News Forum - Thailand’s nightlife can officially open from Wednesday but this will be too late for many businesses

[JJJ]

On 5/28/2022 at 9:02 PM, Politenessman said:

Keeping in mind that "reported deaths" does not mean actual deaths from Covid, you need to ask was a roughly 1% global fatality rate worth all the damage?

If we hadn't shut down the advanced economies of the world for 2 years, could we have used some of the resources generated to cut the death rates in the less advanced countries?

Over the same time period there’s also been almost 4 million deaths from tuberculosis. Yet we don’t run around with daily death trackers for that. 

[Thaidup]

C'mon guys we all really do like how the Thai's can get around a law or situation, Any farang living here (in my opinion) is happy that they could almost carry on with there lives with little disruption.

[Soidog]

1 hour ago, JamesR said:

I do, I used to drive a number of E class Mercedes for many decades but now I am retired I have to put up with a Peugeot 5008 in the UK and a Toyota in Thailand, times are hard.

Exactly. It’s a similar situation to last night and the Champions League final in Paris. Traditionally, Liverpool is often seen as a deprived or poorer part of the U.K. (I know times have changed and not like it use to be…). Last night half of Liverpool were in Paris for the football match. Literally thousands (maybe as many as 60,000) Liverpool supporters (not all from Liverpool obviously) had taken flights, trains or drove to Paris. Stayed in hotels and paid premium prices for food and drink.
 

The people in the U.K. have no idea what poverty is. Spend a few days driving around the villages of rural Thailand and you will start to see it. Thailand is classed as a developing or middle income country and so there are poverty levels far worse than you see even in rural Thailand. 

[JamesR]

2 hours ago, JJJ said:

Over the same time period there’s also been almost 4 million deaths from tuberculosis. Yet we don’t run around with daily death trackers for that. 

I don't see the connection, TB is treatable, covid wasn't and if left to run it course then most hospitals around the world would have been overrun, transportation of food and goods at a standstill and a lot more people would have died.

There are no more covid stats in the UK as the virus is seen as endemic now. 

[JamesR]

1 hour ago, Soidog said:

Exactly. It’s a similar situation to last night and the Champions League final in Paris. Traditionally, Liverpool is often seen as a deprived or poorer part of the U.K. (I know times have changed and not like it use to be…). Last night half of Liverpool were in Paris for the football match. Literally thousands (maybe as many as 60,000) Liverpool supporters (not all from Liverpool obviously) had taken flights, trains or drove to Paris. Stayed in hotels and paid premium prices for food and drink.
 

The people in the U.K. have no idea what poverty is. Spend a few days driving around the villages of rural Thailand and you will start to see it. Thailand is classed as a developing or middle income country and so there are poverty levels far worse than you see even in rural Thailand. 

Some Liverpool football supporters planes were cancelled so a group hired a speedboat to take them to France and then they caught a train.

Fuel poverty in England is when more than 10% of a persons income is spent on fuels costs, there is no such thing as poverty here unless someone is a druggy or a drunk.

I have never seen any poor people in Thailand either even after driving around villages, I have never driven in Isaan though as I have heard that is the most backward and uneducated part of Thailand hence poorer I assume.

When I say poor I am comparing it to India where I saw whole families living in tents under bridges and used the river as their 'bathroom'. 

[MikeW]

What are the new green provinces? 

[Manu]

9 hours ago, Soidog said:

Exactly. It’s a similar situation to last night and the Champions League final in Paris. Traditionally, Liverpool is often seen as a deprived or poorer part of the U.K. (I know times have changed and not like it use to be…). Last night half of Liverpool were in Paris for the football match. Literally thousands (maybe as many as 60,000) Liverpool supporters (not all from Liverpool obviously) had taken flights, trains or drove to Paris. Stayed in hotels and paid premium prices for food and drink.
 

The people in the U.K. have no idea what poverty is. Spend a few days driving around the villages of rural Thailand and you will start to see it. Thailand is classed as a developing or middle income country and so there are poverty levels far worse than you see even in rural Thailand. 

