to make the tough decisions even if it means alienating its key supporting districts. People wanted political unity, well they are getting it as the military and the Democrats are providing their tacit support to the government.

Agreed. The most sensible post I've seen from you in a long time GK.

Agreed also.

Must be the moon tide.

[whybother]

...

Moons relative position to earth axis isn't static but constantly changing.

Before I say "you're talking crap" , can you explain what you mean by this?

[BlueTerrace]

I get accused of being a Redshirt in these threads, so I shouldn't be supportive of the strategy to save Bangkok, should I?

I am glad the authorities are trying to protect Bangkok. . It is the right thing to do. Bangkok is the nerve center of Thailand. Sure, it would have made sense to not be so centralized and sure it would have made sense to have proper urban planning, but the reality is that Bangkok is the most valuable urban asset in the nation and the government cannot reverse urban strategies made over the past 50 years.. The city is filled with refugees from flooded areas. it is filled with the key financial and service industries that will help Thailand recover and that are keeping Thailand functioning. Yes, houses are flooded outside the protective ring, but inside the ring it would be highrises with thousands that would be flooded.

Some argue that the pain must be shared. That is a shortsighted and selfish approach. The flooded areas are damaged, and the property damage cannot be reversed by causing more property damage in Bangkok. If Bangkok is flooded the people have nowhere to go. What do the proponents of flooding Bangkok propose done with the 10 million or so people in the so far undamaged or slightly damaged areas? Keeping this population going provides a foundation for rebuilding after the floods, it also means that more resources can be directed to those in need. From a cost benefit analysis, keeping Bangkok working and functioning is the right decision. Flooding in Bangkok would mean the loss of key medical centers and if that happens thousands of people will die as they are denied medical care. Where do you think many of the patients from the flooded areas were taken? The decision to protect Bangkok is politically damaging to the national government, but it shows that the government is able to make the tough decisions even if it means alienating its key supporting districts. People wanted political unity, well they are getting it as the military and the Democrats are providing their tacit support to the government.

Hear, hear.

Destroying the city centre infrastructre will do nothing to assist those who have already been flooded. Flooding the economic and financial heart of the nation it will make it far harder to rebuild.

[ratcatcher]

I get accused of being a Redshirt in these threads, so I shouldn't be supportive of the strategy to save Bangkok, should I?

I am glad the authorities are trying to protect Bangkok. . It is the right thing to do. Bangkok is the nerve center of Thailand. Sure, it would have made sense to not be so centralized and sure it would have made sense to have proper urban planning, but the reality is that Bangkok is the most valuable urban asset in the nation and the government cannot reverse urban strategies made over the past 50 years.. The city is filled with refugees from flooded areas. it is filled with the key financial and service industries that will help Thailand recover and that are keeping Thailand functioning. Yes, houses are flooded outside the protective ring, but inside the ring it would be highrises with thousands that would be flooded.

Some argue that the pain must be shared. That is a shortsighted and selfish approach. The flooded areas are damaged, and the property damage cannot be reversed by causing more property damage in Bangkok. If Bangkok is flooded the people have nowhere to go. What do the proponents of flooding Bangkok propose done with the 10 million or so people in the so far undamaged or slightly damaged areas? Keeping this population going provides a foundation for rebuilding after the floods, it also means that more resources can be directed to those in need. From a cost benefit analysis, keeping Bangkok working and functioning is the right decision. Flooding in Bangkok would mean the loss of key medical centers and if that happens thousands of people will die as they are denied medical care. Where do you think many of the patients from the flooded areas were taken? The decision to protect Bangkok is politically damaging to the national government, but it shows that the government is able to make the tough decisions even if it means alienating its key supporting districts. People wanted political unity, well they are getting it as the military and the Democrats are providing their tacit support to the government.

Your post is very logical and makes a lot of sense, but try telling that to people who are living on the second floors of houses in areas north and west of Bangkok surrounded by a meter of muddy water.

There is something wrong with the overall picture since where I reside,Nong Suea area of Pathumthani, the east side of klong 7 and everything east of there, at least to klong 10 and probably further, is not flooded.

Everything west of klong 7 and north & south of klong Rangsit is flooded.

The klong Luang, Lam Lukka areas have a higher population density than Nong Suea, so why is it still dry?

I am not complaining since my house is dry, but if I was one of the angry affected citizens , I'd want some answers and soon.

And I have had my share of flooding after living near Phichit in August & September surrounded by 2 feet of muddy waters from Nan river, so I know how they feel.

Plus we received compensation from the Amphoe for flood damage, something which I am afraid suburban Bangkok citizens will not..

