Bob

Guess that next time I leave the US I'll pick a TSA security line with the best looking dudes. Hate to miss a good groin grab.

One newspaper article suggested the dates would be December 25-29. Other articles have said the actual dates have not been finalized. Like Fedssocr, I am planning on going to Bangkok (for the first time in more than a decade) solely to see the completed structure prior to the formal ceremonies. One government spokesman more than a month ago (it was reported in the press) said that the area would be open to the public to see by early fall. And this thing is going to be huge....apparently 60 meters square and 50 some meters high. While I'd like to see the cremation ceremony itself, there's no way I'm going anywhere near that place then as I suspect there will be millions of people attending and the most massive gridlock that Bangkok has ever seen (I also wonder if tourists will be able to find hotel rooms during the dates of the actual ceremonies). But given it's massive size (I've been following the regular news reports about construction....the underground foundation, massive steel girders, etc.), I'd like to see it ahead of time.

Don't worry about the mosquitos at all unless you're hanging around outside the city or near a lot of vegetation. Just not any issue for a long time up here (think I had a mosquito bite a few years back but nothing since; then again, I live on the west side of town, not all that far from PJ's Place). There is more-than-average vegetation around PJ's Place and possibly it's a minor issue there (I don't really know...I didn't have any problem the few times I've visited there...but I'm sure its owners, Peter and Jeap, will advise and have some spray for use if it's a problem at all). But I wouldn't be worried about it (and, yes, you'll like PJ's Place....good choice). With respect to gay bars, there are four on Soi 6, Charoen Pratet (which is the soi just south of the Galare Food Center on Chang Klan...the main night market street). Pandee Bar and Orion Bar are on the west (mountain) side of the that soi and Ram Bar and Secrets are next to each other on the very east (river) side of that soi. Ram Bar, by far, is the most popular bar due to the friendliness (that doesn't mean the guys are "offable") of the six guys who work there and their nightly 10PM show (which, if you want to attend, you need to be there by about 9:30PM or so as you won't find a seat after that). Their show is quite entertaining (lip synching lady boys typically surrounded by some really good male dancers). Secrets has also been more active since they moved next to Ram Bar and there typically are a few guys at Secrets that one can off. Pandee Bar is strictly a small drinking bar run by a couple of guys who used to work at Soho (which was permanently closed a month or two back). Orion bar is a bit more active but still not much happening there from what I can see when I walk by. Can't offer much advice about the gogo bars as I rarely go there. Did go to Adam's Apple a couple of Saturdays ago and can report that, while their show was rather boring and no where near as explicit as a few years back, they do seem to have a fairly nice selection of boys there. In the past, I would describe most of the boys as a bit rough looking but that's no longer the case. You'll pretty much need transportation just about anywhere you go up here but you can grab a songteaw or tuk tuk along Huay Gaew which is maybe a 150 yard walk from PJ's. Alternatively, I'm sure Peter and Jeap can get you a driver, taxi, or tuk tuk just by asking. Oh, a lot of friends have been using Uber the last few months and are very happy with that service (decent cars, fairly quick pick-up times, and low prices).

Hunkster, according to what I've read (and those news articles possibly are distorting the actual deal), the cost [the fee you pay to Immigration for it] of the 10-year visa is 10,000 baht. I too wonder what is this so-called thing (re-registering?) one is required to do after 5 years under the new deal but nowhere have I read that it's a second 10,000 baht fee. If it turns out that it is another 10,000 baht fee, then the total cost obviously would be 20,000 baht (which is 1000 baht over what we currently pay.....the annual cost for an extension based on retirement is 1,900 baht or 19,000 baht over a ten-year period). [For what it's worth....not much....the new deal is likely a 10-year extension of stay versus an actual 10-year visa although I suppose it would be a 10-year visa if it can be obtained outside of Thailand]