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2022/feb/06/food-bank-donor-to-to-user-soaring-demand-for-aid

[Vigo]

20 hours ago, Manu said:

"marginal operations" (in touristic areas), small tourist shops, bars, restaurants, small resorts, street sellers, tuk-tuk drivers, etc... were providing food on the table for 100 000s on a daily basis, and now it does not anymore. These people were always "struggling" as you said, but nevertheless it was bringing food on the table. Now it is not even anymore a matter of what will be tomorrow for all these people, but what is today. "well managed and capitalized business", basically with owners with enough cash on the side, will always manage somehow, but the real "economic damage" is always suffered by small people and the poorest of the poors in a crisis and in Thailand, it is dramatic. That is what I have observed where I am in Thailand.

And yet, we can read on any given thread, the  hatred/contempt/loathing for these "poor". Some of the people who you feel sorry for are those who committed the petty larcenies and exploited the tourists the most. Workers who come to mind are; Beach chair/jet ski touts, bar touts,  pimps, prostitutes, drug dealers, extortionists,  drive by thieves, tourist and time share touts and promoters, transport thugs in tourist zones, restaurants that inflated their prices or who sold poor quality food at  high prices to naive tourists (e.g. Patong's seafood restaurant row or some restaurants in Hua hin night market. I did not lose sleep over the suspension of trade at many of the illegal  beach restaurants on Phuket or in Hua Hin.

The reality is that the Thai economy still has a labour shortage. There are jobs available for these people.

The shakeout in the hospitality sector was a blessing for Thailand as it got rid of a lot of deadwood.  Yes, there were some people who suffered, decent and good people too, but their numbers are far less that what is assumed or claimed. Food & produce wholesale, and retail continued operating. Financial services continued, Manufacturing continued.  I won't shed a tear or lose sleep because one of Patong's taxi mobsters or jet ski thugs lost money. Nor will I lose sleep when some over priced rip off guest house/hotel has closed for lack business.

[Soidog]

5 hours ago, Manu said:

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2022/feb/06/food-bank-donor-to-to-user-soaring-demand-for-aid

Since you sent a link from the Guardian. Try reading this one. Says it all. Its inequality in the U.K., not poverty:

https://amp.theguardian.com/society/2014/sep/05/poverty-uk-better-calling-it-inequality

[Manu]

2 hours ago, Soidog said:

Since you sent a link from the Guardian. Try reading this one. Says it all. Its inequality in the U.K., not poverty:

https://amp.theguardian.com/society/2014/sep/05/poverty-uk-better-calling-it-inequality

The article you sent me is the opinion of one guy, an opinion you agree with, fine and I respect it. I personally completely, totally, hugely disagree. This made me jump for a start:

Quote

The first, and subtlest, of the difficulties is something that you could say was at least partly Jesus's fault. Three of the four Gospels tell the same story: a woman gives Jesus some expensive ointment, he uses it, and his disciples protest. They tell him that he could have sold the oil and given the money to the poor. Jesus disagrees, because, "The poor you will always have with you, but you will not always have me." This is often paraphrased or misremembered as "The poor are always with us," a sentence that returns more than half a billion Google hits. The original phrase "with you" isn't dismissive; there is something companionable, perhaps even necessary, about the permanent presence of the poor. This idea has penetrated deep into the collective consciousness: the idea that poverty is somehow inevitable, ineluctable, a given condition for a significant proportion of humanity.

You have got to be kidding!!! I can picture this middle class Guardian opinionated article writer writing this in his warm and cosy London flat with a lovely cup of tea with just a drop of milk but no sugar on his side. (I sometimes use The Guardian on here for sources when it provides indisputable numbers cause I know nobody will argue with it. But personally I have stopped reading this piece of crap, and certainly buying it when I am in the Uk, a long time ago).