[jayboy]

The decision to protect Bangkok is politically damaging to the national government, but it shows that the government is able to make the tough decisions even if it means alienating its key supporting districts.

A cynic might argue it didn't take that much courage since the districts it "alienated" don't have anywhere else to go politically.In other words at an election it's highly unlikely they will vote other than for PTP.

[thaicbr]

I don't (didn't) live in a flood plane. My area was turned into one to protect people's right to live it up at the malls on Sukhumvit.

I think the people who have been flooded have a legitimate grievance and if I was in their position I'd probably want to smash down the barriers and dykes too. But your last sentence is ridiculous. If you honestly think the people in the "dry zone" are whooping it up and buying Rolexes in celebration then you are sadly mistaken. Unfortunate as it is, this government (who are the Reds - the rural poor remember?) has taken the decision to try and save Bangkok at the expense of others. We had no part in that decision. Most of us would agree to take on water to alleviate the suffering of those outside. But Bangkok is a city of 10 million people and it powers the economy. If it were to flood Thailand would be crippled. Tens of thousands - maybe hundreds of thousands - would be out of work. It would take years to recover and that would affect all Thais. Right or wrong, that is the truth of it. So please take your self righteous divisive nonsense and stick it your dyke.

Ridiculous, eh? Well, I evacuated over On Nut two days ago. The night I got here I was taken by my friends to the new mall, Terminal 21, for dinner at Tony Roma's since I hadn't had anything much to eat in almost a week. The mall looked like a salmon run, with people buying and shopping with a frenzy. Fully stocked Lotus over here on On Nut, too, unlike the one in Salaya which was sold out of water almost two weeks ago. Also canals over here are practically EMPTY. I'm seeing the BOTTOM of drainage pipes. Why?

BTW, someone answer me this. The floodwater from the Mahasawat was supposed to go into Nakhon Pathom and the Tha Chen above Nakhon Chasi. But that area is relatively dry. According to all the pre flood maps that area was supposed to be under 1 to 2 meters of water and Phutthamonthon was supposed to get only 20 cm to 50 cm. So, why is Phutthamonthon under 1.5 meters and Nakhon Chasi is dry? Who plugged up the Mahasawat and diverted the word south in Phutthamonthon?

"TW, someone answer me this. The floodwater from the Mahasawat was supposed to go into Nakhon Pathom and the Tha Chen above Nakhon Chasi. But that area is relatively dry. According to all the pre flood maps that area was supposed to be under 1 to 2 meters of water and Phutthamonthon was supposed to get only 20 cm to 50 cm. So, why is Phutthamonthon under 1.5 meters and Nakhon Chasi is dry? Who plugged up the Mahasawat and diverted the word south in Phutthamonthon?"

It is amazing how much crap you are spurting out, yesterday complaining that 'no one told me it was coming' or 'the bma did not say anything about phuttamonthon getting flooded'

Matey. putthamonton is in nakhon pathom and is not under the BMA. And nakhon chaisri flooded BEFORE puthamonton. if you had bothered to go and look at the Tha chin river it is at it's highest in years. The maha sawat has to be pumped into the Thai chin.There is no conspiracy it's just nature. the water is flowing to the sea. We are in the way.

I do feel for you because you were flooded. BUT get a grip on reality.

look at the sat flood map the hugest part of the flood is over the west of Bkk the flood gates in Bkk would make a snowflake in a snowstorm worth of good. And possibly endanger millions of people.

[TAWP]

Even if they opened the gates to the full some areas, due to being elevated higher, will receive little or no water...should we truck water and dump it in their backyards to make it more 'fair'?

Listen, I understand that people are upset with water in their houses, but thinking that drowning a couple of million other peoples homes will make their suffering easier...is shortsighted and frankly selfish. "I am in pain, they must be too."

[hammered]

It is about symbolism in a changing country. The area that is not flooded stands for certain things in many many people's minds and that makes this a very divisive and political issue regardless of whether risking the flooding of central BKK by a more aggressive water flow through the centre is a good or bad idea.

Everyone has seen the satellite images showing BKK at the centre of the water mass and dry and virtually everyone north of BKK thinks the gates should have been opened ages ago. The whole thing is compounded now by high tides and it is fairly obvious that if water were to be sent through central BKK a while back when there were low tides was the time to do so. There will be another opportunity starting soon when tides get lower. In the meantime the symbolism in a badly divided country is not missed.

[animatic]

...

Moons relative position to earth axis isn't static but constantly changing.

Before I say "you're talking crap" , can you explain what you mean by this?

