Jump to content
BANGKOK 22 May 2019 22:19

sweatalot

Advanced Members
  • Content Count

    3,846
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by sweatalot


  1. 5 hours ago, webfact said:

    Most are in Mae Hong Son, with 407, while Chiang Mai has 193, Chiang Rai 137, Lampang 109 and Nan 106.

     

    Myanmar has 12,422 and Laos 2,938.

    So how many percents is home made in Thailand and how much is imported?

     

    Looks like Thailand cannot do much - except declare war and send water bombers (joke)


  2. 48 minutes ago, WeekendRaider said:

    there is always a yin and a yang.  with this also.  some perspective can help.  maybe.  this smoke we can see.  we can even smell it.  and we all certainly have memories and can see today folks, including ourselves, suffering from this.  so we get upset.  but this kind of pollution also has a 'negative forcing', on a larger scale, that is actually good for us.  the albedo effect.  it's just that we have too much of it now in the north.  but the really bad stuff cannot be seen, at all, cannot be smelled at all, is omnipresent or there would be no life and accounts for all of the air we breath, albeit indirectly by "feeding" trees and grass, as well as all of our food.  the one that even accounts for why we left the trees 8 mya ago we now know and found the "missing link" of in Chad in 2005.  Sahelanthropus.  

    none of us confuse this smoke with benevolence, yet the much more dangerous atmospheric "pollution" of carbon dioxide is still to this day conflated by billions of us as an all powerful benevolent force that accounts for life.  that we can't see but we "just plain know" must be true.  yet we are not smart enough, nor well enough organized, even just to stop some rice paddy being burned.  there's a good lesson to be taken from this.    

    too wise for me

    • Like 1

  3. 1 hour ago, Thian said:

    It's too dangerous to stop the farmers from burning....they have guns/bombs i guess.

    So has the military. And as another poster in another threat said: Why not send in the army, guarding the fields and the forests and shoot perpetrators if they resist against arrest and forced labour extinguishing fires and delete those fungi and paying a hefty fine

    • Thanks 2

  4. 1 hour ago, teacherofwoe said:

    1. Anyone lighting a forest or field gets 10 years mandatory without appeal or parole.

    2. Anyone in possession of those grim black mushrooms gets 10 years mandatory without appeal or parole.

    3. Any burn forest or field must lie fallow for 10 years.

    4. Anyone found growing crops on burnt land within a 10 year period gets 10 years mandatory without appeal or parole.

    5. Any company, including all directors of the board, that utilize burnt land shall have their business assets seized to pay for harm caused, and all parties shall have their personal assets frozen for 10 years and 10 years mandatory without appeal or parole.

    6. Any politician found receiving donations or accepting a lobbying appeal from a company, or representative of a company, which has been prosecuted and found guilty of any of parts 1 to 5, shall have their personal assets seized to pay for harm caused, and gets 20 years mandatory without appeal or parole.

     

    Problem solved if someone up there only had the balls.

    well meant - but dream on

     

    Nothing can be done until they start banning and enforcing burning

     

    Until they start with this they can double and triple the threat of punishment to no avail


  5. 2 hours ago, Just Weird said:

     

     

    3 hours ago, silver sea said:

     

     

    Two wrongs don’t make a right. The father made a mistake in turning round and trying to drive away, but that doesn’t justify the volunteer’s subsequent actions. The fact he hasn’t turned up to be interviewed shows he knows he’s in the wrong.

     

    Even if the volunteer, who is of 10 years’ experience, couldn’t see the child, he would have noticed that there was a woman on the back, and yet he still acted in a reckless way. They weren’t Bonny and Clyde, but just a young couple, who, foolishly, were trying to avoid paying the fine.

     

    Thank goodness he had only a piece of wood and not a gun, otherwise the consequences could have been more serious.

     

    the father turned round to avoid the checkpoint  - makes him suspicious of being a criminal trying to flee. Who knew he was not a murderer going to kill again if not apprehended?

     

    In this case duty of police to stop him. Police in every country would do that. Using a stick instead of a gun was appropriate. He could not see the child.

     

    Only the father to blame. Big mistake to turn round in sight of the checkpoint  in particular with a child on the bike.

    • Sad 1

  6. 7 hours ago, PingRoundTheWorld said:

    LOL. There is literally NOTHING in there that says long-term tourism is prohibited. That's the entire point - there is no rule prohibiting it. People have been doing it for decades, it's only very recently that certain immigration offices decided to "amend" the rules on their own.

    But where is it written that they have to let in everybody?


  7. 7 hours ago, Thaiarrow said:

    To those who have used this as an opportunity to make false claims

    I don't buy some posters claiming   IOs are criminals or acting illegally - Thailand as a sovereign country is free to decide whom to let in.

    Those posters seem to be sure they have the right to go everywhere they want and stay as long as they want. They don't. They should try to go to China or NK and see what happens

     

    • Like 1

  8. 7 hours ago, JackThompson said:

    As is, there is no legal reason to deny-entry ...

    Are you sure there is a legal reason that Thailand has to let in everybody?

    Is there even a "legal" reason to let in people with a visa?

     

    I think they are a sovereign country and free to decide whom to let in and whom not

    • Like 2
    • Sad 1

  9. 2 hours ago, robblok said:

    Quite possible and that shows that loyalty is NOT to the PTP but to their politicians. Showing again that vote buying worked and that Thaksin was outbid this time.  The PTP lost massively i take that as a sign that vote buying worked for them but now they are outbid. With vote buying I also mean popular policies and so on. 

     

    The longer the PTP stays out of government the more they will shrink as their war chest shrinks too and thus them losing power. So they desperately need to be in a government or face even more losses. Because (unfortunately) who is in power will reap money and fill their war chest for the next election.

    Isn' ptp's war chest filled by thaksin?

×
×
  • Create New...