Steve and Scott Bar near Piman Chon2

Which you can also do down the soi at the new hotel and soon to be developed shopping mall plus Smile.

I'm not being negative just telling the truth. If I have to pay more for a beer than 7-11 I want something in return.  Sky gives me a superb over the lake and city view plus music. Smile does the same. Leo's gives me log term farangs plus Duncan's take on life. Eric's did the same until Duncan could not be bothered and Sid left.

Bars are bars and apart from beer and the clientele they have little or nothing to offer.

If I want aircon and beer then I'm going home.

Sat 7 Apr 2012, 9:52 am

 

     I believe if you look at the literally   T H O U S A N D S   of posts on the many bar threads on this forum and on other sites,  very, very few posts indeed express a negative opinion about booze, bars or the booze peddlers who own the bars. People who have anything negative to say about this institution are regarded as highly suspect.   The problem is that drinking is so embedded in the culture, so culturally sanctioned that most people accept it as a given that using the drug ethanol is normal, innocuous, even healthy.    There is a cultural taboo which precludes and open-eyed,  fair-balanced discussion of this topic.  This distorted viewpoint is well-protected by people who indulge in and profit from this drug trade directly and indirectly. Pointing out the serious personal and cultural costs associated with this drug abuse is regarded as sour grapes <tee hee> by party-poppers and teetotalers with an ax to grind.  Even AA has essentially been in collusion  with the booze peddlers, early on  taking the namby-pamby position--perhaps an over-simplification--that alcoholics are bad, but booze it good! Possibly shrewd from a political standpoint, but namby-pamby nonetheless.  Interestingly, this is exactly the same position as the alcohol industry takes:  Booze good, alcoholics bad!!!

 

     However, a drug that addicts and injures 10%-20% of those who use it would never get approved by the FDA or other government regulatory agencies if it were introduced today!  If your doctor recommended a drug that had a 10%-20% chance of addiction and injury, you would never agree to take such a drug!

 

     Believe it or not, my objective here is not to have a go at people who enjoy their booze.  It may seem that way because the modern, cultural mindset on this topic is so insulated that anything negative feels disruptive iconoclastic.  Well, I don't mind being an iconoclast!  If I sound strident, it is because it seems the only way to rise about the complacency and introduce  a fair-and-balanced viewpoint is by being a bit strident.

 

XeReX