Bob

This board may not be hopping with activity but it remains puzzling to me that the only people complaining or commenting about that are people who've essentially never posted here. Poster Shamahan: I presume you think that posters have been banned here due to coordination with other board owners (i.e., one board owner not liking what "X" did on his board so asking another board owner to ban him there too). Why do you think that? Any evidence, anecdotal or otherwise, of that occuring here even once?

I don't particularly like them either but I find it rather easy to ignore them. Not that big a deal. What's puzzling to me is that one would think that who'd complain about it (presuming it needs complaining) would be people who are regularly involved here. I don't see a problem with a couple posters who aren't regularly involved here complaining about it but it seems puzzling to me as to why they particularly care enough to do so.

Well, I am quite a bit younger....

Probably for the most part that's absolutely true; regardless, I contend they appreciate the effort. And, if I make myself understood, at least I feel good about it.

Taking investing advice from anyone is somewhat risky but, for what it's worth (what you're paying for it?), here goes: (1) Everybody ought to strive to have enough liquidity (cash, cd-type instruments) around for at least a year's expenses....and maybe that figure should go up once you are close to or past retirement age. And, for any money you might need within the next 2-3 years, any investment analyst will tell you not to put that money in the stock market. (2) While I have and will on occasion pick particular stocks where I know (or think I know) the companies well, a probably safer bet is to go with mutual funds (which, I'm guessing, is what Fountainhill means by "investment trusts."). There are records out there that will show you hundreds (thousands?) of mutual funds and their history. I'd rather invest in a mutual fund that has a long-term history of doing fairly well than a fund that's only done well within the last year or so. I also tend to like mutual funds that invest in certain spheres (e.g., made a few bucks over the years which focused on China and Southeast Asia). When selecting a sphere or area to invest in, use your brain to guess what the long-term future of that sector might be. For example, I think anyone that invests any money in anything to do with print (newspaper companies or book-publishing companies) is, in the long run, going to lose most of that money. Reasonable long-term bets might involve pharmaceutical companies (given how long people are living these days) and companies producing foodstuffs (even in a recession, ya gotta eat). If the sector pays a reasonable dividend (2-3% these days), you'll probably do okay over the long haul even if the sector retreats for a while. (3) Saying "buy low and sell high" sounds pretty stupid but it's just about the opposite of what many investors do. When the market takes a dive, they pretty much wait until it dives to it's lowest point and then sell. Then they don't get back in until everybody's giddy about how high the market is (meaning, right before it dives again!). Over the long-term, the averaging method mentioned by a couple of posters is probably the safest method even if it is a bit boring. I don't do that but I do get a bit giddy when the market takes a dive (a buying opportunity!). (4) And, finally, be lucky. Hey, it helps!

The topic is probably boring for most but, what the heck, you asked. Looking back on it, I simply can't explain (or condone) the authortarian approach back then. Part of it was simply the times (the 50's), I suppose, but part of likely was upper midwest attitudes at the time. There were a few of the nuns who were semi-friendly at times but that wasn't the norm. And everybody was afraid of most of them...they just seemed like mean old bitches. I can't believe we were bad kids in general but perhaps we didn't like the regimentation. Every day at school started by all of us going to latin mass.....one of the most boring and tedious things you could ever do to a kid that was 5-12 years old. By the 4th or 5th grade, we could recite the entire mass in our own "latin" (e.g., "Domine vobiscum", meaning in latin "the lord be with you", was altered to "Dominic, go frisk 'em"). Just kid kind of stuff (or self defense to the terminal boredom we experienced every day). Khun Thaiworthy is a few (very few!) years younger than me and maybe his experiences were slightly different. A lot of things began to change in the early 60's. As concerns Valentine's Day, I do remember that we did exchange simple "valentimes" at least in the first couple of grades. But that practice was history by the time we became full fledged smart-asses at age 10-11 or so. It wasn't "cool" after that...haha.

Most Thais appreciate you're attempting to converse with them in their own language and quite often, at least with me, are liberal with their compliments when you do. Yet, I typically respond to the compliments with a smile and say "คุณพูดภาษาอังกฤษดีกว่าผมพูดภาษาไทยครับ." And it's always the truth given I'd rate my abilities at about the level of a somewhat dumb Thai first grader.

Although irrelevant to the thread, all the retired falang I know occasionally read the Bangkok Post or The Nation. Those, as most of us know, mainly provide coverage of events in Thailand and southeast Asia. I've never seen any of my retired friends with a western newspaper and, to the extent that some falang do buy those few available here, I presume they're tourists.

