Amras

5 minutes ago, FritsSikkink said:

Let them show you the law, I wouldn't take "for some reason" as an answer.

I agree. I might push them again. They didn't say 'for some reason', they just said, in typical Thai fashion. You cannot. 

5 minutes ago, Maestro said:

 

In what province was that? Not all provincial branches of the Department of employment use the same unwritten rules.

Bangkok. Wouldn't put it past them not knowing what the hell they are doing. 

24 minutes ago, FritsSikkink said:

No, as a shareholder she doesn't count but she can be an employee too.

Ahh, maybe I didn't explain clearly. 

Even as an employee, if they are ALSO a shareholder, they don't count/cannot be used for Work Permit purposes for a foreigner. 

The employees must be non shareholders (cannot be an owner/shareholder of the business).

At least, apparently now, according to both our Lawyer and accountant (who don't know each other). As I also believed they could.

Edit: Although, I'd be happen to be proven wrong (or rather prove the lawyers wrong). As we could use her as an employee as we need 8. They were adamant she couldn't be a 'countable' employee for work permits though. For some reason. 

On 12/27/2017 at 3:06 PM, FritsSikkink said:

You don't get a visa for owning a business. You can get an investment visa if you invest 10 million THB. For a work permit for you there need to be 2 Thai's working for that company if you are married (your wife can be 1 of them), otherwise 4. You can get a non O visa for being married and work on that or get a non B with the paperwork and Thai's working for that company. What sort of business will it be as you might need additional permits for the business to run.

"For a work permit for you there need to be 2 Thai's working for that company if you are married (your wife can be 1 of them)"

I thought this as well. 

However, according to both our lawyers and our accountant, a shareholder (in this case his wife) of the business, does not count as one of the required employees for a Work Permit for a foreigner. 

We've been told this when also questioning them multiple times, as my partner is a shareholder in our company and can't be used as one of the employees for work permits. 

Maybe things have become more strict?

I'm missing the NOT being married to a Thai claus. What does that have to do with anything? It's ok if you don't have a job, just don't be married to a Thai. Hahaha

It says OR, meaning, if you ARE married to a Thai, you can get a Non-O reasonably easily for visiting your wife/husband.

Technically, if they are working offshore and then coming back here when not working (ie too live), then they are not a tourist, but in fact returning to their place of residence (or home) and immigration can at their discretion decide you are no longer a tourist and give you trouble, hassle, headaches. Every country is the same and would class this person as a resident, not a tourist.

IO's have no such discretion. They cannot deny entry to someone qualifying for visa exemption that meets the entry requirements. Some regular visitors using visa exemption are being interviewed but only to ascertain that they are not illegally working. If you've got 20k cash, and if necessary an onward flight and proof of job/income from abroad, they cannot legally stop you.

Someone can legally live here on visa exemption/tourist visas. I agree that at some point they cease to become a tourist in the true sense, but there is nothing in Thai law to prevent someone living here indefinitely with a valid permit to stay and the means to support themselves.

Domicile and residence has no bearing on applications for visa exemption or tourist visas, or the number you can have. They only have a bearing on your tax liabilities.

Of course IO's have discretion. They obviously can't deny you on spot, but they can bring you aside, then a more senior immigration official, after interview, can decide if they should let you enter the country. There is no 'right' to enter a country that you are not a citizen of. To believe that no country has the legal right to deny foreign citizens (aliens) into their country is well...I don't know where you got this from?

Someone can legally live here on visa exemption/tourist visas. I agree that at some point they cease to become a tourist in the true sense, but there is nothing in Thai law to prevent someone living here indefinitely with a valid permit to stay and the means to support themselves.

That's a grey area. It's regarding intent and purpose of the visa. Someone could apply for successive tourist visas with a short break to Australia (as an example), but Australian immigration would end up denying your application, as you are obviously no longer a tourist and residing majority of the time in Australia. You need to get the right visa.