People who rely on charity, literally begging for food (and clothes and gas and electricity and even a roof over their heads) are poor people (even the guy of your article agrees with that). That they are even poorer people somewhere else does not make them richer, in fact I am pretty sure it never even crossed their minds while they are missing all essentials for a basic life in their so-called rich country. If you step on a dog's poo, you have less poo on your shoes than someone stepping on a cow's poo. Yes your shoes are cleaner, but you cannot call your shoes clean cause they are simply not. I find creating a scale of the poors of the world unbearable, which is what the guy of your article does. It is not acceptable to be poor anywhere while the riches are so rich.

Definition of the word "poor" (Oxford dictionary)

Quote

1- having very little money; not having enough money for basic needs

https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/definition/american_english/poor

[Soidog]

1 hour ago, Manu said:

The article you sent me is the opinion of one guy, an opinion you agree with, fine and I respect it. I personally completely, totally, hugely disagree. This made me jump for a start:

You have got to be kidding!!! I can picture this middle class Guardian opinionated article writer writing this in his warm and cosy London flat with a lovely cup of tea with just a drop of milk but no sugar on his side. (I sometimes use The Guardian on here for sources when it provides indisputable numbers cause I know nobody will argue with it. But personally I have stopped reading this piece of crap, and certainly buying it when I am in the Uk, a long time ago).

People who rely on charity, literally begging for food (and clothes and gas and electricity and even a roof over their heads) are poor people (even the guy of your article agrees with that). That they are even poorer people somewhere else does not make them richer, in fact I am pretty sure it never even crossed their minds while they are missing all essentials for a basic life in their so-called rich country. If you step on a dog's poo, you have less poo on your shoes than someone stepping on a cow's poo. Yes your shoes are cleaner, but you cannot call your shoes clean cause they are simply not. I find creating a scale of the poors of the world unbearable, which is what the guy of your article does. It is not acceptable to be poor anywhere while the riches are so rich.

Definition of the word "poor" (Oxford dictionary)

https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/definition/american_english/poor

You chose the Guardian, not me. If you honestly believe that people in the U.K. are suffering from absolute poverty of the likes we see in India or Africa, then please point me to the areas of the country where that exists. All I see is relative poverty or inequality. It’s an affront to the people in this world who are suffering genuine poverty to compare people in the U.K. with their significant social safety nets and government handouts. If most of these people understood that it’s cheaper to buy fresh vegetables rather than frozen pizzas then that would help.
 

The only people in the U.K. I feel sorry for in such situations are the Children who live with these often overweight, lazy and uneducated “parents”.  

Poverty in the U.K.  don’t make me laugh! 

[JamesR]

20 minutes ago, Soidog said:

You chose the Guardian, not me. If you honestly believe that people in the U.K. are suffering from absolute poverty of the likes we see in India or Africa, then please point me to the areas of the country where that exists. All I see is relative poverty or inequality. It’s an affront to the people in this world who are suffering genuine poverty to compare people in the U.K. with their significant social safety nets and government handouts. If most of these people understood that it’s cheaper to buy fresh vegetables rather than frozen pizzas then that would help.
 

The only people in the U.K. I feel sorry for in such situations are the Children who live with these often overweight, lazy and uneducated “parents”.  

Poverty in the U.K.  don’t make me laugh! 

There was a report from Southampton yesterday by Sky News.

They interviewed two women both single parents, one said she feels poor as she can not take her daughter on day trips to the seaside anymore and the other one said she has to choose between food or electricity, it seemed like she had chosen food as she was grossly overweight.

As far as I can see in Africa and other such places poor people are extremely thin as they are truly poor.

Another guy said he has to choose when to drive his car as petrol is expensive, he had a car, do poor people have cars?

It is half term for schools at the moment, last weekend many of the airports were completely jam packed by families going on holiday, I suppose they were poor too.

"Where are you going on holiday"

"Jamaica for two weeks"

"Oh we are poor, we can only afford to go to Spain".

