Bob

Damn, what the heck are you taking with you, the kitchen sink? My suitcase is bigger than most and I unfortunately tend to overload it but it usually always is no more than 50 pounds (but, yea, I always have to pay the overweight fees on Air Asia as they allow about 12 ounces or some such dinky weight). My little dinky hometown (16,000 people) airport has two of the machines and they tell me that, while every checked item goes through the machine, they only physically open up less 1% of all screened items. In LAX, I've actually watched them shove all the checked luggage through the machines and I've only seen them set aside a rare suitcase to be physically inspected. I'd guess they physically inspect less than 1% too (in reality, there simply isn't enough manpower or time to do much more than that anyway).

Most digital cameras allow you to alter the flash settings (more or less) and, presuming you intend to take multiple photos in one particular room, play with that setting until the result is what you want. You can also alter the exposure setting (more or less) and, as long as you're taking flash photos within 15 feet or so (beyond that, it's generally worthless), you ought to be able to adjust the settings to get a fair result.

I know that happens, GT, in the major airports (such as LAX, DTW, etc.) but the smaller airports don't quite work that way. It's the airline guys in the smaller airports (although perhaps they're certified by the TSA and/or part of their salary comes that way). In my hometown, the guys who shove the suitcases through the expensive inspection machines work for the airline (I know, a couple of them are friends of mine). Thanks for attaching the TSA notice. I've actually never seen one in spite of having gone through the TSA process hundreds of times. While I know all the checked stuff goes through the machines, I wonder what percentage is actually opened and physically inspected. To my knowledge, my suitcase has never been opened (but I've never locked it).

A lot of good advice...at least by the guys who are actually here. I occasionally get amazed at people who want to move over here who really haven't been here all that much. Seems not too smart to me - to make that kind of radical change without knowing much about where you're going. And occasionally, whether seeing people post about it or actually talking with falang friends, I'm amazed sometimes at the lack of knowledge about expenses one ought to expect. I presume these people live somewhere presently and understand that there are such things as electric bills, water bills, cable television bills, internet bills, laundry bills, medical insurance needs, that you do need to eat everyday, that you'll have transportation expenses, etc., etc. Presuming somebody is going to cut all ties with their home country (if not, don't forget that you have those on-going expenses), making any plan to move here to Thailand based on inadequate funds or based on the hope that you'll find a job that will make up for those inadequate funds is pure folly to me. And, while Z's advice about proper investment strategy is sound, I think you'd be nuts to move here if your financial health is so thin as to be majorly affected by a change in the exchange rates. As a minor point, the electric bills here (and water bills, tv cable bills, etc.) are hardly difficult to figure out even if you can't read Thai at all. What you owe is printed in plain old arabic numbers in baht.

Hardly the case. Have you ever been to the US or ever had any experience at all with the TSA? GT and some others actually have a history with the TSA handlers and I can understand his frustration (but, presuming GT is complaining about the TSA going through and altering things in carry-on luggage, I'm puzzled why he doesn't fix whatever the problem is once he's past the TSA lines). For checked luggage, I don't believe TSA is much involved with screening any of that except at some major airports. Other than the occasional long wait to get through the screening, I've actually never had a problem with the TSA handlers. It's my understanding that the occasional under-staffing is actually the fault of the airlines (who, as we've seen over the years, are generally attempting to make the flying experience a little more miserable). There are times, too, that the process is frustrated by simply stupid people who are attempting to take totally inappropriate items through screening, attempting to take more luggage through screening that I take on the entire flight, can't read a sign telling you to take off your shoes (and/or are too stupid to notice what everybody else around them is doing), etc.

When I was coming to Thailand for two or three shorter vacations annually, I paid a lot more attention to the boards. Now that I'm here for most of the year, I just have lost interest. That seems to be the case for a fair number of prior prolific posters (I won't name names but you can figure out who they are if you've been around the boards the last 10 years) who apparently tend to lose interest once they've moved to Thailand for all or most of the year.

While I wasn't "upset" to any degree (for the reason that I've been around these boards way too long and way to much to let anything personally bother me much any more), GSG has pretty much hit the nail on the head with his analysis. But I'd also note that a poster or two who were, in my view, "flooding" in August probably caused the most harm (I say that as one of them did the same thing on another board early this year and I avoided that board for that very reason). But long-time posters and board owners all know that things change over time. Lord/buddha knows what any of the boards will be like in another three months.

Sorry, I can't remember the name of the hotel in the old quarter that I stayed at either. It was on the little street that tees into St. Joseph's Cathedral (yep, a high spired Catholic cathedral right in the middle of Hanoi's old quarter). I'd highly recommend that you stay near Hoan Kiem (spelling?) Lake if you like to walk around a bit.....nice areas, shops, and restaurants around the Lake and a nice temple to see that juts out into the Lake.

