new2here

My guess is that for a foreigner who is currently in the kingdom - and isn’t either still in nor fresh out of some form of quarantine- I don’t think it’s going to be all that different.

Rightly or wrongly, when it comes to government action, the expression “the squeaky wheel gets the grease” is somewhat true.

Months ago the daily talking point was the daily number of incoming foreigners having the virus and all the issues surround that… today, while foreigners still arrive daily - and some still carry the virus, there’s near zero “talk” about that.. the attention has shifted to things like the new clusters, the delta variant etc. etc. 

So… to me, *so long as* the collective attention doesn’t somehow shift back to foreigners and the virus, i think things won’t really change - for better or worse.

23 hours ago, placeholder said:

And the RCPT members will benefit how?

 … by influencing public policy towards their groups position (which appears to be opposite of the “open up” side)… the “benefit” does not necessarily have to be financial - but can also be influencing public policy or regulation towards positions that are aligned to the groups position. 

i have active accounts with most of the thai banks and it’s my experience that for most all transactions you will have to have the actual bank book (plus governor ID) with you to do most teller/CSR-based transactions… once and a while i can get a few things done without out it… but my experience is that the vast majority of the time, the actual book must be present… i don’t know of any that has it as a formalized policy that no bank book* need be present for over-the-counter service 

(Note:  i think the only accounts where this won’t apply is to some of the newer “online only” savings accounts that, when opened, don’t get a physical bank book at issuance) 

20 hours ago, petedk said:

 

Ok 

Thanks to all the replies.

 

I was just a little concerned as usually I get the return notification within 3 weeks. I read on their site that if you have waited more than 4 weeks, then you should contact them.

Actually, I was surprised that they didn't even offer to investigate when I called.

I'll wait a while.

 

 While i’m sure there are others with more experience, i’ve done my 90 day exclusively by post for the past 4 years. never done it online. I have never not received my new form back… sometimes it was fairly quick.. other times slower.. and the most recent (late January 2021) it took nearly 3 weeks past the due date… but again, i got it back.

My guess here - based only on my experience - is that IF they got your  90 day filing, and IF you gave them everything they require, you will get it back… maybe slow, but it will come .

13 hours ago, nkg said:

 

 

I take it all the members of RCPT have jobs. Perhaps they would like to contribute some of their salaries to help the millions out of work following the collapse of Thailand's tourism industry. No?

 

There's a surprise.

 

I agree… it’s no surprise … but… i think that it’s the same as statements made by the various “hotel” trade groups and associations.

Each one has their own “priorities” and they tend to be rather singular in track or focus…. 

Therefore the RCPTs position and statements will naturally reflect that priority…. so… I don’t think there’s anything overtly wrong per se, with the RCPTs statement as that’s where their membership is coming from.. same from the hotels trade group, restaurants trade groups, airline trade groups, etc …

but do agree with you in that I think each group tends to speak to the matter without looking at the much larger picture - but only based on how their own membership will benefit.

I wholeheartedly agree that speaking up is a big part of the solution… and i think having an environment that supports those who claim such is a key part..

that said, i ALSO think it’s critical to make sure that the accused — and that’s a key here “accused” - have their rights ALSO protected.

In that i think it’s fair to recognize that the initial claims of “He did X to me” or “She did X to me” tend to be widely covered— IF it turns out that He or She didn’t do that, or he/she were acquitted in court — that part doesn’t commonly get equal coverage.

So… i fully support the girls - or any victim of assault to come forward and inform the officials … (and yes, the officials MUST do their jobs after the complaint comes in) … and I also want to be sure the rights and assumption of innocence of the accused is ALSO respected - until some form of a recognized outcome (ie arrest, conviction, acquittal, etc) is made.

17 hours ago, RotBenz8888 said:

We have found that....??? So why haven't they set a limit to 1 single time? 

I agree… I think that’s the more “fair” thing to do… Just allow a single time event… If they have used the SQ option before, then any subsequent returns would be wholly self-financed.  

I think that’s fair as i’m sure there are still some citizens who have remained overseas - for whatever reason - and as such should be entitled to the same privilege as other citizens who returned prior … one free SQ entry… no more, no less.

