Bob

I don't know about it being solely "private" but I simply don't understand why anybody cares about whether somebody is heterosexual, homosexual, or any shade in between. When I meet or interact with somebody, it's not exactly the first thing that pops into my head but that's not true of some people.

A month ago, while attending a language class, a 50-some-year-old male Aussie leaned over to me and said: "You know that "X" (another adult male classmate) is gay? That's what "Y" (another male adult classmate) says."

I didn't give a rat's ass other than I was a bit pissed off that the Aussie seemed to think I'd care one way or the other. I didn't react at first but later leaned over to him and said: "Hey, I heard that "Z" is actually a heterosexual! Can you f___king believe it?!?" He didn't reply (as he had no clue if I was being sarcastic or not....and, yea, I was...).

Air Asia's advertising slogan is, "now everyone can fly." How true it is. I have never seen airfares so cheap.

I flew on Air Asia last week round-trip from Chiangmai to Bangkok....and was a bit surprised (based on past history) that both flights were on time (and the return flight to Chiangmai was actually 10 minutes early!). I actually do like Air Asia as their flights are relatively inexpensive and their flight times usually fit my desired schedule.

But (and this doesn't only apply to Air Asia), why the heck do the airlines list the "baording time" when they never have ever started boarding at that scheduled time? My guess is it's just a scheduled time to start thinking about boarding....

TV helps too, especially if you have cable or satellite.

Now that's an original idea, Wino!

(Okay, okay, not funny.....but buddy lvdkeyes will like it...hehe).

Deported?!?!?

For the few fans of Prime Minister Abhisit that remain in existence, you all know how truthful he is, don't you? Here's what was reported on Page 3 of the Bangkok Post today:

"Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva insists the action was legal as the Hmong were not forced to leave Thailand." (emphasis added)

Now that I think of it, I do recall those wily Hmong asking the Thai military for a free ride to Laos....NOT.

In the states, any electrical outlets and the like anywhere near water (including in your bathroom, by your kitchen sink, etc.) have to be supplied by what are called ground-fault-interrupter circuits. These are circuit breakers (sometimes in your breaker box but also in stand-alone outlets) which will detect a small current leak (a short) and cut off the power before anyone receives any shock at all from that source.

I've not seen one of those here in Thailand and, of course, the electrical current in Thailand is 240 volts versus 110 volts in the states. And I've heard (but have nothing to support it) that death by electrocution is rather common here in Thailand.

If/when I buy a condo or lease a house/condo long-term, the first thing I intend on improving is the electrical hookups. The idea of the electric water heater next to the shower without ground-fault-interrupter protection is simply insane. Same for the outlets by the kitchen sink and stove and those outside.

Even the "corporation trick" (at least in those situations where the corporation is just passively owning land versus being involved in a true business) is illegal as was made clear by a directive I read from some Thai ministry within the last month. Based on what I read, you could get your interest confiscated if they catch you doing that one (but my guess is they're not looking much and don't do all that much about it). I wouldn't risk a lot of my money trying to do that one.

As to rucus7's question about "land tax", I really can't answer that one. I do understand that there are taxes due at the time of purchase/sale of land and, while not insignificant, it's not that much. My guess is the ThaiVisa site would likely have some more specifics on this topic.

Regarding annual "property taxes" (like we have in the states), I've asked that question hundreds of time and have been told there are none 95% of the time; however, one Thai from Surin made mention that his family pays 50 baht per rai per year for some agricultural land that they own. And I'd note that the Abhisit government is curently studying whether to impose a general property tax throughout Thailand (as a method to raise revenue from those that can afford to pay) but I haven't bothered to read the details (I'm guessing that it's nominal involving a house or agricultural land).

Hmmmm....never heard the word "shonks" before (and I presume it means "scams"). Learn something new every day (oh well, I'll forget it soon....).

I've been coming regularly to Thailand for more than a decade, spending 6+ months this year, and I've never heard anybody talking about the scope/scale of tuk tuk issues you mention. Sure, I hear people moan about the cost but you protect yourself there by setting the price up front. If I'm lapse in that department, I've heard of them charging 100 baht for a ride that should have cost 50-60 baht but I've never heard anywhere near the numbers the author cites. Maybe I lead a sheltered life (not really and a tuk tuk driver has been a good friend of mine for the last 9 years).

As for cost of a bar drink (meaning a beer or standard drink you hear about in any bar in the states), I've never heard of a bar charging more than 200 baht for that (now, I'm not talking about the Oriental or the Hilton, ya know). Most times the beer is 60-100 and most drinks (whisky and coke, rum and coke, gin and tonic, etc.) are 100-200 baht. Of course, if you're going into a bar in Thailand and ordering champagne, somebody ought to take your ATM card away from you anyway....hehe.

