Rorri

Pattaya28, on 19 Jan 2015 - 20:10, said:

When I queue at immigration I get the feeling the immigration officers are doing me a big favor.

I have never ever seen a smile on any of their faces.

They are grossly understaffed.

The regime cannot and will not accept constructive criticism.

And as for the Taxi-drivers ........... they will never change their ways.

We know and must remember "This Is Thailand"

I actually got a smile, from the immigration guy, last time I left Thailand... the reason, he flicked through my passport, and with a smile pronounced, you overstay, guess he saw a few baht coming his way, that smile quickly disappeared when I turned to the very page I had my departure card in and wow, guess what, there was my last entry stamp, in fact I still had 5 weeks left , on a 12 month visa. Before anyone jumps the gun, all my 90 day stamps were up to date.

If the ambassador of the UK said all that and praised the General, who are you, the other ones, speaking against him on TVF?

I think it's about time he starts correcting some of you also.

How about being a British taxpayer ... remember Kent effectively works for me and it's a pity those paying his salary don't get a say otherwise he'd be on the unemployment line along with the rest of the morons.

Oh dear, you may have been a failure back home, but somehow I don't think it is the "morons" fault. It seems a few million Brits are happy with the government, if not then hey, it's not like Thailand, Britain actually is a democracy, the government can be voted out, unlike Thailand, land of the free, well, I hardly call them "free."

h90, on 16 Jan 2015 - 18:49, said:

bangkokfrog, on 16 Jan 2015 - 18:45, said:

Both countries have agreed to hold activities and celebrations along the year 2015 to celebrate the fifth decade of Thailand-UK relations.

Only 50 years? What about the period during the reigns of Rama 4 & early Rama 5 when the British Consuls used gun-boat diplomacy to uphold questionable treaties which allowed their countrymen to rape then Siam of much of its natural resources? (History of Anglo-Thai Relations by M.L Manich Jumsai, Chalermnit)

I think they don't want to remember that....both the UK and the Thais.

Are you suggesting that countries that once had conflict can NEVER find common ground in order to prosper? You really need to look to the future you poor poor thing.

Bogan Koori, on 15 Jan 2015 - 22:01, said:

canman, on 15 Jan 2015 - 16:56, said:

FiestyFarang, on 15 Jan 2015 - 16:14, said:

I suggest some of the readers be less racist or do not live here. These guys day in day out risk their life to help and save people with very little equipment like jet-skis in Australia. Then you get people who ignore red flags which should be obvious what it means and be disrespectful. The lifeguards have to put up with disrespect probably every day. I see some of the tourists they come here and look down on Thais. They would not behave the same in their own country. Most of the tourists here are budget end people and not educated.

This is just bigotry of lowered expectation.

I have been to beaches all over Australia and have never seen an Australian lifeguard assault a tourist. Same in Bali. You seem to think that we should make allowances because these thugs are Thai.

You never heard of the Cronulla riots? Started by Australian lifeguards who didn't like Arabs. You want to see Australian lifeguards in action then take a can of VB to Bondi beach and watch the tactical response group roll up.

Well you certainly are a bogan, spreading liars... as for the Cronulla riots...On 4 December 2005, a group of volunteer surf lifesavers were assaulted by a group of young men of Middle Eastern appearance, with several other violent assaults occurring over the next week.

Further reading for you,<removed>. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2005_Cronulla_riots

Tchooptip, on 15 Jan 2015 - 16:42, said:

JustAnotherFarang, on 15 Jan 2015 - 15:14, said:

No need for thai apologists to insinuate that it must have been the fault of the tourists.. No matter what thai people do they not only absolve themselves of any guilt but eagerly point the finger at those they have wronged.

Mickey Mouse country that becomes more and more 2 dimensional every day.

JAF

Relax man no danger, more more Thai bashers than Thai apologists around here

I often wonder about some people who believe Thailand, and Thais, are "perfect" and is someone says something negative they are called a Thai basher..... I have news for you, not all Thais are perfect and in this case it was a Thai lifeguard, and his cowardly group, who were becoming Russian bashers... but hey, I guess you would think this ok, because it is the Thai way.

FiestyFarang, on 15 Jan 2015 - 16:14, said:

I suggest some of the readers be less racist or do not live here. These guys day in day out risk their life to help and save people with very little equipment like jet-skis in Australia. Then you get people who ignore red flags which should be obvious what it means and be disrespectful. The lifeguards have to put up with disrespect probably every day. I see some of the tourists they come here and look down on Thais. They would not behave the same in their own country. Most of the tourists here are budget end people and not educated.