Just because Thailand currently allows people to do this (ie has a mai pen rai attitude to it), doesn't mean it's legally correct. Unless you have some evidence that shows in Thai law, no alien can be denied entry in Thailand? (Which would be different to every country elsewhere).

A more senior officer can indeed deny entry but only if the Alien is excluded under section 12 of the immigration act or the conditions required by Ministerial regulation.

A country can decide who they let in and who they don't. It's then passed to law! But an IO, senior or otherwise, can't and need a lawful reason to deny entry. As in one of the reasons passed in law. If a country decide to exclude people with ginger hair they can, but an IO can't. IO's don't make law they uphold it!

Nothing grey. There is no limit in law or otherwise that limits the number of tourist visas one can have. And nothing that stipulates how long or how often someone stays in the kingdom before they are no longer considered for a tourist visa. When you apply for a tourist visa the consulate/embassy can deny but they will only do so if the conditions of application can't be met. Some consulates/embassies will limit the number unless the person can prove they have income to support their stay.

"Unless you have some evidence that shows in Thai law, no alien can be denied entry in Thailand?"

Try reading whats written. I never said "no alien can be denied entry". I know a visa does not give the right to entry, but we are talking about the rights of individual IO's and their enforcement of the law. As long as the Alien meets the entry requirements an IO cannot deny entry. If they do the Alien can appeal under section section 22 of the immigration act and the final decision would lay with the Minister in charge of the act.

All the evidence you need is in the Immigration Act, B.E. 2522.

Great. Thanks for that. Had a good read. It would seem that they could at least use their discretion to detain and interview you *causing annoyance. (section 16).

Weren't there a number of 'crackdowns' on abuse of both tourist visas (for a short time) and especially in-out (and multiple) visa exempt entries many times last year? I specifically remember a significant issues at a Malaysian border (with tourist visas) as well as a number of people being refused entry elsewhere (on both visas and visa exempt entries).

I'm guessing these were ministerial directives and thus allowed under section 14? The Minister shall have power to issue public notice in the Government Gazette requiring the alien entering into the Kingdom to have with either money or bond , or shall have power to order an exemption under any condition.

Strangely it also seems (after some further reading), prior to 2008 you could only stay 90 days out of every 180 days, but this was suspended (http://www.immigration.go.th/nov2004/doc/temporarystay/policy778-2551_en.pdf).

So where is the legal basis from the ongoing (inconsistent) crackdowns? It would seem, that even if the act and amended act actually allows continuous stay (no limit), there are people who are turned away/refused entry.

So again...this elite visa may be costly to some, however, what's the price of not having to deal with inconsistent enforcement of the immigration act (or random ministerial directives under section 14)?

immigration, clearly have no desire to annoy people spending 500k on a visa, as seen by the many positive posts of people with it. The only ones who talk about it not being good value, seem to be the people who can't afford it (which for now is me as well, although I'm not against it).

Technically, if they are working offshore and then coming back here when not working (ie too live), then they are not a tourist, but in fact returning to their place of residence (or home) and immigration can at their discretion decide you are no longer a tourist and give you trouble, hassle, headaches. Every country is the same and would class this person as a resident, not a tourist.

IO's have no such discretion. They cannot deny entry to someone qualifying for visa exemption that meets the entry requirements. Some regular visitors using visa exemption are being interviewed but only to ascertain that they are not illegally working. If you've got 20k cash, and if necessary an onward flight and proof of job/income from abroad, they cannot legally stop you.

Someone can legally live here on visa exemption/tourist visas. I agree that at some point they cease to become a tourist in the true sense, but there is nothing in Thai law to prevent someone living here indefinitely with a valid permit to stay and the means to support themselves.

Domicile and residence has no bearing on applications for visa exemption or tourist visas, or the number you can have. They only have a bearing on your tax liabilities.