Never heard of the massage scam cited. If a guy hasn't been there and he's with his wife when some Thai bimbo approaches, it's almost beyond belief to me that the guy wouldn't tell her to FO. Can't believe anybody's dumb enough to pay anything in that situation.

I suppose anything can happen once....but I for one don't believe much of what Joel McHugh has to say.

I was living in Patong when the tsunami struck and can confirm that there was much loss of live and destruction, but when I read words like the above then I must protest. I actually viewed the results of the tsunami 30 minutes after the waves struck. In Patong the damage did not extend as far back as even one block, in fact the damage only extended back half a block (about 300m) from the beach front, very few building were 'levelled', and I never 'smelled' dead bodies. To be honest I never actually witnessed any dead people or body parts during my general inspection of the damage for the rest of that memorable day. No doubt the damage was like a war zone, with lots of piled up rubbish, debris, wrecked cars & boats, and many people died, but this zone had a very limited depth from the sea and the majority of Patong was untouched by water damage. I think the writer was describing other areas, like Kamala, Phi Phi Island, Khao Lak, and other very hard hit areas.

I stayed at Patong Beach for a few days a month before the tsunami hit and I did see a lot of the photos and videos taken from that area. I agree with you that there was little/no damage 4 blocks back and most of the 4,700 or so deaths in Thailand occurred elsewhere (mainly the Khao Lak area).

But I had heard that there were some deaths right on the beach (I mean there were some tourists or whoever that actually walked out to the receding area to retrieve sea shells or whatever - not realizing, of course, what was coming) and back on the main street. Across the street there (on the east side), there was a rather large basement supermarket. Since I saw photos and reports that the water level got up to about 2 feet in the street, I presumed that the basement supermarket was totally inundated and I couldn't imagine how several deaths there could be avoided. Did you happen to see anything there?

It's been many a year since I have been really blasted, perhaps as much as 20 years.

There seems to me to be two general behavior patterns for people who drink too much - those that get loud, obnoxious, angry, and often want to start a fight and those that simply get tired and sleepy without any of the obnoxious side effects listed before. Thankfully, none of my friends are of the first category as I can't stand being around somebody who gets "brave" (and loud and obnoxious) due to his/her overuse of alcohol.

I find that being around drunks is a complete bore.

Same here (unless, of course, I'm one of them.....)

Never heard that one in the midwest. Something in the water out there in the Idaho panhandle?

Basic fairness and justice is what should have driven the health care legislation (which still must survive a conference between the House and Senate and votes in both of those chambers, I believe). But it faced tremendous opposition - from basically all Republicans and from potent lobbyists working for entities making tons of money off the current system.

Your home is your castle and you should be able to run around naked if you want.

If you installed one-way glass (where only you can see out), agree with you 100%. But, given we've invited the world to look in through 2-way glass, there's some responsibility not to scare the bejesus out of the neighborhood kids or little ol' ladies. Common sense and courtesy would solve most of today's issues.

For most of us over 50, God invented the perfect method of birth contol - it's called nudity. Jeez, I even scare the crap out of myself sometimes when I see myself in the mirror in the morning.

I hoped they charged him about 87 billion for the medical treatment....

I'm with the judge and prosecutor on this one. Just because it's your own property doesn't mean you can exhibit your nude body (especially if it's ugly!) to the public. And, mind you, this isn't a case about an accidental exposure or two [and I suspect it's more about somebody getting their jollies by exhibiting their weewee (that's a medical term, folks) to the little old ladies walking through the neighborhood].

I'm sure you'd agree that I shouldn't be allowed to stand naked out on my own lawn by the sidewalk. And, if I stood in the garage with the doors closed, no big deal - but I'd guess you'd also agree I shouldn't be standing there naked with the garage doors up.

The key, of course, is what you're publicly displaying, not some antiquated notion of "I was on my own property" or "I was in my own house." If somebody wants to prance naked in their house, shut the damn drapes or don't do it by the windows.

Fair statement and reasoning, Thaimo. Too often we all forget that the President doesn't have all that much power to change things that are important without a cooperative Congress.....and getting something done by the current Congress is like pulling teeth.

Shows how uninformed I am on some subjects, I never knew that Angel Falls was named after a person.

I didn't either, figured it was some religious symbolism or the like. And I'm uninformed about a lot of subjects!

I still always get a kick about hearing how Columbus (or the Vikings or whoever) "discovered" America. I do believe the natives are still scratching their heads over that one.

Bob,

You have such a succinct way of getting your point across.

