jacob29

I don't think that's the case. Look at job postings listed as 'fully remote', almost all of them (I would estimate well over 90%) will only permit remote work within specific countries - usually those they have a presence in. If the listing doesn't explicitly say work from anywhere (worldwide), it's very likely they will have restrictions. I've contacted many recruiters about 'fully remote' opportunities where they didn't specify, and all were restricted to specific countries. Even one that explicitly said work from anywhere (worldwide), turned out to mean work from Canada. They may be operating on bad information, but they're not trying to prevent people from doing it - it's just an additional compliance headache they don't want to deal with. I've asked a few recruiters about this, and it seems a case of accounting isn't sure, and they just don't want the hassle.

Not seeing how that excuses the practice? The idea of shaming children to do something they never signed up for doesn't sit well me with, and being cultural doesn't soften it. I see some of the fallout from the practice. Granted there's a difference between the occasional visit (during Songkran) and some of the more burdensome expectations, but some children have a good reason to keep a low profile.

Having children so there's someone to take care of you when you're old, sounds like a case of 'me generation' as well.

This applies to foreign source income, which it won't be if the income was derived within Thailand borders. For example, if you've never set foot in the UK, and work as a remote contractor for a UK company - you're not liable for UK tax as it's not UK sourced income. So if it's not UK sourced.. well there's only one other source it could be, which is where the work was carried out. There's plenty of literature supporting this interpretation. The same would apply to Thai companies hiring remote offshore contractors that have never been inside Thailand, though harder to find real world examples as it's not a common arrangement.

You can set up your own company, and hire yourself. Very expensive, and you will need proper Thai partners involved. Do not use fake nominees that many agents will offer, as authorities have repeatedly clarified this is illegal. Also requires four Thai employees per work permit which is what makes it a deal breaker for most. There's also a work permit option available for the elite visa, requires 10m thb investment or so, making it impractical. Finally consider this, if you established your own company, hired yourself.. what if you later hired a foreign associate, who works as a contractor but invoices through your company. This is how sponsored work permit services operate. Plenty of people say they're illegal, but I've yet to hear a coherent legal argument as to how/why - since they're identical in structure to the hiring yourself option (which definitely is legal). If this was in fact illegal, consulting/contracting agencies (which take a cut of your profit) would be illegal as well, which I find highly unlikely.

No it's where the work is performed, which is also why a work permit is required even if the source of income is from abroad. This is made explicit with the smart visa - the income is from a foreign corp as part of the visa conditions, but they still expect you to pay tax on that income. The one year remittance exemption is for foreign source income (such as investment income from abroad).

Some would argue that's also what enables marriage at the scale we see it today, given it often has an economic element.

We know this isn't necessarily true by finding counter examples. The Japanese property bubble, for instance, which was followed by decades of stagnation. Excessive speculation can be harmful. Canada isn't looking particularly productive right now either (which is part of why they introduced stricter foreign ownership rules). The kicker is that you and many others would likely be priced out by capital from China that needs to find a home abroad (beyond the reach of home authorities). You can't compete as they don't need strong returns to make it worth their while, and a bunch of vacation homes with low utilisation sitting idle is most definitely not productive.

You obviously don't tune into Russian state media. The fact many Russians are fearful to openly discuss the situation on camera, tells us most of what we need to know about media transparency.

Why would Thailand want to encourage foreign rent seekers into their cash cows? Sitting on prime real estate is a non productive investment, and wealthy Thai people are right to protest foreign competition for such plum investments. Yes building on the property can be productive. You don't need to own the underlying property for that to happen though.

Do you have a VPN? It seems to be a specific VPN server causing a similar problem for me. If I disconnect the VPN or change to a different server, the issue stops happening. I will follow up with my VPN provider later to confirm, the alternative is these bad ads are region locked for some reason.

I never said people aren't doing just that. I even explicitly said that could be the case, I only have a limited sample size. What I did say, is that I've personally witnessed many people having problems and having to leave, due to spending the great majority of their time in Thailand. As such it does not seem statistically probable to characterise the problem as a tiny ratio. Now if the original statement I was addressing, indirectly meant that most people aren't trying to essentially live in Thailand on TVs, that seems like a fair statement, and maybe what was intended.