Of course IO's have discretion. They obviously can't deny you on spot, but they can bring you aside, then a more senior immigration official, after interview, can decide if they should let you enter the country. There is no 'right' to enter a country that you are not a citizen of. To believe that no country has the legal right to deny foreign citizens (aliens) into their country is well...I don't know where you got this from?

Someone can legally live here on visa exemption/tourist visas. I agree that at some point they cease to become a tourist in the true sense, but there is nothing in Thai law to prevent someone living here indefinitely with a valid permit to stay and the means to support themselves.

That's a grey area. It's regarding intent and purpose of the visa. Someone could apply for successive tourist visas with a short break to Australia (as an example), but Australian immigration would end up denying your application, as you are obviously no longer a tourist and residing majority of the time in Australia. You need to get the right visa.

Just because Thailand currently allows people to do this (ie has a mai pen rai attitude to it), doesn't mean it's legally correct. Unless you have some evidence that shows in Thai law, no alien can be denied entry in Thailand? (Which would be different to every country elsewhere).

It is not even equivalent cost of 1 business class flight back to UK per year. And it is 6 years if you get a stamp for a year at the end of your fifth year.

Those over 50 or married need to stop trolling, or those eking out an existence in the LOS - this is for people under 50 and not married!

For people in the Oil and Gas game it is peanuts - less that 2 days rates per year.

I would imagine you get treated better and don't have to bother with immigration.

I am seriously considering this.

You're right that it can give you 6 years.

Many Oil and Gas workers can enter for free as often as they want and can stay for 30 days each time. Anyone that wants to fast track immigration can buy it. I believe the going rate is 850 Baht. Assuming a 4/4 rotation thats 6 fast track entries per year for 6 years totalling 30,600 leaving 469,400 of their hard earned wedge to spend on limos, ladies that don't act like ladies, girlfriends, beer etc.

I get the convenience, but I don't see the value especially for regular visitors that have short stays (60 days or less) and qualify for visa exemption.

People should stop seeing immigration as the enemy. As long as your reason for entry is legitimate, you meet entry requirements, and you can finance your stay you will never have a problem being admitted.

Hmm yes and no. There's been reporters of those exact people having issues. Technically, if they are working offshore and then coming back here when not working (ie too live), then they are not a tourist, but in fact returning to their place of residence (or home) and immigration can at their discretion decide you are no longer a tourist and give you trouble, hassle, headaches. Every country is the same and would class this person as a resident, not a tourist.

So depends how much value you place on assurance. For some it's worth it, for other's it's worth it although they can't (yet) afford it (me) and for some who might never afford it they can be bitter.

There's ALWAYS another way. It's all about the value to you (the person getting it). Value is subjective.

Contrary to what I posted earlier, after further checking it does seem that the current law expects Foreigners to carry their actual passports or - if they have one - a Thai ID card. While it does depend on circumstances, copies are not valid.

Two different rules. One is a valid recognised form of Photo ID (doens't specifically state passports) (which would include a locally issued drivers license). The other regulation is the Immigration act which states that you must be able to prove you are lawfully in the country. So there are two different rules. For most tourists though, the only recognised photo ID is their passport.

The translation of possession of passport is either 'be able to show' or ' have on person', I believe (from what others have said), that it depends on how it is interpreted.

i faced a similar situation myself. my advice is to never marry below your station. middle and lower class girls can appear cute at first but you will soon tire of their ignorance and lack of social standing. in my case i had an investigator vet all the candidates as to medical history, education, etc etc and also investigated the relatives. i then had a short list from which i selected my wife based on her looks, personality and suitability for child rearing. we have had a long and happy relationship due mainly to me doing my homework and i am very happy with the children she has produced.

Hey...aren't you the troll from the other thread...who had a wife (overseas) who was coming here to invest in 'condos' and annoyed at the protestors inconsideration for your plans. sigh....