 

[JamesR]

1 hour ago, Manu said:

The article you sent me is the opinion of one guy, an opinion you agree with, fine and I respect it. I personally completely, totally, hugely disagree. This made me jump for a start:

You have got to be kidding!!! I can picture this middle class Guardian opinionated article writer writing this in his warm and cosy London flat with a lovely cup of tea with just a drop of milk but no sugar on his side. (I sometimes use The Guardian on here for sources when it provides indisputable numbers cause I know nobody will argue with it. But personally I have stopped reading this piece of crap, and certainly buying it when I am in the Uk, a long time ago).

People who rely on charity, literally begging for food (and clothes and gas and electricity and even a roof over their heads) are poor people (even the guy of your article agrees with that). That they are even poorer people somewhere else does not make them richer, in fact I am pretty sure it never even crossed their minds while they are missing all essentials for a basic life in their so-called rich country. If you step on a dog's poo, you have less poo on your shoes than someone stepping on a cow's poo. Yes your shoes are cleaner, but you cannot call your shoes clean cause they are simply not. I find creating a scale of the poors of the world unbearable, which is what the guy of your article does. It is not acceptable to be poor anywhere while the riches are so rich.

Definition of the word "poor" (Oxford dictionary)

https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/definition/american_english/poor

It depends on your interpretation of ''basic needs'', as far as I can see in the UK on the news it means can a person afford to go out and socialise or go on holiday. 

[Soidog]

14 minutes ago, JamesR said:

It depends on your interpretation of ''basic needs'', as far as I can see in the UK on the news it means can a person afford to go out and socialise or go on holiday. 

Off topic now so apologies. But you are exactly right. I grew up never going on a local holiday, never mind a trip to Spain or France. The people today don’t just expect, but demand being able to afford the latest technology, trips abroad, cars, nights out, 200 channels of television, Branded clothes. That’s all well and good and it’s great to live in a country where the majority can. However, a failure to deliver on these issues does not in itself define a country descending in to Poverty.

[JamesR]

22 minutes ago, Soidog said:

Off topic now so apologies. But you are exactly right. I grew up never going on a local holiday, never mind a trip to Spain or France. The people today don’t just expect, but demand being able to afford the latest technology, trips abroad, cars, nights out, 200 channels of television, Branded clothes. That’s all well and good and it’s great to live in a country where the majority can. However, a failure to deliver on these issues does not in itself define a country descending in to Poverty.

I will have to do the four Yorkshiremen sketch from Monty Python but in my case it was true.

We did not have a car or a telephone when I was a kid, we went on holidays to Butlins, I had to work in the evenings/weekends from the age of seven.........etc, I won't bore anyone with the details. 

It made me determined so after been forced to leave school at fifteen and go to work I decided to do something about it. 

Long story involving working during the day and then night school etc.

A few years later I ended up at University, software engineering and then I was set for life. Later on I went to Oxford University.

I made sure my two sons were well educated and had good a good start in life. They now have great jobs and are doing well. 

Some people have too many kids which they can not afford, they expect too many things for free and then rely on hand outs from the state and if they do not get what they think they deserve then they blame it all on the government.

 

[Soidog]

4 minutes ago, JamesR said:

Some people have too many kids which they can not afford, they expect too many things for free and then rely on hand outs from the state and if they do not get what they think they deserve then they blame it all on the government.

For government read tax payers. In other words, other people. 

[JamesR]

25 minutes ago, Soidog said:

Off topic now so apologies. But you are exactly right. I grew up never going on a local holiday, never mind a trip to Spain or France. The people today don’t just expect, but demand being able to afford the latest technology, trips abroad, cars, nights out, 200 channels of television, Branded clothes. That’s all well and good and it’s great to live in a country where the majority can. However, a failure to deliver on these issues does not in itself define a country descending in to Poverty.

I want all of the above except for the branded clothes as they are just a rip off, but I pay for it all myself.