Yep, went to a Catholic elementary (grades one through eight) school. The term "parochial" school typically refers to any church-run school but it wouldn't necessarily have to be a "Catholic" school. In my elementary school (sometimes just called "grade" school and less often called "primary" school), most of the staff and teachers were nuns, Sisters of Mercy (kinda hard to say that last word without heavy sarcasm). A rather authortarian affair. For example only, the cafeteria held about 500 kids and we were not allowed to talk while we ate the sometimes questionable slop they fed us, the gorilla nuns walking up and down the aisles with their rulers waiting to smack you if you even looked like you wanted to talk. That's the way it pretty much was all day long excepting only when we had a brief recess out on the playground. Since I went to school, I think most primary or elementary schools in the US are now grades 1 through 6 and now they have middle schools (or "junior high" schools) that cover grades 7 through 9. Our highschools typically now handle grades 10 through 12 (but, back in my day, our parochial high school was 9th grade through 12th grade).

What I'd be interested to know is how your bf would respond to the question: "Would you like the falang around you to speak to you in Thai or English?" I think you might be surprised by the answer. Like many other Thais, my bf of 12+ years won't speak Thai with me and, from what I've gathered over the years, he is puzzled why I would bother to learn to speak, read, and write Thai. In a sense, he somewhat thinks his learning English was improving himself but that my learning Thai was somehow lowering myself. And when I'm around other falang friends with their long-term (or even short-term) boyfriends, those boys too typically won't speak Thai to the falang around them and, even if I ask them a question in Thai, they'll respond in English. Admittedly, most of them can speak English better than I can speak Thai. Regardless, there are a lot of reasons I continue to learn the language. But the notion that it's not hard to learn it (especially for a westerner over 50 and who has no prior experience with tonal languages) is simply dead wrong. Timmberty, your comment about what you're sure that retired people do or read here continues to reflect your ignorance of retired expats in Thailand. Are comments like that based on experience or do you simply get a kick out of saying things you know nothing about?

I have no doubt that's how you see it but, nevertheless, it's a bit incredible that you said it. Would you mind telling us what is your source to support that africans have a lot of children because they expect some of them to die. You find that tidbit on the back of a cereal box?

While it's obvious you're not going to get specific as to what particular topics interest you, I think you're making an assumption as to what type of posts interest "us all." We're all different as to what topics we want to read or post about and one's station in life and/or experience (age) probably has a fair amount to do with it. For those who are younger or only vacation here in Thailand, I suspect they might be more prone to want to read about various gay scenes (bars, off fees, whatever) in Bangkok or Pattaya as that's where most of the vacationers go. For those of us who live here and/or have read thousands of posts about such topics for the last 15+ years, I suspect there is less interest. I can only speak for myself as to what interests me but, for the most part, since I've been around for ages and live for a reason in Chiangmai, I have no interest at all in what's happening in the gay scene in Pattaya or Bangkok and I typically skip over those threads posted on any of the boards. I do have a minor interest in the gay scene here in Chiangmai but, since I know about the places (and/or hear all I need to know from other friends here), there's really no dying interest from me to read posts about them. I will post responses to questions about Chiangmai locales and happenings if somebody asks a question about same and I feel I know enough to provide a reasonable response. So, sorry, looks like I won't be much of a source for topics that interest you (whatever that might be); however, if you have a question about what's happening up here in the boonies, ask away.

Perhaps now this thread will qualify for the type of posts williewillie was looking for? On the other hand, what would be the difference with straight abandon?

First of all, if you want to try to switch the topic to the wisdom of spending a ton of money to keep elderly or vegetative patients alive, I'd suggest you start another post. The post you started in this thread is not at all about that topic. I can understand why you didn't substantively answer the question I posed as it would likely show your premise to be as repugnant as it is. The idea that you suggest people who give money or assistance to keep children alive are somehow responsible or complicit in the deaths of either those aid recipients or their progeny later is incredibly wrong-headed and, as I noted, repugnant. With thinking like yours, all nations and individuals with means would just let everybody else rot and, to you, that'd be in the long run the "kinder" thing to do. Yea, sure.

In that category, I just replay elementary school memories in my brain. Yea, there were some good nuns, I think....but I don't remember them as much as the discipline-exacting gorillas that I normally encountered. But, to be somewhat fair, I suppose my ability to attract that category of beast was likely somewhat related to my behavior....haha.

Before I react too uncharitably to the OP's question, let me ask the following. It's your theory that somebody who saves lives is somehow responsible (or wrong-headed) because some of those saved lives will later die of disease, war, starvation, or whatever?

Never quoted myself before (probably never worth quoting) but, since he hasn't substantively responded to the same question posed by several posters, thought I'd give him another opportunity. Up to you, williewillie.

Given the prevalence of horizontally-challenged falang in the area, I'm not sure if free food is such a great idea. Sorta like serving wine or beer at the weekly AA meeting, eh?