Check out the video frame by frame from 57 sec on wards, she points what looks like a camera at the police man and when she passes behind him he lifts his left arm to knock the 'camera' away from him to stop having his photo taken. She then backs up on the pavement still pointing the 'camera' at him. he follows her and gives her a slap across the face.

Can't imagine what she said to him, but maybe he just didn't like his photo being taken.

Agreed. I can't see anywhere where she hit him. She's clearly holding a phone/camera trying to take a photo to report him would be my guess?

No idea how all these people see her hitting him when she clearly has something in her hand, ie a camera.

I would say she got off lightly. She clearly cuffs him around the back of the head at 59 seconds, she copped for a little slap which has got to be better than handcuffs to the police station, a night in a cell, charged and sent packing back to whereve she comes from. She got off lightly, he did the right thing.

She hit him in the head while holding her phone (camera) in the same hand? You didn't see her holding up her hand/camera for about 4 seconds before that obviously trying to take a photo?

I can't see her hitting him anywhere...although I'm guessing he wasn't happen about her trying to take a photo of him.

how long you can manage to stay in thailand on turist visas ? doing extensions and new visas in near by countries?

Mataleo, this is actually the most important point here!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Those who have a lot of tourist visas will find it harder to get an ED visa. Most have missed this most important point. If you have a long history of tourist visas it will be harder to convince the MOE that you all of a sudden want to learn Thai and are a genuine student. So if you want to learn and get an ED visa do it, if you get a few more tourist visas you might be in trouble.

In any case Walen School will do our best to help all those who are interested in learning Thai or English and obtain an ED visa. Being a genuine school makes it easier for us.

We had a case of student recently who was refused an ED visa in Vietnam because he had too many tourist visas, these new forms confirm that that is the new thinking. Serial tourist visa runners do not seem to be good candidates for genuine students. Makes sense, doesn't it?

This is the biggest issue I think and one many people are missing. As an example, you're on a double tourist visa and go back home (to your home country) for a few months and then come back here on tourist visa's again and so on. So someone could be an extended (legit) tourist who returns home in between for a few months.

Now what if after doing this a few times you think, hmm really I should get my act together and study Thai, apply for an ED visa etc. How will they view your tourist visas, will they examine the exact time in and out of Thailand or only look at how many visas you have (passports are valid for 10 years). It becomes quite complicated if they just take a 'glance'.

People might be on tourist visas and then after time decide to invest the time into studying Thai (because they plan to get a job/open a business/ get married etc). How many people are going to genuinely come here after one-two tourist visas and say, sure I'll invest the years into learning Thai because I'm 100% sure I should do that.

You really need a good reason to learn Thai (wife, job etc) which would imply you want to stay here for an extended period of time. No one is going to casually learn Thai, it's not a universal language. I see this as a bit of either, we don't want people studying Thai and living here, or investing in learning Thai to stay here long term (which it implies you want to do).

No idea why they make this so complicated. It's simple. They have simple/basic reading/speaking tests based on how long you have been studying Thai when you go for your extension. If someone has been studying for a year they should be able to converse at least basic conversation (even if they are a slow language learner). 2 years, more and so on.

These are just complicated hurdles to make it harder for people to be here, invest the time into something that connects them to Thailand. The abuse thing is so much easier to see with simple testing.

Being from the States, Thais have to go through hell to get a visa or even try to get a visa, so I have mixed emotions on this issue.

I'm Australian, and they are the same.

Since when is it difficult? I've applied for 2 tourist visa's for my girlfriend with a little bit of paperwork and no issues at all.

Migrating is a different story, but always has to be. I wouldn't put Australia in the 'difficult' tourist visa basket. A small amount of work, yeh, but not painful.

I did, but fail to see how it relates to Thailand. An idealist vs PTP? You can't truly compare Abraham Lincoln with PTP?

And of course you don't (need education)..to see now. I think everyone can see what's going on now. But hindsight is a wonderful thing. Foresight is a different matter all together. That's what I'm saying they don't have. The ability to think about how these things will affect the future. Did they really think a promise of paying for rice more than what it was worth was going to work? Anyone with foresight can see it simply can't. In no world we live in.

