Economy of Laos Puns

https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1986-12-14-me-3083-story.html

https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/1980/10/14/refugees-pour-out-of-laos-seeking-new-life/0b4780cb-d5e9-4a57-a8ae-fcb143a2232a/

I know there are similar threads, but, being an Italian citizen, my situation is a little bit different (more restrictions from other countries and not 100% safe going back home now), so I'd like to hear your suggestions :)

I'm 28 and my initial plan was to solo travel around SEA from January to July. I left Italy at the beginning of January and since then I've been backpacking Thailand, Malaysia and now Laos. At the moment I'm in Vientiane (Laos) and I was thinking of going to Pakse/four thousand islands and then Cambodia, but each day the situation gets worse because of covid restrictions and I really need to rethink my plan. The current situation is:

- I cannot anymore go to any of the neighbouring countries (during last week Vietnam, Cambodia, Thailand, Myanmar and Malaysia have put restrictions to Italian citizens, no matter if I've been to Italy or not in the past 2 months...)

- Lots of flights are being canceled and some flights have connection flights in countries where I cannot go, so my list of available flights is even more reduced

- I'm in a country (Laos) with very poor healthcare and the fact that I cannot go to Thailand (as for example) which is close and has a definetely better healthcare system is probably a little bit risky (I'm not only talking about covid, but I should consider that I might need a decent hospital for anything else, such as bad food poisoning, dengue fever, etc.)

- Since more and more people (expecially from China and Europe) are avoiding travelling now and lots of people who were travelling have decided to go back home, lots of hostels and touristic places are quite empty. While there are advantages to this (as for example it would be really nice to see Angkor Wat without crowd around), the general vibe around me is not as great as one month ago

Having said that, I'm currently considering 3 options:

1. Continue travelling as normal, just changing my plans based on other countries restrictions. This means I will continue visiting Laos and then move to a country that have no strict restrictions for Italian citizens (as for example at the moment I can enter Philippines or Indonesia, even if I cannot be sure that it will be the same in one or two weeks). Of course this is what I would prefer, but it might be a little bit risky... Situation is changing really fast, so from one day to another I might find myself completely stuck in a third world country with very poor conditions and no available flights to move f

Wikipedia:

> The U.S. dropped 2,756,941 tons of ordnance on 113,716 Laotian sites in 230,516 sorties between 1965 and 1973 alone. By September 1969, the Plain of Jars was largely deserted.

> U.S. aircraft dropped more ordnance on Laos than on all countries during World War II, leaving Laos with about 78 million pieces of unexploded ordnance (UXO) by the end of the war. Casualties continue to mount from UXO dropped by the U.S. and Laotian Air Forces from 1964 to 1973. It has been reported that, between 1964 and 1973, areas controlled by the invading communist North Vietnamese and Pathet Lao were hit by an average of one B‑52 bomb-load every eight minutes, 24 hours a day. Xiangkhouang Province was the most heavily bombed province. Thirty percent of bombs failed to explode immediately.

The citation for the 78 million is to this PDF: Khamvongsa, Channapha; Russell, Elaine (2009). "Legacies of War: Cluster Bombs in Laos"

This is jaw-dropping, and raises many questions.

1. Was a 30% failure-to-explode rate considered normal? How did this rate compare to rates in previous decades (e.g., WW2) or later ones (e.g., Persian Gulf War)?

2. Is the figure of 78 million unexploded bombs a widely accepted estimate?

3. Given some calculation (see below), and assuming the numbers in the quoted passage are accurate, we can infer either (a) a low number of planes per mission along with a high number of bombs per plane (like 5 & 226), (b) a high number of planes per missions along with a low number of bombs per plane (like 200 & 6), or (c) somewhere between the two. Which is closest to the truth?

Calculations

To bastardize the Drake equation, to achieve u = 78 million unexploded bombs we can multiply together:

• Number of missions m: 230,516 (over nine years this implies 70/day on average)

• Average number of planes per mission p: ?

• Average number of bombs per plane b: ?

• Probability that a bomb will fail to explode f: 30%

The two parameters to be estimated bear the relationship b = u/(m*p*f), or, equivalently, p = u/(m*b*f). Plugging in the known values of u, m, and f, we have:

1. b = 78,000,000 / ( 230,516 * p * 30%)

2. p = 78,000,000 / ( 230,516 * b * 30%)

In other words, allowable pairs

Is there any precedent for the type of meditation Lao Ge practices? Instead of focusing on one thing or noting thoughts, it seems he meditates by focusing on everything.