I'm not talking about posts here, I'm talking about people I know personally who have spent the majority of the year in Thailand, year on year. They have all faced problems, without exception. I didn't say their rejection was explicitly cited as 180 days, it's just too much time in Thailand. Whether 180 or 300 days in Thailand is too much, seems rather beside the point. We know it's neither, so what kind of calculus would you expect is going on in the officers head? That does not mean other people have faced problems, but it demonstrates the issue is common enough, unless I've just been exposed to a real anomaly. It's not always about turnaround time (overnight visa run) either. I'm also not talking 2019, this goes back close to a decade. I did not say a simple six months in Thailand will land you problems. I said people spending the majority of their time in Thailand, year on year for many years.

Provide some details or stop posting nonsense.

Maybe true if you mean of all the people questioned by IO across the board. If you mean what fraction of people who stay more than six months a year, every year, I have my doubts it's a tiny fraction having problems. Given that of the people I know in this category, all of them have faced issues (which doesn't mean everyone will, but unlikely to be a tiny fraction). For sure it's not specifically 180 exact days, but it seems like a fair estimate. Since it's at the officers discretion, it comes down to who is stamping you in. Unless you have a sixth sense for these things (there likely is benefit paying attention to how officers are processing the other passengers), it's likely to catch up to you eventually.

Thanks all, will investigate further. I've only installed one app recently on android, which should be safe as it's paid.. so struggling to think how it installed if it did so recently, but obviously did somehow.

I can't be certain it's due to the website, as possibly my mobile is compromised. However only when browsing the ASEAN now forums (it's not been seen on other websites), I see the lower banner ad as blank for about 15 seconds, then an automatic redirect to this scam website (without clicking anything) http://2022325luckyday.top/prize/luckyus-ad/lpphone.php Which displays the following

Being conservative is overrated, there are millions of conservative women around, is that not enough for you? Also what does it matter if she has typical looks, would it be better for you if she had a rare look? If not, then why mention it?

After hiring a cousin, I can picture the awkward conversation with big boss when it doesn't work out.. Boss - "This new hire doesn't have the skills for this job, why is it so hard to find employees with relevant experience? Do we need to increase the salary?" "Well about that boss, we had multiple qualified candidates.. but my cousin promised me they could learn the skills quickly, and I trust them!"

Entirely unsurprising, as there are no words to justify nepotism. In case it wasn't entirely clear, not every situation where someone hires a family member is nepotism, but it certainly warrants oversight. Also when you say honest - honest to whom? Honest to other family members? That's not a predictor of being honest to the business. If your family is into graft (as some are), that hire could be perfectly honest to family members, but that says nothing of whether they're good for the company/department. You seem to conveniently ignore all of this, there's a good reason why it's almost universally acknowledged as problematic. The potential for abuse is too high.

If they shared your worldview that there's nothing fundamentally wrong with favouring one applicant over another equally qualified candidate, provided they are qualified and honest (or can learn the job).. yes why wouldn't they? That's the core issue here, it's not about specifically family favouritism, but in general favouring a less qualified candidate for reasons unrelated to qualifications for the job. If the person was in fact the ideal applicant, it ceases to be nepotism. Though conflict of interest remains a concern as far as that judgement goes. You may as well ask would an 'honest' family member accept a job when they knew there were more qualified candidates more deserving of the job. Of course some would.

If qualified and honest people are giving brown envelopes to get the job, yes it applies equally. Multiple applicants may be qualified and honest, where the brown envelope tips the scales.

I never said you stated that. However your justification for nepotism can be equally applied to these other variants of corruption. Unless you can explain the difference?

Just like it's not wrong to accept a bribe or kickback for giving someone a position eh? As long as they are qualified, or can learn the job, why not hire someone who gives you a bit of money under the table.

I don't know if it was legal, and not sure if it was specifically Dubai, but I also know a girl who went to the middle east (possibly Bahrain, I forget) during COVID. She tested positive for covid while over there, which made her reconsider her plan. There is no reason she would make this up, and given other posters reporting similar, it would seem they found a way (possibly through shady brokers).