Education makes a part of being taught how to think, laterally, cause and effect. Thais as a whole lack this ability, imagine those with minimal education (as a general rule).

Sure it's not the ONLY thing, but we all know Thailand severely lacks on education. It's a part. You only need to see where a place like Taiwan has come must faster than Thailand has...and the reason why. Education helps people grow.

I'm sure uneducated countries have voted for liberators (idealists), but surely you aren't saying PTP (Thaksin) is an idealist?

You wrote, " Education makes a part of being taught how to think, laterally, cause and effect. Thais as a whole lack this ability, imagine those with minimal education (as a general rule)."

Prove it. Be specific. How many college graduates from the State of Kentucky lack the ability to think laterally. Name me the courses at the Royal Academy of Dance that teaches lateral thinking. George Bush went to Princeton. Obama went to Harvard. You think either one of them thinks laterally? You do know Yingluck has an MA degree? Now tell me she knows how to vote?

Not being American, I can't speak for the state of Kentucky. I love your anecdotal, people can learn dance - equals all other study. Common. Just because people study doesn't mean they can't be morons (by the way I don't think Obama's an idiot, he had ideals and then got into office and was told where his place was and now he's stuck - but that's another topic).

If I need to show you that education develops thinking, than unfortunately, you need to go back to school, or read a bit about brain development, education and so on, or something. You know the reason we learn calculus (and maths) at high school is not really because 95% of people are going to use calculus in real life right? It develops problem solving and thinking skills.

If you don't have this, you don't develop those abilities (and before you go saying, people can problem solve anyway, sure they can but at different levels).

Dare I ask, did you not receive a lot of education (no judgement, purely asking/trying to understand, why you believe education means nothing/so little).

Do you know most of the people who voted for Abraham Lincoln did not go to high school?

Few slaves could read (they would have voted if they could). Do you think they didn't know slavery was wrong? Informed decision my putooty.

Education is nice and all that but in Thailand it doesn't take a weatherman to tell which way the wind is blowing.

So you're saying the rice pledging scheme was a great idea (buying rice above world wide market rates)? (populist policy), sure it gives the farmers more money, which farmer would vote against that? The free tablet to each child was (in principle it was, but another failed policy), let alone an amnesty bill to bring a CONVICTED criminal back to Thailand (who also stole billions from the very people he is supposed to represent).

Please....I love Thailand and it's people as much as most, but money brings food to the table and for many, who live day to day, it's critical. Sure there are some that don't fit into this, but they likely aren't in the high percentage of minimum wage staff (or below).

There's also a big difference between voting for an idealist (based on their ideals and what they will do for the people) and voting for those that promise money simply to gain power. PTP promise a lot only when they can benefit. They have done nothing that didn't benefit them in some way. It was all a means to an end to get someone back and they only tried it after 2 years in office, after they had attempted to appease their followers (of PTP) with their failed policies.

Education is not just a 'nice thing to have'. You only need to look at those who are and those you are not (back in the West) to see the stark difference education makes (on ones reasoning, thinking ability, problem solving, higher level reasoning skills and so on).

If all these people KNEW that PTP would do this, then why vote for them? You really believe that they are happy for their party to bring back Thaksin after he stole all that money from the people, and run the country into billions of debt with rice they can't sell, simply because he did a few nice things back in the day (oh hell he deserves the few billion he took). Common.

I guess you didn't read my post. I said you don't need an education to understand what is going on in Thailand. It has nothing to do with education. It has to do with a lot of things but not education. Too many educated countries have voted for dictators and too many uneducated countries have voted for liberators and democracy to think the difference was education.

I did, but fail to see how it relates to Thailand. An idealist vs PTP? You can't truly compare Abraham Lincoln with PTP?