[JamesR]

Just now, Soidog said:

For government read tax payers. In other words, other people. 

That is the point, many seem to think the government has lots of money, they never think it comes from you and I the tax payer, we have to pay for our own way in life and then pay for the lazy 'hangers on.'

They then blame you and me for their predicament saying 'it is all right for you' etc, the best thing to do is just laugh. 

[Manu]

On 5/30/2022 at 6:11 PM, JamesR said:

It depends on your interpretation of ''basic needs'', as far as I can see in the UK on the news it means can a person afford to go out and socialise or go on holiday. 

Choose the interpretation you wish. If I follow the real meaning of the word poor “ then I do not need any other interpretation of “basic needs”. Maybe you forgot cause you are too old or something, I personally remember very well what basic needs are. And really how many are having the beautiful feeling right now, moving around in circle in a very small space. One has really to define poverty.

[Thaidup]

2 minutes ago, Manu said:

Choose the interpretation you wish. If I follow the real meaning of the word poor “ then I do not need any other interpretation of “basic needs”. Maybe you forgot cause you are too old or something, I personally remember very well what basic needs are. And really how many are having the beautiful feeling right now, moving around in circle in a very small space. One has really to define poverty.

You said that very well. Being poor does not mean being "deprived" or "depoverished" some of the poorest people live a better and happier life than others with money. Better off being happy in life than wanting .

[Manu]

On 5/30/2022 at 5:36 PM, Soidog said:

You chose the Guardian, not me. If you honestly believe that people in the U.K. are suffering from absolute poverty of the likes we see in India or Africa, then please point me to the areas of the country where that exists. All I see is relative poverty or inequality. It’s an affront to the people in this world who are suffering genuine poverty to compare people in the U.K. with their significant social safety nets and government handouts. If most of these people understood that it’s cheaper to buy fresh vegetables rather than frozen pizzas then that would help.
 

The only people in the U.K. I feel sorry for in such situations are the Children who live with these often overweight, lazy and uneducated “parents”.  

Poverty in the U.K.  don’t make me laugh! 

I told in my previous about the guardian. Soidog my good man, i do not honestly “believe “ in any scale of poverty as you are talking about but does not  exist. There are poors and poorer and only the latter should get any attention you seem to say. . Anyone poor should… who’s poor again? Unless you put the word inequality (I’d love to know what that means) to replace the meaning of the word for some reason.

[Manu]

11 minutes ago, Thaidup said:

You said that very well. Being poor does not mean being "deprived" or "depoverished" some of the poorest people live a better and happier life than others with money. Better off being happy in life than wanting .

Yes.

[Soidog]

15 minutes ago, Manu said:

I told in my previous about the guardian. Soidog my good man, i do not honestly “believe “ in any scale of poverty as you are talking about but does not  exist. There are poors and poorer and only the latter should get any attention you seem to say. . Anyone poor should… who’s poor again? Unless you put the word inequality (I’d love to know what that means) to replace the meaning of the word for some reason.

Ok let me explain if I’m not making myself clear. There are two levels of recognised poverty in the world:

 

• Absolute poverty – is a condition where household income is below a necessary level to maintain basic living standards (food, shelter, housing). This condition makes it possible to compare between different countries and also over time.
• Relative poverty – A condition where household income is a certain percentage below median incomes. For example, the threshold for relative poverty could be set at 50% of median incomes (or 60%)

In the U.K. there is relative poverty and is set around an income of £13,500 a year. 
 

My issue is that most people are either unaware of the difference or don’t understand it. As a result, when the word “Poor” or “Poverty” is used by Western media, people assume the worst and that people can not afford food and shelter. This is simply not true in the U.K.  Yes, people have to make a choice regarding how they spend their income and those choices are often unpalatable. They may have to decide not to fill up their car in place of buying some extra food that week. Or they may decide not to pay a particular bill in time and let it slip a week or more. Or even decide to cancel the subscription to Netflix in order to buy clothes for the children. 
 