Not counting the medical insurance requirement, the differences between what the new plan offers and the standard one-year extension deal provides is (based on 35 baht per US dollar): (1) Currently, the bank method requires a deposit of about $22,857 and the income method requires monthly income of about $1,857 (annual income of about $22,285). Historically, the income requirement has been proven by showing proof to your embassy/consulate and they then notarize the income statement (with the exception of the US where you don't have to show any proof at all)....and there's no reason to believe that this method of income proof will change at all (z909 - surely all forms of income will be counted as they always have been). The "visa" (extension) cost over 10 years is 19,000 baht. (2) The new scheme provides for a deposit of about $85,714 or a monthly income of about $2,857 (annual income of about $34,285). The 10-year visa cost is $10,000.00. I believe about half the falang I know here would have no problem (financially) at all with this new scheme and may very well go for it to avoid the annual renewal hassle. Many I know simply leave the bank money untouched in perpetuity anyway....some do it as a safety net provision and others do it because they can earn 2-3 times the interest here on bank funds as they can back in their home countries (on the other hand, not many with the financial wherewithal really want to keep 85 grand in a bank versus in the stock market or other investment vehicle). As for the medical insurance issue, I also don't see that as stopping anybody. At least half the falang I know already have medical insurance coverage that easily exceeds the minimum numbers the new plan envisions plus, no doubt, some insurance companies will certainly come up with new plans tailor-made to fit the new criteria; besides, those with the higher bank funds or the higher income won't likely have a problem affording the coverage. So, based on what we know now, currently it seems this new deal is a viable option for a fair number of falang living here in Thailand.

Given your attitude about the other posters here, I presume then that you'll be leaving us? Geez, I think I'll go have a good cry.

Ditto, Z. And there's really no excuse for having a post on this board whose main theme is to attempt to criticize somebody about a post on another board. But, given the topic was raised, every single state (excepting Maine and Nebraska which provide for proportional representation) requires their electors to vote for the candidate who received the most votes in that state. If what the OP is talking about is requiring the electors of each state to vote for the national vote winner, that would in effect dilute a given state's power and is not likely to ever be approved by many/most of the small states; besides, if we're only going to look at the national vote total alone (absolutely pure democracy on a national level), then the electoral college should simply be eliminated by amendment to the constitution (and, if that "pure democracy" remains the goal, then logically the 2-Senators-per-state system should also go out the door).

For a couple of days, all channels were showing Thai movies, programs, and news about their beloved King and the premium channels (HBO, Cinemax, etc.) continued in that manner for a few more days; however, all the English-speaking channels are back to normal now (meaning that occasionally there is something interesting or entertaining to watch but in general we're back to the normal wasteground).

"....then just let us all duke it out, I'm a big boy and I can give out more than I ever take usually...." That type of thinking doesn't reflect the type of board we've historically enjoyed here and I would hope that people would restrain themselves from reacting with playground bravado. Most of us here, I think, are the same in person as we are behind a keyboard and that reflects, at least in my view, that we're pretty much level-headed grownups; unfortunately, there are a small minority of posters who use internet anonymity to display their "courage" (for lack of a better word) to say things which, if said publicly, would cause them to be shunned by most adults.

I somewhat like the mild name and shame method used in a few forums. Simply closing a thread and making a mild statement at the end doesn't do much in my view and I'd rather see the moderator provide some language within a post that makes it clear to the offending poster in a public manner that the language isn't acceptable. For example, if just a part of a post is offensive, just delete that part and insert some language somewhat similar to the following: "Part of this post has been removed due to offensive language in violation of the board rules. The poster is requested/warned to tone it down." Most of us know who the 2-3 posters are who start this garbage but they seem to get away with it by the simple thread-closure method being used (i.e., the offending poster is likely not getting the hint that it was his comments that were unacceptable). I would note the one thread where one poster basically said he welcomed a face-to-face confrontation with another poster (who was obnoxious with his comments) was beyond the pale....especially when that poster would have crushed that kind of comment with an iron fist in a nano second on his own board. I can't blame him at all for being pissed but his responsive language was exactly what none of us need here (plus the guaranteed net effect was only to goad the other poster to be even more obnoxious and to somewhat irritate a few of the rest of us).

Apparently a restaurant/brewery signboard menu (I'm not sure where it's from but the photo was sent to me by a US westcoast resident):

It would seem logical to me that whoever actually witnessed the offensive posts (it would appear Z did) would at least have a basis to reasonably offer a critical opinion of the events but those of us who didn't see the fracas (I'm one of them) can hardly offer a reasonable opinion as to the appropriateness of the actions taken. I believe Scooby has done an admirable job of administering this board since the beginning of his involvement and, based on that history, I trust whatever actions were taken were merited.

It's a bit apparent that you failed Dale Carnegie's course. You rail against what you perceive is the nastiness of others and then come out with these gems. Are you old enough to spell "hypocrisy?" I've never put anybody on "ignore" but, if I ever do, you've earned a spot on the short list.