And of course you don't (need education)..to see now. I think everyone can see what's going on now. But hindsight is a wonderful thing. Foresight is a different matter all together. That's what I'm saying they don't have. The ability to think about how these things will affect the future. Did they really think a promise of paying for rice more than what it was worth was going to work? Anyone with foresight can see it simply can't. In no world we live in.

Education makes a part of being taught how to think, laterally, cause and effect. Thais as a whole lack this ability, imagine those with minimal education (as a general rule).

Sure it's not the ONLY thing, but we all know Thailand severely lacks on education. It's a part. You only need to see where a place like Taiwan has come must faster than Thailand has...and the reason why. Education helps people grow.

I'm sure uneducated countries have voted for liberators (idealists), but surely you aren't saying PTP (Thaksin) is an idealist?

Just to get that straight: there was an election here in 2010, as fair an election as Thailand ever will have one (which of course means: not fair at all, vote buying on either side, corruption running wild etc.) and parts of those who are now complaining, shot themselves in the foot with their brilliant "no vote"- strategy.

The outcome: one party more or less is the government, rules as they wish, fills their pockets, makes decissions mostly for their own...which simply every government since the stone-age has done...and all the (note: I am not saying "you"!) supporters of the opposition are now out in the streets and want to not only negate the outcome of that election, but are calling for a complete handover of power, to an un-elected government, to re-write the constitution and basically end all democracy, but at least "one man- one vote"...

From which country are you, where that is even slightly okay?

(Yes...I know! Thaksin= bad!)

You seem to be missing something. The REASON people are protesting. Because of this shame, probably illegal amnesty bill that the current government tried to push through. This was the spark of the protests, where the people said, ok we've accepted all the crap decisions you've made, rice pledging scheme and all, put the country into billiions of debt to fill your pockets, but this is the last straw.

If this happened in any other country, I'd bet there would be outrage as well. Trying to pass amnesty to convicted (not suspected) criminals and the biggest one at that. So it's all nice to say, accept what has happened. But being in power does not give a government the right to do as they wish. They are supposed to represent the people and for the last 2 years, they have worked with one main goal in mind................and people now see that.

Nope- didn't miss it!

I just happen to think, that this is only one reason for what is going on.

If you break down this whole mess, it starts with a country, that is per se not fit for democracy.

You can not just step up one sunny day and tell a feudal, hierarchic country that from now on it is a democracy!

One part of democracy is equality- do you see any equality here?

There is no real education, there is no freedom of speech...democracy will never work ina society like the Thai society.

So...if you want to make it easy (which many here seem to do) blame Thaksin and the present government for the chaos.

But you are just fighting the symptom.

The disease still stays!

I said it before: If this government steps down, if you really get rid of Thaksin and we meet here again next year, it will all be there: the inequality, the corruption, the injustice...there will just be another name on the cover!

They are playing democracy- a system, they don't embrace, they don't want, a system, they don't even understand!

Ahh looks like we are on the same page. Your original post seemed to be missing context. Never mind (maybe I misread it).

I agree with everything you said, democracy can't really exist here, not yet anyway. The education, gap in social classes and freedom of speech are all integral to becoming democratic and I can't see these 3 things changing anytime soon.

Thailand needs a government with vision, people who are qualified to lead a country and think about how to make Thailand grow in 5, 10, 20 years. Not this populist government that is going on now.

Guess we can hope for change. Maybe.

Or in Thailand, the majority who are uneducated and vote for whomever will put the most money in their pocket (or promise too).

Unfortunately lack of education makes influencing the 'masses' easy. Most policies that will develop Thailand as a whole, business wise on the international scale, unfortunately won't directly benefit the poor. Hence why they vote for populist parties like PTP who promise them a lot, but it's all empty and they can't see the lies behind the show. Democracy works in countries where people make informed decision on who to vote for, but in a country where more than 50% have minimal education it's very difficult for them to see the greater picture on what's beneficial to the development of Thailand. They just can't see it at that scale.