I’m also sure that if I was to look at the majority of so called poor people, I could see where they could spend their money better. As I mentioned before, buying fresh vegetables instead of convenience food such as frozen pizzas is both cheaper and more healthy. 
 

So the issue of poverty in the U.K. needs to be seen as a relative poverty. Relative to those who earn above £27,000 a year. Not by comparing it to most peoples view of what poverty means or experienced back in the 1930’s. 
 

I feel strongly about this as I grew up in a household with relative poverty. We rented a house and didn’t have any extras. My father couldn’t afford to ow or run a car, I had two pairs of trousers, one for school and one for home. I didn’t go on holiday as a child and simply played football with my friends all summer. I didn’t have iPads or iPhones or even my own television in my bedroom. I wouldn’t wish kids to grow up as I did, but my life was way more better than the millions living in Sub-Saharan Africa or India. Hence I have a perspective on life that many parents and children today simply do not understand and simply demand other people provide for them. 

[JamesR]

3 minutes ago, Soidog said:

Ok let me explain if I’m not making myself clear. There are two levels of recognised poverty in the world:

• Absolute poverty – is a condition where household income is below a necessary level to maintain basic living standards (food, shelter, housing). This condition makes it possible to compare between different countries and also over time.
• Relative poverty – A condition where household income is a certain percentage below median incomes. For example, the threshold for relative poverty could be set at 50% of median incomes (or 60%)

In the U.K. there is relative poverty and is set around an income of £13,500 a year. 
 

My issue is that most people are either unaware of the difference or don’t understand it. As a result, when the word “Poor” or “Poverty” is used by Western media, people assume the worst and that people can not afford food and shelter. This is simply not true in the U.K.  Yes, people have to make a choice regarding how they spend their income and those choices are often unpalatable. They may have to decide not to fill up their car in place of buying some extra food that week. Or they may decide not to pay a particular bill in time and let it slip a week or more. Or even decide to cancel the subscription to Netflix in order to buy clothes for the children. 
 

I’m also sure that if I was to look at the majority of so called poor people, I could see where they could spend their money better. As I mentioned before, buying fresh vegetables instead of convenience food such as frozen pizzas is both cheaper and more healthy. 
 

So the issue of poverty in the U.K. needs to be seen as a relative poverty. Relative to those who earn above £27,000 a year. Not by comparing it to most peoples view of what poverty means or experienced back in the 1930’s. 
 

I feel strongly about this as I grew up in a household with relative poverty. We rented a house and didn’t have any extras. My father couldn’t afford to ow or run a car, I had two pairs of trousers, one for school and one for home. I didn’t go on holiday as a child and simply played football with my friends all summer. I didn’t have iPads or iPhones or even my own television in my bedroom. I wouldn’t wish kids to grow up as I did, but my life was way more better than the millions living in Sub-Saharan Africa or India. Hence I have a perspective on life that many parents and children today simply do not understand and simply demand other people provide for them. 

Yew, were lucky, I ad t'live int paper bag in't middle of road when a were a lad, if you tell people t'day thel neva believe it. (Monty Python Four Yorkshireman Sketch).

It makes me laugh when people say money does not make you happy, normally from people who don't really have much.

Why can't these people not see, you can have money and you can also be happy at the same time, you can have both as one does not cancel out the other.

 

[Soidog]

21 minutes ago, JamesR said:

Yew, were lucky, I ad t'live int paper bag in't middle of road when a were a lad, if you tell people t'day thel neva believe it. (Monty Python Four Yorkshireman Sketch).

It makes me laugh when people say money does not make you happy, normally from people who don't really have much.

Why can't these people not see, you can have money and you can also be happy at the same time, you can have both as one does not cancel out the other.

Paper bag? Paper bag? Luxury!…..We had to wake up two hours before we went to bed. My father would beat me to within an inch of my life and we were grateful….

 

Totally agree. These people who win the lottery and then claim it ruined their life. I’d love the opportunity to test it out