Are you demented, are you suggesting it's ok to assault someone.... grow up, your thinking is not that of an intelligent being. We all know that whether foreigners, or Thai, there are fools, but this doesn't give anyone the right to assault, and then be backed up by a cowardly group. Thainess, who really knows what it is, I doubt even Thais know, it's another term they use for whatever occasion, in a positive way, suits them, leaving out the many negative points.

timmyp, on 12 Jan 2015 - 16:42, said:

The water tasted weirdly salty when this happened last year. Then I read in the newspaper about the sea water getting into the water supply and realized why. I could certainly do without a repeat of that. It's tolerable, but it's pretty unpleasant to drink.

Normal filters won't get the salt taste out, the filter has to be capable of desalination.

You "actually" drink the tap water, don't be so tight, pay your 12baht and buy a 20 liter/litre bottle.

They can institute "bans" or whatever measures they want, but those of us that have been here, even for a short time, know damn well Thais ignore any bans, laws etc that they don't like.

Sorry, but how does "One of his ideas to serve this purpose revolves around engaging technology to help entrepreneurs running small and medium-sized businesses. For example, connecting more of these entrepreneurs with technology to improve their businesses." become science for society, to me it's still economy.

I'm getting a strong feeling that many of those "victims" of 2 tier pricing have actually contributed to or brought the situation upon themselves.

if you believe that it shows you are "out of touch" with Thailand and prices.

Extremely unlikely, but you are of course basing your observation on??? nothing!

And you are basing yours on what?... your own assumptions!... and I might add, very poorly thought out... but then you could be one that lives under a bridge.. a TROLL. Can you please explain how you came to your own assumptions 1) they contributed to it themselves and 2) they brought it upon themselves.

"Buyer protection in Thailand," best laugh I've had all week.

I find it strange the water pumped "seized" without warning, this throughs some doubt on your story. You would normally get weeks, if not months, of warning, the bearing makes a lot of noise. One thing about Thai "mechanics" many have no idea about belt tension, their way to adjust is to make it as tight as possible, this put to much pressure on any bearing resulting in premature wear.... but still giving considerable warning.

HiSoLowSoNoSo, on 05 Sept 2014 - 06:12, said:

""It isn't based on skin colour. If you have a Thai driving licence, work permit or tax certificate to show you pay Thai income tax, you pay the Thai price.""

Seems to be different policies at different national parks, tried coming into Khao Panueng Thung, Keang Krachan National park a couple of times with my Thai driving licence for the Thai price but had to pay the Farang price every time, at other parks I got the Thai price with my Thai driving license and WP, so I am not sure what the rules are any longer, maybe its up to the officer at the gate.

Wake up, it's Thailand, it makes no difference to what the "rules" are, it comes down to whose on the take gate.

Ling Kae, on 05 Sept 2014 - 01:12, said:

wilcopops, on 04 Sept 2014 - 21:16, said:

AnotherOneAmerican, on 04 Sept 2014 - 20:25, said:

brewsterbudgen, on 04 Sept 2014 - 20:00, said:

It isn't based on skin colour. If you have a Thai driving licence, work permit or tax certificate to show you pay Thai income tax, you pay the Thai price.

If you're white they ask for higher price.

If you're Asian they ask for lower price.

Sure if you're white you can show ID, but if you're Asian no ID required.

If this wasn't racist, they would ask everyone, Asian, Black and white for ID.

Interesting - where did you get that idea...it is of course completely untrue.

Bullsh!t, your comment is so out of touch it isn't funny.

Car load of 3 Thais and 1 Philipino turn up to a National Park (all look thai) no questions asked. 20 baht each

then

Same car turns up with 3 Thais and one white farang, 60 baht for the 3 Thais and 200 baht for the farang. Do you think this is fair and right? This is a racial discrimination at it's best and this is why Thailand is still a 3rd world country.

lol... Thailand is NOT a third world country, it is a country of its own.

whybother, on 04 Sept 2014 - 18:25, said:whybother, on 04 Sept 2014 - 18:25, said:

Rorri, on 04 Sept 2014 - 18:20, said:Rorri, on 04 Sept 2014 - 18:20, said:

That's only because it is subsidised by the government, your tax at work, but what you say does NOT stand true if you go to a private hospital, I think you are being a "little" unfair with your example. Entry prices, in Australia are the same for everyone, with exceptions for students, with concession cards, kids, I think under 12 and senior citizens. There is NOT difference between tourists and most Aussies, it is simply illegal.

Yes, I have been corrected on the "private hospital" aspect.

But in Australian government hospitals, tourists would pay more than locals because locals are subsidised.