Have to agree about Bernie Sanders. I liked him and even agreed with some of his policies; however, I saw no sense supporting a candidate who was advocating policies that had zero chance of becoming law and which the US could not afford. But a decent guy. As much as I personally dislike the Clintons (especially Bill), at least Hillary is competent for the presidency. Trump, however, is clearly not. On my way back here to Chiangmai, I stopped in Seattle for a few days and came across a tee shirt that somewhat expresses a common attitude back in the States.....

Come on, Z, nobody is saying that anybody shall (or your biblical "shalt") tip. My first point is I do it because it seems natural to me and I choose to do it. My second point, which I really didn't make very clear above, is that I don't care to hear anybody else tell me what I should or shouldn't be doing. You don't want to tip? Fine, that's your business. Likewise, it's nobody else's business if somebody else chooses to do so. In my view, this isn't all that different from the comments/arguments heard for years about "over-tipping" the boys for services. Some would bitterly argue that the over-tippers (those that paid more than some declared or perceived norm) were "ruining it for the rest of us." While I'd respond that it was none of the complainer's business, my inner thoughts were never so kind. I've never had a Thai friend, sex-worker, waiter, or whatever directly or indirectly suggest that my tipping practices were inappropriate or unappreciated....and, of course, it would only be their opinions that would interest me in the first place.

I tip in Thailand (well, almost everywhere) and I've had nobody complain about it (although have had a couple of wait staff run after me wondering why I left 20 baht or whatever on the table). And, admittedly, I probably do that due to my upbringing in the US. As to calling tipping a "social evil" (come on, Christian, I suppose you'll next call for the death penalty for jay walking....) or complaining about how anybody else tips or doesn't tip, such comments or complaints are simply inane.

Have to generally agree with KhorTose. While surely some intelligent and educated people voted for Brexit, I'd bet you a few pounds (for what those are worth these days!) that by and large that's not the demographic which supported the exit. And, of course, none of them (including the "Trumpesque" Boris and others) had any clue whatsoever about the ramifications of the vote. To the extent their property values or investments have dropped significantly in value, I have no sympathy for them. For others, though, I do (and that includes a fair number of British expat friends of mine who are currently taking a fairly big hit because of the exchange rate). I thought the after-the-fact headline of "Regrexit" was rather appropriate. The US/UK alliance and friendship will continue and, if I were in power, I'd fast-track negotiations on a US/UK trade treaty (Obama's off-the-cuff crack a few months ago that the UK would go to the back of the line was inappropriate in my view given our relationship with the UK).

You talk as if what you refer to as the "network rate" is the same baht/dollar rate that Thai banks are giving at the same time. If that's what you're trying to say, I believe you're wrong. And I'm not talking about any fees.....just the conversion rate. As I asked before, does anyone actually know the difference? It may not be huge but I'm just curious as to what it happens to be. I'd note that I can't calculate it as I don't use ATM cards here. From what I've read (a lot of internet articles about the subject), credit cards offer the best exchange rates and ATM cards provide the second best exchange rates. Money exchange offices supposedly provide the worst conversion rates.

As anonone mentioned, it's not wise to exchange your home currency for Thai baht anywhere outside of Thailand. That includes when you wire (SWIFT or whatever) funds to your Thai account (make sure you transfer in your home currency and not Thai baht or you'll normally lose a small chunk on the conversion that happens in your home country). I've had a Schwab account forever but have never used their ATM card (I actually have never used an ATM card in Thailand other than once in 2000 just to see if my bank's card would work here). I recognize that Schwab refunds the ATM fees as many posters have mentioned that over the years; however, just out of curiosity, does anybody know what conversion rate Schwab uses (meaning, how much lower is it than what the Thai banks are giving on the conversion day)? I'm guessing that they're making a little money off the deal somehow.

Seems like all of this is good advice although I remain puzzled as to why, for a 6-day trip, that pretty much all of the concern can't be handled by bringing cash, exchanging that at Thai banks as needed, and using the ATM or credit cards for emergency money only; however, for a 6-day trip, just about any option isn't going to bankrupt anybody. US financial institutions usually make their money two ways when one uses an ATM card here in Thailand - the "international transaction fee" and a lousy conversion rate. While the OP and some others are lucky to have no international transaction fees, I'd be suspicious that they're really making their money by a fairly lousy conversion rate. Those institutions usually are not charitable (or dumb) enough to not get a cut somewhere. Farangyai mentions correctly that Thai banks generally charge no ATM fees.....so long as you use the ATM machines of your bank in your home province (i.e., I've never known a Thai bank not to charge for using an ATM machine outside the province where you opened the account.....but perhaps things have changed?).