It makes sense.. Someone (like a delivery person) can start their day - buy the cheapest B15 ticket- then enter.. so long as they remain within the fare payment area (ie don’t cross out) the MAX they will pay is the highest fare as the BTS caps the maximum time a person can remain inside the fare payment area.

So, it might be possible to make numerous “gate-side deliveries” and since the delivery person didn’t leave the fare payment area, the max would be the full rate (again, due to exceeding the time cap) BUT this “penalty” rate is still far cheaper than buying multiple successive tickets (mist likely short distance trips too) from each delivery station to the next. 

To me, I’d start kind of “small” so-to-speak..: show people the process works — especially if there will be major foreign media present… after a few weeks or so, THEN add to it.. by then word would have got out that the Phuket model works.. then they could add to it.

If you do in fact get it right, then the media will “sell” it for you - and i’d argue that the media would have a much father reach and probably better credibility.. so .. getting it right when they are there is huge. 

I’d rather start with the basics and get that correct right “out-of-the-box” versus shoot too big and look foolish when you have to step it backwards and fix it…

2 hours ago, WaveHunter said:

Yes it is indeed true.  If you read Thai, here is the official order form the Governor:

good!  I hope (and would expect) that the other neighboring areas (ie BMA) follows suit ..: that would be a plus for many peoples day-to-day lifestyle .. 

I too hate re-learning a stores layout… but… I do think that IF they redid the layout so that more products were now on offer - that’s good for me (sure, it might be things i don’t buy, but still, IMHO, more choice is better) or perhaps they made the layout more “intuitive” -here too, that is a good thing.

So, i don’t support move for the sake of moving (which i highly doubt that is what happened) but i DO think it’s good if there’s a direct positive impact on the shopper and his/her experience in-store. 

57 minutes ago, Petey11 said:

Cannot work out why they don't digitiser the system and put on computer. When I visited Laos my visa was on computer. Simple.

I think the CoEs are… When I came back, the immigration officer before i got to the actual “counter” had a stapled set of papers and i could see that it listed CoEs by number and had the name of the passenger, passport, nationality and issuing embassy/consulate … She “checked off” my CoE before i was allowed to move to the actual counter for processing and stamping.

So, Is guess that unless you were somehow able to manipulate the data within the Embassy, it would be hard as the fake CoE wouldn’t appear on that list - and would then trigger questioning. 

#1 seems fairly straightforward except for the 20-hours a week part.. that to me would be very very hard to fairy, easily and objectively measure that and do so in a way that facilities compliance/enforcement.

#2 seems easy enough… you can check for compliance by requiring a certified copy of the foreigners PD90/91 each year before extension is approved.. that way you can check how much was earned and that taxes were paid. 

#3 sounds like we end up back kind of where we are now with some foreigners not being able to sufficiently “prove” their pension income.. so this option to work, there will have to some kind of system that thai thai authorities will recognize and foreign governments/entities will adopt as well.

I’m all for new ideas, but i think there’s LOTS of leg work on this one before i could say it has any reasonable chance of becoming an actual law.

1 hour ago, Poet said:

Never really understood why people buy air tickets via agents. Is it really that much cheaper?

When using the flight search aggregators, I often notice that some online agent site will offer the flight slightly cheaper but, in my experience, they seem to add an additional fee after you have already wasted time and are about to pay.

The direct prices listed in the aggregators generally turn out to be their total price, so, I feel that the agents are engaging in sleight-of-hand to funnel people to their sites.

Even if an agent did work out, say, 10% cheaper overall, I still feel it is better to deal directly with the airline, especially if you have a return flight that you might possibly need to change. So many variables affect travel, I always suspect it will work out more expensive to deal with any problem or change through an agent.

Don't get me wrong, I would LOVE to find a way to get cheaper flights, I certainly waste enough time searching for the best dates to fly, but I've never really found a way to come out ahead by going through a third party.

 

I think for some it’s just a process they are simply more familiar with and understand… also, in some limited cases, a good agent may be able to construct a more difficult/complex booking (ie interline but across different networks, triple connections, etc) that a normal person might not be able to readily do so on any one carriers own platform…  

So i do think there’s still a space for agents to exist, but i agree that for the majority of booking today, they can be made just as easily with the carrier direct - which then mean you deal solely with the carrier itself - should any issues arise. 