What you seem to have forgotten, maybe you've been away too long, or have an axe to grind, but when Aussies pay tax there is a "Medicare levy" this is in fact a healthcare insurance payment, so again, what you say is wrong.

rethaier, on 04 Sept 2014 - 18:41, said:

Let me see if I understand this statement.

The cost of a stamp - 70 cents - is amongst the cheapest in the world but does not cover the cost of the service, he said.

So the stamp cost 70 cents to print. <deleted>. These people must think we are stupid.

Bit short on thinking aren't we.

whybother, on 04 Sept 2014 - 09:30, said:

thailand49, on 04 Sept 2014 - 09:25, said:

They only want to do something because although they are lying about tourist coming back they are not! This is a government and people who believe lying a little is o.k. just like excepting corruption.

As noted it is a mindset, even in the police station and hospital that charges you more is o.k., as recently as last month Bangkok/Hospital gave me a quote in writing for 15,000 for a procedure when i came back a week later to confirm the procedure the original doctor had overbook his day so I was told another doctor could do the procedure. After doing some paperwork I was told the charge will be 25,000, I pull out and gave her the slip of earlier quote and she/he came right out and say that is " Thai price " " you Falang " was was stunned knew and heard about it before never could confirm.

Here what is new... all smoke and mirror!

In Australia, it would cost me (as an Aus citizen) less for hospital visits than it would for foreigners.

That's only because it is subsidised by the government, your tax at work, but what you say does NOT stand true if you go to a private hospital, I think you are being a "little" unfair with your example. Entry prices, in Australia are the same for everyone, with exceptions for students, with concession cards, kids, I think under 12 and senior citizens. There is NOT difference between tourists and most Aussies, it is simply illegal.

laurentbkk, on 03 Sept 2014 - 17:39, said:

Those are Siemens train no ???? usually German technology is good ...and waterpoof

But who maintains them...

chris2004, on 22 Aug 2014 - 14:22, said:

This was always illegal. If people took the risk and now get caught out it's their own fault. Their country, their rules and laws.

Not and never was "illegal", there is a legal loophole. Please read "LEGAL."

The Foreign Business Act was a law enacted by the Chuan Leekpai-controlled National Legislative Assembly of Thailand in 1999 that limited foreign ownership of certain Thai industries. Its predecessor was the Alien Business Act of 1972, enacted by a military junta. Industries which must be majority-owned by Thais included the newspaper business, radio stations, television stations, rice farming, animal husbandry, fishing, land trading, mining, wholesaling and retailing, restaurants, and all service businesses. The law criminalized nominees, any Thai who held shares on behalf of a foreigner. Nominees could be fined 100,000 to 1 million baht and face up to 3 years in prison. However, the law did not prohibit foreigners from being the majority in the board of directors and also did not prohibit having different classes of shares with differing voting rights. This loophole allowed thousands of foreign-controlled businesses to operate in Thailand.

loppylugs1, on 22 Aug 2014 - 10:44, said:

Rorri, on 22 Aug 2014 - 10:37, said:

carstenp, on 22 Aug 2014 - 08:24, said:carstenp, on 22 Aug 2014 - 08:24, said:

I feel sorry for the foreigner using Thai Nominee Shareholding to keep control of the land, and house for millions of bt to protect there investment, but they know it was illegal in the beginning

In the end, is all about money and keep them safe in Thailand

Please, show me where, in Thai law, that it was/is illegal. As far as I can determine ALL conditions were met. If they wanted to make it "illegal" Thailand had ample opportunities to close any legal loop holes. As far as I'm concerned it appears Thailand now believes it has everything it needs, from foreign investment, and now wants it all to itself.

Thailand took a blind eye to this,new govt will not. Never was legal for farang to own land,never mind the house that stood on it. Even the company that owned the land/house was Thai owned,so farang owned nothing

Loopholes were created to shovel more money into the scheme of things,now farang going to get fingers burnt

Um, it is "legal" to own the house...and according to law, through a company to own land. The loophole is there, and allowed by the government.

ldnguy, on 22 Aug 2014 - 11:43, said:

chooka, on 22 Aug 2014 - 07:43, said:

They want foreign investment but don't want foreigners owning more than 49% after they contribute and invest 100%. Whilst they are going after foreigners in Thailand they are openly encouraging Thais to invest abroad where they can own 100% which includes the land their business will sit on.

Wrong. You invest 49%, you own 49%. No-one is forcing you to invest 100%. If you don't like the rules, then invest elsewhere.

What planet are you on..... your comment is stupid to say the least. You seem to miss that in many cases you invest 100% but own 49%.

jessc, on 22 Aug 2014 - 11:21, said:

If Thailand permitted majority foreign ownership of companies and land, China would own Thailand.