I've never been to Saigon but I can join lvdkeyes in recommending Hanoi. A charming city (I stayed in the old city, not too far from the lake, and near the old cathedral). But be aware that the traffic is bad, trying to cross the street in many places is an exciting moment (as in scares the hell out of you), and the air pollution almost makes Bangkok look good. While you're there, be sure to try what I call beef noodle soup (pronounced something like "pho")as it's a local favorite and very good (and, in case you're wondering, not excessively spicy). You'll see these vendors up and down many streets (they have a little cooking area set up with some chairs) and just go to the one that has the most Vietnamese eating there (they know where the best pho is!).

Twelve minutes is a long time for you to have sex? What's it usually cost you at 100 baht a minute, 2 or 3 hundred baht? I will grant you this, it's the first time I've ever heard of anybody paying for sex by the minute. Hmmmmm....wonder if I can get about 30 seconds worth.....

I generally don't respond to the same topic on more than one board (I'm not sure why - maybe I'm easily bored after one visit to a topic) but I do think that GT's post above is probably quite accurate as to all the good massage up here. They are all hit and miss given there were so many places and most of the time (for the last many years anyway) the customers are few and in between. B-Beez generally has gotten good reviews for a very long time but I suspect that every place up here has slow days and times. Too few customers for too many joints.

I'm with GT on this one. You pay what you think you think is fair. And nobody ought to give one whit what anybody else pays (and, if somebody tells you that "you're screwing it up for the rest of us", tell them to take a hike). As far as I'm concerned, the same notion applies to what people choose to tip in restaurants. If somebody thinks I tip too much (or too little), I could care less.

I wasn't suggesting that you just agree on whatever the kid says. And I already know in the back of my head that I'd pay about 1000 baht per day (plus expenses). If, for 21 days, he was thinking, let's say, 10k or 15k, then I'd say sure, no problem, and likely pay him more. If he said 40k and stood on that figure, that's another reason I'd want the discussion up front (cause he wouldn't be going with me). Presuming we make a deal, I'd likely ask him if he wanted all the money at the end or if he wanted some of it as time elapsed. The bottom-line is I would want him to have fun....and to not be worrying about whether this "old falang" is going to be a cheap charlie or whatever. To get that out of the way, make the deal up front. Then have fun.

Rather than have falang suggest what is or isn't an appropriate rate for a long-term stay, why not ask him? I can't imagine taking somebody off for a long time period without having had that discussion upfront. And, rather than asking him "would 'x' amount per day be okay?", I'd just make sure he knows how long you intend to have him stay with you (and, of course, make sure first he's okay with that) and then ask him what he thinks is an approprite daily (or, perhaps, just a lump sum) fee.

I'm just wondering if I'm reading part of your last set of comments correctly. You're suggesting that the Obama administration is Marxist?

Rather than return the compliment, it would indeed be very wise for people to read what you wrote and also read the article that you linked which allegedly supported your contention that private pension funds in the US were somehow unsafe, that there were plans in the offing to mess with those private pension funds, and that there is some prohibition for a US citizen to open and maintain an offshore account. Then those readers can easily make up their mind as to who, as you describe, knows very little about the subject matter.

Rather than be repetitious, what I wrote above is accurate - there is no problem with the private pension funds, there is no problem with getting an offshore account, and there are no plans on the table to have the US government mess with those private pensions funds. So, other than that, your comments may be correct.... I'd recommend you don't view Ron Holland as some economic guru as he isn't. And, in my view, he doesn't know what he's talking about. His notion that some suggestion by a low-level staffer about a new and additional type of annuity-retirement account would be either adopted by the US government in the next many years or that such a new item would be mandatory is pure poppycock.

While I agree that the US has to put its fiscal house in order, there's no problem at all with private retirement plans (at least with IRA's, 401k's, deferred compensation accounts, or any portion of defined benefit plans that are self-funded). There are a few (very few) underfunded defined benefit plans but even that's not much of an issue given there is government insurance to back most if not all of those. Given that, I am curious about what you claim are "clear" indications that these private pensions are unsafe. As to offshore accounts, no problem in getting one at all. The only difference these days is that you have to annually report them (if they hold more than 10k US at anytime during the year) to the Treasury Department. I'm curious as to what restrictions you assert exist as to offshore accounts or "coming" restrictions in investing in overseas markets. I'm aware of none and I've read about no plans to have any.