Thailand's a quite complicated situation.

Do you know most of the people who voted for Abraham Lincoln did not go to high school?

Few slaves could read (they would have voted if they could). Do you think they didn't know slavery was wrong? Informed decision my putooty.

Education is nice and all that but in Thailand it doesn't take a weatherman to tell which way the wind is blowing.

So you're saying the rice pledging scheme was a great idea (buying rice above world wide market rates)? (populist policy), sure it gives the farmers more money, which farmer would vote against that? The free tablet to each child was (in principle it was, but another failed policy), let alone an amnesty bill to bring a CONVICTED criminal back to Thailand (who also stole billions from the very people he is supposed to represent).

Please....I love Thailand and it's people as much as most, but money brings food to the table and for many, who live day to day, it's critical. Sure there are some that don't fit into this, but they likely aren't in the high percentage of minimum wage staff (or below).

There's also a big difference between voting for an idealist (based on their ideals and what they will do for the people) and voting for those that promise money simply to gain power. PTP promise a lot only when they can benefit. They have done nothing that didn't benefit them in some way. It was all a means to an end to get someone back and they only tried it after 2 years in office, after they had attempted to appease their followers (of PTP) with their failed policies.

Education is not just a 'nice thing to have'. You only need to look at those who are and those you are not (back in the West) to see the stark difference education makes (on ones reasoning, thinking ability, problem solving, higher level reasoning skills and so on).

If all these people KNEW that PTP would do this, then why vote for them? You really believe that they are happy for their party to bring back Thaksin after he stole all that money from the people, and run the country into billions of debt with rice they can't sell, simply because he did a few nice things back in the day (oh hell he deserves the few billion he took). Common.

Or in Thailand, the majority who are uneducated and vote for whomever will put the most money in their pocket (or promise too).

Unfortunately lack of education makes influencing the 'masses' easy. Most policies that will develop Thailand as a whole, business wise on the international scale, unfortunately won't directly benefit the poor. Hence why they vote for populist parties like PTP who promise them a lot, but it's all empty and they can't see the lies behind the show. Democracy works in countries where people make informed decision on who to vote for, but in a country where more than 50% have minimal education it's very difficult for them to see the greater picture on what's beneficial to the development of Thailand. They just can't see it at that scale.

Thailand's a quite complicated situation.

It is pretty cynical to believe that just because the majority lack a comprehensive education that they lack the sense and judgement to see"pork barreling" for what it is and therefore sell their vote to the highest bidder. Plenty of these people that I have met over the last 20 years or so are savvy and know a croc when they are fed one. If anything, they have a better sense of right and wrong and a stronger moral compass than their city cousins.

Cynical? No, fact. Education is critical. People fall for populist policies in the west and for the most part, the majority of people have completed at least high school education. There's also a vast difference between moral compass and growing business and a country. Your suggesting that one predicts the other or that simply having a moral compass (which will usually be at the level of to your fellow man) means that people can effectively decide on the larger picture and what's the best way to develop a country. They are unrelated.

At the end of the day, when you work to have shelter and food (and not much more), these are your priorities. You don't care if the country prospers as long as you have money to live. Hence populist policies will win, day in and day out. It doesn't mean that those policies are for the greater good of Thailand though.

I don't understand what's this protest for.

Do this people realized that it will be new elections soon and that PM is dissolving the government?

Yep. And that's what they are scared of. The Democrats can't win elections. They haven't won one in over 20 years. Elections means that they will lose. They want a power grab without elections.

And there's a good reason for this. As I said before...when more than 50% of the population is uneducated, it's very hard for them to see further than how much money is in my pocket, or to see the complexity of politics, promises and lies and thus choose which party will benefit Thailand and thus them (in the long term). Populace policies will ALWAYS win elections (they do even in the west), but that doesn't mean the governments that promise them are good for the country nor the people. As can be seem by the current government. Failed policy after policy. Maybe they deserve it in some karma way, but when people can't see the forest through the trees (ie the big picture) like most of the regional poor in Thailand, it means other's need to step up for them and the good of the country. Democracy only works when people are on a level playing field, in terms of the ability to make educated decisions. This is not Thailand.