It's not a level playing field because Thailand has a substantially weaker economy compared to many many other countries. It is totally reasonable for a nation in Thailand's position to welcome limited financial investment from abroad, with regulation that keeps them in charge of their own economy. Is it the best possible legal framework? I am sure economists could present many differing arguments. Is it irrational xenophobia aimed at milking money from Europeans? Um, no.

Many countries "limit" foreign ownership, of some businesses, but the difference here is all the added restrictions Thailand imposes.

moto77, on 22 Aug 2014 - 10:49, said:

Rorri, on 22 Aug 2014 - 10:47, said:

KittenKong, on 22 Aug 2014 - 09:51, said:KittenKong, on 22 Aug 2014 - 09:51, said:

carstenp, on 22 Aug 2014 - 08:24, said:carstenp, on 22 Aug 2014 - 08:24, said:

I feel sorry for the foreigner using Thai Nominee Shareholding .....

I dont. It's illegal. It's always been illegal. There has never been any suggestion that it is anything other than completely illegal.

Anyone who does this chooses to do so in full knowledge of the fact that it is totally illegal, and so they only have themselves to blame if it goes pear-shaped.

That said, from the report it appears that they are targeting active businesses rather than just house-owning nominee company structures. Though I would not be at all surprised if the latter were not targeted also at some point in the near future.

Please, show me, in law, where it is "illegal" as far as I can see it is, at the most, the use of a legal loophole, that the Thai government has had ample time and opportunity to close, but have chosen not to.

I already did Rorri. What are you expecting, a link to the Thai language version?

With your simple thinking, did you not realise that my post was well before you replied, with misleading info.

moto77, on 22 Aug 2014 - 10:40, said:moto77, on 22 Aug 2014 - 10:40, said:

Rorri, on 22 Aug 2014 - 10:37, said:Rorri, on 22 Aug 2014 - 10:37, said:

carstenp, on 22 Aug 2014 - 08:24, said:carstenp, on 22 Aug 2014 - 08:24, said:carstenp, on 22 Aug 2014 - 08:24, said:

I feel sorry for the foreigner using Thai Nominee Shareholding to keep control of the land, and house for millions of bt to protect there investment, but they know it was illegal in the beginning

In the end, is all about money and keep them safe in Thailand

Please, show me where, in Thai law, that it was/is illegal. As far as I can determine ALL conditions were met. If they wanted to make it "illegal" Thailand had ample opportunities to close any legal loop holes. As far as I'm concerned it appears Thailand now believes it has everything it needs, from foreign investment, and now wants it all to itself.

Foreign Business Act of 1999 (Thailand)

The Foreign Business Act was a law enacted by the Chuan Leekpai-controlled National Legislative Assembly of Thailand in 1999 that limited foreign ownership of certain Thai industries. Its predecessor was the Alien Business Act of 1972, enacted by a military junta. Industries which must be majority-owned by Thais included the newspaper business, radio stations, television stations, rice farming, animal husbandry, fishing, land trading, mining, wholesaling and retailing, restaurants, and all service businesses. The law criminalized nominees, any Thai who held shares on behalf of a foreigner.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foreign_Business_Act_of_1999_(Thailand)

True, but in many instances shares are in Thai names, so in fact they hold the shares, in their own name to be held on behalf of someone else it would need to be written as such. Also, you should have posted some more of your reference.. "However, the law did not prohibit foreigners from being the majority in the board of directors and also did not prohibit having different classes of shares with differing voting rights. This loophole allowed thousands of foreign-controlled businesses to operate in Thailand."

leesgems, on 22 Aug 2014 - 10:31, said:

atsiii, on 22 Aug 2014 - 09:50, said:

My wife is a Thai national; I am a USA national. We live in each country roughly six months per year. But the difference in the way we are treated by each other's native country is night and day. My wife travels in and out of the USA on her Thai passport never needing a Visa. She can work, own property, own businesses, go to school, whatever. She is protected against overt discrimination and welcomed as a tax-paying, contributing part of society. But no matter how long we are married, nor how long we are in Thailand, I can never do any of those things. We are both college educated experienced professionals; but she is welcomed and wanted in my country, and I never will be in hers. Xenophobic or not, it's just plain dumb.

Ditto, same here. Not reciprocal, not fair.

Since when has Thailand ever pretended to be "fair." The only thing we foreigners can do is write to our respective embassies and/or our nations senators/political leaders, we could also approach nation news media, to highlight to the world the difference between Thailand and our home countries, in the way investors/expats are treated.