Yes, attempting to avoid Rogie's euphemism above, the real face of Thailand's future will begin to emerge only after succession occurs. And I can see several scenarios happening. One could be the possibility that the new regent might surprise the hell out of people and come out with some very new ideas (ones actually practicing and endorsing those "weird" concepts called democracy and freedom of expression). But, unfortunately, I can also see the military with its usual backers stage another coup and then watch a crazy rerun of Burma's long period of military rule. For now, however, it seems all the elements are in a holding pattern waiting for the event to occur and, likely, plotting their moves thereafter.

The absolute bitch about being middle-aged or over is the inability to retain new information or the extreme difficulty in permanently parking some new bit of information in your brain.. I can look at a new Thai word, understand what it means, know what tone to pronounce, and even be able to spell it (in Thai). Two hours later, typically I can't remember it. Damn funny that I can remember some minor event in detail that occurred 30 or 40 years ago but it's rather difficult for me to remember what the hell I had for lunch yesterday. To really retain something for any appreciable length of time takes me hours/days (it took 5 minutes when I was 10!). I and a good Swedish friend, amongst all the falang we know up here in the boonies, are the only two that persist with the Thai language lessons/learning. And we often joke (quite similar to the comment anonone made above) that we're just trying to "stay even" and/or to put as much new data into our heads as is leaking out every day. To me, there are a lot of benefits to learning Thai. Thais generally appreciate you making the effort. And sometimes you need to speak Thai to make yourself understood. I get a kick out of trying to read signs and things (and sometimes it's actually helpful to know where the exit or bathroom is or that your'e not allowed to turn left unless the light is green!). [One enduring dilemma is that Thais, when seeing some goofy ass falang trying to talk to them, are generally "listening" in English. They really are. For Thais (who don't know you) you need to somehow signal that you're going to be speaking Thai. I do that by either starting out with a "krap" (it's "kap" up here in the boonies!) or perhaps always starting out with a "sawatdee krap" and that kickstarts their brain back to Thai. But, to be honest, I somewhat do the same thing as there are times when I'm "listening" for Thai when a Thai starts to speak to me and it takes me a moment or two for the lightbulb to go off that he/she is actually speaking to me in English!]

Geez. First, I don't particularly cotton to the word "maintain" as that simply implies the "older partner" (that's us, boys!) exists solely as a money machine. A bit derogatory to those of us who have had partners (beyond the "guess-what-I-rented-at-the-bar-last-night" category) for a while. Second, you ask what income level is "desirable." To whom? How much do I desire to have or spend or how much does he (the "spendee") desire me to have or spend?

There are always (I think) issues that tend to haunt children about how their parents treated them. I felt a bit bitter for a while regarding a rather unpleasant father for a lot of years but eventually figured out that the only way to deal with it was to let it go. That's my advice - just let it go. Not worth agonizing over it and it won't make any difference anyway (other than ruining your day). It's funny how most humans treat/view their parents. Up until about age 12 or 13, they're friggin' perfect people and can do nothing wrong (well, that's how we often viewed them). Then, something (hormones, intelligence, karma?) happens and there's that young teenage day when you begin to believe that your parents can do nothing right! In the long run, however, we eventually figure out that they're just human beings with a mix of positives and negatives. Based on what you're saying, though, it sounds to me that they passed the test (the positives far outweigh the negatives). Accept them for what they are/were, warts and all, as it's simply masochistic to beat yourself to death because they weren't like you wished them to be.

I made a note about that on my fireplace mental but am not sure I'll be able to read it if there's a lot of smoke. I really don't worry about almost any hotel I've stayed in as they seem to relatively safe. I have been in some older Thai buildings (including a disco or two in Bangkok) that just scream "danger" (crowded with people, limited exits, etc.) but, other than noticing the problem, it usually doesn't stop me from entering. At Taepae Gate on New Years Eve, the crowd on the square and out on the streets was so big and packed in like sardines that I actually felt worried for my safety a few times. Had there been a panic of any kind (for example, if there had been an errant firework or if a serious fight broke out), hundreds of people would have been really hurt.

Out of curiosity, williewillie, what specific "gay" topics would you like discussed here? Information about the gay bars somewhere in Thailand, current off fees, or what?

Always wise to check out the charity just so you have an idea as to how much of what you donate goes to accomplishing some good (versus padding fund-raiser fees, executive fees and benefits, etc.). I always hoped that there would be some type of clearing house or advisory board that would check out charities and rate their effectiveness, along with full public disclosure as to what percs and benefits the managers of the charity are receiving. In other words, some type of rating agency that would make public the kind of information a charity should have done on its own in the first place. I'd note that I'm not at all making any reference to Take Care here. I presume Take Care is an effective charity and I would note that their website does provide a fair amount of transparency as to how they spend their money (their monthly newsletters, available online, reflect bank balances, receipts, and expenditures) and for that I applaud them.