Tasteless? Insensitive? Those words just don't seem strong enough to describe this:

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/02/world/what-in-the-world/cambodia-retirement.html

I don't find the article in any way insensitive.  I do find this thread title (which is not the title of the actual article) to be somehwat offensive though.

However the article is certainly misleading in implying someone could  "fund “a relaxed and comfortable lifestyle” in Cambodia on nothing more than a $1,000-a-month Social Security check. ". Western-level accommodation alone runs that much in PP, and utilities are sky ghigh- one of the highest e=]costs for electricity in the world (with two tier pricing, local/foreigner, to boot).

$2,000 a month yes; $1,000, no. And then there is the problem of health care - a big problem....

 

 

It's not the article itself, but that illustration, tied in with the lead's reference to carpet-bombing. And attacking a temple, no less.

$1000, I was hoping a holiday there would cost less than that a month, nevermind living there.

Don;t want to stay anywhere near the paedos.

Dreams spoiled.....booooo

I found the article tasteless with all the (irrelevant) war references and silly graphic, the sort of thing that might be turned in by a second-year journalism student with an inability to judge balance. Heavy war references far outweighed statistical backup ("thousands" LOL) and authoritative evidence (some frail quote from another media rep LOL).  This could have been written from an internet cafe in Prague.