That's simply untrue, Mr. Steve, as I could care what unflattering things you have to say about any religion (I've probably said worse); however, there's a difference between making legitimate criticism about Buddhism or Catholicism (or any other religion) and attempting to do it with false information. You're not entitled to your own "facts." You've claimed Buddhism/temples/monks made money on the ordination deals and that is simply untrue (and you don't support your false claim by questioning why some Thai parents choose to have a big wingding for half the village). You've also claimed the Catholic Church made money off of weddings and funerals and that's also untrue (Koko's comment above regarding the minimal and voluntary stipend to the officiating priest is quite correct). As for being "intolerant", I am generally intolerant of posters who blather about topics they know nothing about and then use false information to attempt to back up their supposed position. At least you're fairly consistent with that problem.

I'm not defending either the Catholic Church (been there, done that) or Buddhism in general as I generally believe that everybody is entitled to their own set of beliefs (even if I think they're all fairy tales); however, it's one thing to rail against the cost of the pre-ordination party or even the costs of weddings and funerals whereas it's quite another thing to rail (falsely) against the temples and the Church for profiting off of those events. They don't. But it's nice to know that people didn't blow money on weddings and funerals prior to 2000 years ago.

Sorry Stevie Boy, you've missed the point and, while you could go back and attempt to actually understood what I and others have said in this thread, I won't hold my breath that you'll understand it now. But, if it'll help, the monks and temples (or Buddhist manuscripts or teachings) have nothing to do with the pre-ordination party at all. And there often is a significant difference between custom/tradition and a given religion. P.S. You clearly made the comment about Buddhism making money off the deal and now (for what reason, god/Buddha only knows why) you add that the Catholic Church makes (apparently significant) profits by officiating weddings. While that latter comment is slightly off topic, it's as erroneous as the first comment.

While I've agreed with the concept about the seemingly excessive amount of money being requested, some of your comments in this thread unreasonably disparage both the religion of Buddhism and the cultural traditions of Thailand. (1) First, maybe you ought to learn why they go into a temple. It's to honor and provide blessing for their parents (or for a deceased relative or even because of a need to change their life) and that's just a wee bit difficult to criticize. And your comment about the "seriousness" of the monasteries accepting lay people into their fold (permanently or temporarily) is totally goofy. (2) Second, if you understood the process (or even read most of this thread), you'd learn that the temples do not make money off the deal. You say that Buddhism makes a "business out of initiating monks." A false and silly statement....and reflects your inability to distinguish between Buddhism (the religion/philosophy) and Thai cultural traditions. The OP has asked about the amount of money being requested and clearly is not asking anybody to question let alone take a swipe at either the religion/philosphy or cultural traditions.

Londoner, if possible, ask your boyfriend to itemize or breakdown (or estimate the best he can) the amount you mentioned (70,000 baht). For example: (1) The proposed monk is required to get and pay for a medical exam....which I'd guess is about 500 or less baht in most places. (2) The proposed monk is normally required to buy his own robes (I'd guess 4 of them maybe cost 3,000 baht at most) although some temples will provide them (used or new) for free. (3) The big expense, I'm told, is to pay for the pre-ordination party. For 20 people (relatives and shirt-tail relatives), I suppose that might run 10,000 baht (depending on how much alcohol is downed, I suppose). On the other hand, if you're entertaining half the local village, then obviously more. (4) To my knowledge, there is no (zero) payment to the temple. Edit: Just asked my bf of 15+ years to detail the costs for him becoming a monk when he was a young teen (he was in the temple for two and a half years). He said that back then (this would have been 24-25 years ago) no medical certificate was required but it is required now, that normally the temple provides the robes (plus he added they don't cost very much), that there is no payment to the temple, and that the big cost is the party for the family or villagers. He also said that if the person/family has little money, then they just have a small party for the immediate family and that usually runs several thousand baht; if, however, it's a big party (with 100+ villagers attending), he said it is much more although usually most of those attending chip in to help pay for it. A huge party, he said, might even cost as much as 100,000 baht nowadays although he again added that the attendees often chip in a big portion of that cost.