Lol. Well, I guess at times (or all the time?)I have a bit of a snotty gene but I can't help myself...

Seems legitimate to me for Venezuela to decide how to name its own landmarks. Any country ought to have that prerogative.

On the other hand, Hugo Chavez is a twisted nationalist seemingly bent on harming his own country and Venezuela, in my view, will be much better off when he is gone.

I got to laugh at how many folks rush to defend Obama, yet these same folks continue to bash Bush and Palin. All these politicians are much the same, all manipulate/spin the facts. I'll say it again, I'm glad I am not a US tax payer and I'll continue to watch with interest how the US fairs in the years to come.

As you apparently see little difference between Obama, Bush, and Palin, I too am glad you're not a US tax payor (but even happier that you're not a US voter).

A few monkeys are somewhat cute but one must never forget they can be nasty little bastards too. The area near Hua Hin has a few tourist attractions that have significant populations of monkeys and, while I'm no wuss, I've actually had the living daylights scared out of me a few times by some of those "cute" monkeys. Given the chance and the right circumstances, they will attack (and an attack usually involves an attempt to chew your face off) - so, while you should enjoy the communion with "nature", watch yourself a little and especially watch out for your kids (who, of course, think that little fang-bearing monkey is just as cute as a baby kitten).

Sometimes there is no alternative. If there was one, that would be my first stop. Regarding my own woes, for the life of me I can't think of any the government has ever solved. I can think of plenty they've created, but none they've solved.

I wouldn't go that far. Yes, I'm generally suspicious of government and pandering politicians - and just about every country has its poltical system substantially corrupted by money. From the US point of view, it'd be easy to provide a fairly long list of the screw-ups of government; however, there's also a very long list of both mundane and impressive accomplishments too (social security and medicare would be pretty good examples of the latter).

I don't agree with the one British poster's fairly complete negativity toward Obama. He's been in office for less than a year and, in my view, he's accomplished quite a bit (even if a lot of it is simply the perceptions of others in the world) in that time period. Without him, we wouldn't have the opportunity to revamp the health care system which has been on the agenda since Teddy Roosevelt. Is it a perfect solution? Hell no, but it's far better than what we've had in my lifetime.

I was wrong in that I expected ol' Roman to be back in France now. I'm glad he isn't and I do hope he gets to vacation in sunny California to put a proper end to his criminal conviction. Justice delayed is justice denied - and, in my view, that applies equally well to society, the victim, and the perpetrator.

I do remain totally mystified by some of the "what, it's no big deal" and "oh, he's such a great movie director and it was just sooooo long ago" reactions of the some of the Hollywood types and elites. On the other (and positive side in my view), I was heartened to hear 99% of the responses of the public and the newspaper editorials which thoroughly condemned those pampering views.

My apologies to Catholics and I hope I am not offending anyone, but I can't resist repeating an old joke: When it first came out that a large number of priests were molesting the altar boys, the Pope called a conclave of Cardinals to try to deal with the problem. But he couldn't get them to come until he promised the entertainment would be the Vienna Boys Choir.

Nah, no need to give apologies to the mackerels (hell, I was one for a long time) and it's understood (at least by me) that the jokes are justifiably aimed at the small percentage of priests and administrators who ought to have been jailed for what they did or didn't do.But, as far as I'm concerned, the jokes are fine. Most jokes are funny because there's a grain of truth to them (there's a reason, for example, that "dumb blonde" jokes are funny....mainly because we've all run across at least one dumb-ass blonde in our lives). Anyway....back to your joke.....I thought the main idea was somewhat funny but I was really wondering if you spelled "come" right....

My favorite of the genre has always been: Q: How do you get a nun pregnant? A: You dress her up as an altar boy...

At home in the US, I haven't gone out for New Years Eve for 30-40 years. I've always called it amateur night and believed it was just a bit too dangerous to be driving late on that night.

As for what I'll do in Chiangmai? My guess is very little or extraordinary that night. A bar I have frequented is having some kind of minor party and is going to set off some fireworks at midnight. Not sure I can stay up that late...hehe.

The contest gave women over the weight of 175 pounds the chance to strut their stuff to raise awareness for the suffering elephant population of Thailand.

I went and saw an elephant show last week near Chiangmai with some friends and I do believe that a couple of the beasts there looked a bit more fit and trim than a couple of these contestants. I can understand honoring larger-than-normal beauty queens - presuming that's what they want - but some of these gals are simply grossly obese and it's a bit sad they're making sport of people with (or will soon have) substantial medical problems. I'd feel the same about doing it for extraordinarily skinny people too.

We humans or some of us do seem to like freak shows but there seems to me to be something kinda weird about that.