I should have added the angle of the moon to an geographic location also affects tide heights. But the principle remains the same. The angle of the moon to sea and land and closeness affects the tides differently at different times.

Why do we have winter and summer?

Because the earths axis essentially is in more northerly or southernly positions

relative to the SUN. Northernly is summer.

But the moon doesn't necessarily exactly track the suns angle to the earth

And the moon sometimes comes closer to the earth than other times.

The closer the moon, the stronger the pull on the seas by the moons gravity.

More than you ever wanted to know about tides.

http://home.hiwaay.n...moon/moontides/

http://www.enchanted...oon/Tides.shtml

http://csep10.phys.u...time/tides.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tide

Edited November 1, 2011 by animatic

[zydeco]

I don't (didn't) live in a flood plane. My area was turned into one to protect people's right to live it up at the malls on Sukhumvit.

I think the people who have been flooded have a legitimate grievance and if I was in their position I'd probably want to smash down the barriers and dykes too. But your last sentence is ridiculous. If you honestly think the people in the "dry zone" are whooping it up and buying Rolexes in celebration then you are sadly mistaken. Unfortunate as it is, this government (who are the Reds - the rural poor remember?) has taken the decision to try and save Bangkok at the expense of others. We had no part in that decision. Most of us would agree to take on water to alleviate the suffering of those outside. But Bangkok is a city of 10 million people and it powers the economy. If it were to flood Thailand would be crippled. Tens of thousands - maybe hundreds of thousands - would be out of work. It would take years to recover and that would affect all Thais. Right or wrong, that is the truth of it. So please take your self righteous divisive nonsense and stick it your dyke.

Ridiculous, eh? Well, I evacuated over On Nut two days ago. The night I got here I was taken by my friends to the new mall, Terminal 21, for dinner at Tony Roma's since I hadn't had anything much to eat in almost a week. The mall looked like a salmon run, with people buying and shopping with a frenzy. Fully stocked Lotus over here on On Nut, too, unlike the one in Salaya which was sold out of water almost two weeks ago. Also canals over here are practically EMPTY. I'm seeing the BOTTOM of drainage pipes. Why?

BTW, someone answer me this. The floodwater from the Mahasawat was supposed to go into Nakhon Pathom and the Tha Chen above Nakhon Chasi. But that area is relatively dry. According to all the pre flood maps that area was supposed to be under 1 to 2 meters of water and Phutthamonthon was supposed to get only 20 cm to 50 cm. So, why is Phutthamonthon under 1.5 meters and Nakhon Chasi is dry? Who plugged up the Mahasawat and diverted the word south in Phutthamonthon?

"TW, someone answer me this. The floodwater from the Mahasawat was supposed to go into Nakhon Pathom and the Tha Chen above Nakhon Chasi. But that area is relatively dry. According to all the pre flood maps that area was supposed to be under 1 to 2 meters of water and Phutthamonthon was supposed to get only 20 cm to 50 cm. So, why is Phutthamonthon under 1.5 meters and Nakhon Chasi is dry? Who plugged up the Mahasawat and diverted the word south in Phutthamonthon?"

It is amazing how much crap you are spurting out, yesterday complaining that 'no one told me it was coming' or 'the bma did not say anything about phuttamonthon getting flooded'

Matey. putthamonton is in nakhon pathom and is not under the BMA. And nakhon chaisri flooded BEFORE puthamonton. if you had bothered to go and look at the Tha chin river it is at it's highest in years. The maha sawat has to be pumped into the Thai chin.There is no conspiracy it's just nature. the water is flowing to the sea. We are in the way.

I do feel for you because you were flooded. BUT get a grip on reality.

look at the sat flood map the hugest part of the flood is over the west of Bkk the flood gates in Bkk would make a snowflake in a snowstorm worth of good. And possibly endanger millions of people.

First, my name is not "matey". Got it, pal? Second I live on Phutthamonthon Sai 3, which is in Thawi Wattana and under the BMA. Third, an acquaintance of mine lives north of the junction of Borommarachachani and 4 in Nakhon Chasi, just west of Sai 8 and the river and he reports that his water level in the area, which is just a few cm on the street, has remained stable since October 16th. The rumor he heard, which because it was a rumor is the reason I did not repeat and instead asked why his area was not being affected, is that Nakhon Pathom food processers had intervened to protect their businesses. That was his RUMOR, which I do not put much credence in, but it wouldn't surprise if it was true and vested interests were protecting themselves over people. And NO, there was NO EVACUATION notice for Sai 3 until the night before it started to flood. If you consider that an adequate warning, telling people to flee for their lives in the middle of the night, then you are the one full of crap.