Yep, and hopefully there won't be any. A couple of years ago, I missed seeing the 380 upclose on its visit to Chiangmai (this was when the company was flying the 380 all over the world so people could get a look at it). What happened is that the flight was delayed from Bangkok after a pilot, following the taxi markings on the ground for planes with smaller wingspans, actually clipped one of the hangers with a wing. Rather embarrassing (and apparently not a lot of damage as the plane did make it to Chiangmai the next day) but at least the driver didn't run away in the confusion as happens all too often with bus crashes and the like here in Thailand! My guess and trust is that the pilot is now employed elsewhere.

I'm curious what provision you're actually talking about there. There's been an IRS requirement ever since I was in business (mid-70's) that requires the annual filing of 1099 forms (essentially the same forms you file for employees) for anybody you've paid $600.00 during that year for services (like payments to a lawyer or payments to somebody regularly engaged to do your lawn - in short, for what we would call "independent contractors"). The purpose of the provision, of course, is to make sure that the person receiving those funds actually reports the income to the IRS and pays taxes on that income. Is there another provision out there that you're talking about? In answer to BL's question, I've never voted a straight ticket as I pick and choose who I want from either party. I've always considered that people who walk into a voting booth in the US and who simply mark one box (Republican or Democrat) are intellectually lazy voters (espepecially given that both of those parties seem to have their share of absolute worthless creeps); that being said, I've probably ended up choosing the democratic candidate for a given office about 80-90% of the time since I've started to vote.

I'm guessing it just means he's completed some new work (when I just went to the website, there appeared to be one or two new works shown there than I saw a couple of months ago). But lvdkeyes will surely explain. The guy does seem to do some nice work (I realize that this type of art is quite personal but I like the realism of his subjects).

Seems like you guys are being a bit negative there. Suggesting the new owner (even in a humorous vein) is a bit brash somewhat catches me by surprise as I've seen no (zero) evidence of that so far. I've no complaints at all. As to the volume of posting dropping off, it seems to me that it's largely due to two factors. First, a few posters who posted a ton of postings aren't posting at all. I'd give names but would rather not do so (some are missed and some, in my view, shouldn't be missed). Second, I'd surmise that some posters were overwhelmed by the flood of posting and decided to take a break for a while. And, perhaps, some of the regulars are on trips elsewhere (historically, a few take sabbaticals from the board from time to time....even GT did that from time to time). I, for one (although hardly a prolific poster), returned to Thailand last week for a long stay and I simply don't play on the internet as often here as I do at home. But the dynamics of these message boards do change from time to time and god/buddha only knows what will happen here or elsewhere. I would note that I've noticed a significant drop in postings at two other boards (Sawatdee and Ting Tong) over the last couple of weeks which puzzles me as it seems to have happened along the same time line as has happened here.

Yea, I'm wondering if the word games confused him there. It's obvious aot87 is getting the 30-day deal (regardless of what the heck you want to call it when he arrives at Bangkok). Presuming that's the case, that permission will be cancelled and totally gone when he leaves Thailand by either air or land. When he returns (by vehicle through Cambodia), he'll get a new permission for 15 days. If, aot87, that's all the time you need, then you don't need to do anything else or worry about it; if, however, you need more than 15 days after your land trip to/from Cambodia, then there are a couple of other options but I won't go into those unless you feel you need more than 15 days after you return to Thailand from Cambodia.

Regardless of the word games, a visa is governmental permission to stay or remain in a given country for a period of time. And the stamp you get (either ahead of time or at the time you show up) is your proof/documentation of the permission to stay. If it helps, perhaps we just ought to call it permission to stay although most people quite correctly call it their visa. The citizens of some countries are exempted (not required to) obtain any permission to stay prior to showing up in the foreign country.

A little pedantic argument here. I never understood why somebody objects because a whole lot of people say that you get a "free thirty-day visa" upon arrival (at least by plane). A visa is (I'm ripping this definition from some site as it sounded like a rather complete description of what a visa truly is): Certificate issued or a stamp marked (on the applicant's passport) by the immigration authorities of a country to indicate that the applicant's credentials have been verified and he or she has been granted permission to enter the country for a temporary stay within a specified period. This permission, however, is provisional and subject to the approval of the immigration officer at the entry point. In short, a visa is permission for a foreigner to stay in another country. Whether you get it ahead of time or upon arrival or pay for it or not, it's still a visa under any definition of that word. And whether it's a piece of paper pasted or simply stamped in your passport is also a bit irrelevant (e.g., my one-year visa is simply a stamp provided annually here in Thailand and it's really no different than the "upon arrival" one except it's more expensive and I'm allowed to stay longer). And when I arrived the other day (I did have a re-entry stamp so I wouldn't screw up my one-year visa), guess what stamp they used in my passport? Yep, the identical stamp that is the "free upon arrival" one with the only exception that the time limit is not 30 days but the end of next May when my one-year visa expires.