As long as populist policies win, Thailand will go no where, because the people making them are only trying to line their own pockets. You only need to look at the qualifications/experience of most of the current governments bench to realise that most of them shouldn't even be there, ie they have no experience whatso ever in anything they are deciding on.

Well it is nice to see all the pro red/Thaskin farangs finally making a showing.

What boggles the mind is that all you supporters of the corrupt come from real democracy's that would have put

the PTP to bed a long time ago. So could it be that you all are dabbing in heartless heart of no morality?

Just to get that straight: there was an election here in 2010, as fair an election as Thailand ever will have one (which of course means: not fair at all, vote buying on either side, corruption running wild etc.) and parts of those who are now complaining, shot themselves in the foot with their brilliant "no vote"- strategy.

The outcome: one party more or less is the government, rules as they wish, fills their pockets, makes decissions mostly for their own...which simply every government since the stone-age has done...and all the (note: I am not saying "you"!) supporters of the opposition are now out in the streets and want to not only negate the outcome of that election, but are calling for a complete handover of power, to an un-elected government, to re-write the constitution and basically end all democracy, but at least "one man- one vote"...

From which country are you, where that is even slightly okay?

(Yes...I know! Thaksin= bad!)

You seem to be missing something. The REASON people are protesting. Because of this shame, probably illegal amnesty bill that the current government tried to push through. This was the spark of the protests, where the people said, ok we've accepted all the crap decisions you've made, rice pledging scheme and all, put the country into billiions of debt to fill your pockets, but this is the last straw.

If this happened in any other country, I'd bet there would be outrage as well. Trying to pass amnesty to convicted (not suspected) criminals and the biggest one at that. So it's all nice to say, accept what has happened. But being in power does not give a government the right to do as they wish. They are supposed to represent the people and for the last 2 years, they have worked with one main goal in mind................and people now see that.

The situation here, unfortunately, will not get any better as Suthep and the Dems do not want an ELECTED government. They want to be appointed by who knows who. They want to go back 50 - 60 years ago. That would not be a democratic government.

Well, in all fairness, the Red-shirts wanted Thaksin back and installed without an election, so they are no better. In case you haven't read the history on Thailand, the election process hasn't been a perfect bed of roses for the country. There are countries that don't have elections (e.g. UAE, Qatar, Vietnam, Laos, China, etc.) that have far more peace and security than many countries that do have elections (e.g. Malaysia, the Philippines, Greece, etc.). Elections do NOT bring peace and security! In Thailand, they spell disaster!

Are you serious? In most countries people want to vote for who runs their country.

Or in Thailand, the majority who are uneducated and vote for whomever will put the most money in their pocket (or promise too).

Unfortunately lack of education makes influencing the 'masses' easy. Most policies that will develop Thailand as a whole, business wise on the international scale, unfortunately won't directly benefit the poor. Hence why they vote for populist parties like PTP who promise them a lot, but it's all empty and they can't see the lies behind the show. Democracy works in countries where people make informed decision on who to vote for, but in a country where more than 50% have minimal education it's very difficult for them to see the greater picture on what's beneficial to the development of Thailand. They just can't see it at that scale.

Thailand's a quite complicated situation.

You guys are all so nice for helping this OP pick a bike. However his budget (that he told me he could buy my Ninja for) only allows for a second hand CBR250. As ninja's are still more expensive second hand, his budget won't get close to the second hand (few years old) price of a Ninja.

Hence for him, it's a bit of a moot choice. Since your budget allows for a CBR go with the second hand CBR and be done with it. Don't pine over choices when your budget doesn't allow for it. We all need to work to a budget, the CBR will be a fine bike for the money you have to spend.