This question, to me, is tricky… on one hand i am very much a proponent of the idea “personal rights” when it comes to your own healthcare… i don’t think the government has the right to tell you how to manage your own health..

that said…

I also recognize that individuals; complete with their right, also exist within larger societal groups — and one individuals actions - be that from exercising a right or legally granted privilege  - can impact others … so i don’t think ones own “rights” exist within purely within a vacuum …  

So, while i don’t agree with the government MANDATING an individual person get it the jab, i DO think that government also has the right and obligation to implement law to insure the collective safety of the group… and while you as an individual to may chose to abstain from getting the jab, i think it’s also fair for government to have rules that bar those that aren’t vaccinated from situations where there is a credible risk to health of society at large. 

On 5/15/2021 at 2:30 PM, Jonathan Fairfield said:

I'm using cash and card less and less. I mainly use QR payment/Prompt Pay via the K-Bank app. It's great. So convenient and most places accept it now, from street food vendors up to big stores. 

I’m like you.. While i still use “cards” - mostly because either i earn some kind of points/cash back or because  i want some kind of post-purchase recourse should things go bad, i do find that more and more of my smaller day-to-day purchases i pay by QR or the like... 

I do sometimes find it funny that at some stalls that lack electricity hook-ups or running water have their QR code prominent displayed and used. 

my neighbor runs a few smaller cafes near several universities in the bangkok area - thus is a cash heavy business …  he told me that his commercial banking costs (like the banks fee for bulk cash deposits, loose coin acceptance fees and the occasional bogus note his staff would accidentally accept) have dropped dramatically- he has now set it up that users of QR get an additional “point” in his shops frequent buyer card programme as a means to promote it. 

This to me, kind of mirrors what happened when CoEs were initially rolled out in late march 2020… the very very first group of non-citizens with valid work permits who were “economically essential” to thailand, then soon after it was expanded slightly to include all valid WP holders… notably at that that time it EXcluded those who were holders of various retiree-type visas or were foreign spouses, foreign parents of a Thai national.  

I remember in some FB there was fairly vocal … bantering…. of “group X should come before group Y, because Y is more important than X…. “   and honestly, each one did have a valid point to varying subjective degrees.

This issue of what groups will be first, second, etc… kind of feels like we will see the same… it unfortunately kind of became very divisive. 

It kind of sounds like we’re talking essentially about the amount of tax/excise/fee revenue does the government get…. 

IF that’s the sole metric, then I think there’s a few things to note… first, while most everything you’d buy domestically includes the current VAT at 7%… but to be more accurate and fair, there are some types of purchases that are taxed at a lower to zero VAT rate and many other purchases that are taxed (to include excise/duty and the like) at much much higher rates…   

so, for example 1MM spent at traditional stores might take in close to 7% +/-, reflecting the normal 7% VAT…  but if someone else were to also spend 1MM, but do so on goods that are taxed at much higher rates, now the governments tax income would be much higher on the same 1MM level. 

Also, i also assume the government would be keen to attract people who do both SPEND their money here (again, that’s the VAT and other excise taxes) but ALSO those that EARN money here as that’s usually subject to some level of Thai income taxation (assuming over the taxation threshold nett of the various statutory deductions)

so, while a foreigner simply spending 1MM or 2MM + annually IS a good thing from a government tax income basis, i think there’s other metrics to look at (like a non-citizen EARNING 1MM or 2MM) that might make someone a bit more appealing—  IF the criteria is just how much does the government receive in direct taxation of economic activity. 

3 minutes ago, mtls2005 said:

 

I think most hospitals break out prices for medicines, services, fees, etc. by line item on the bill.

 

That's the way it works here, say for a flu shot. You see the price of the shot, the nurse fee, the doctor's fee, the facility charge all as separate line items.

 

If a private hosptial does not offer a vaccine at a price you find acceptable you can shop around, and probably get a vaccine at a government facility, for a lower fee, at some time in the future.

 

 

I love to to whine about stuff, but until I see the prices - and I'll happily pay - I'll whine about something else.

 

 

 

 

i agree … that’s my experience too.. it’s commonly a line itemized bill 

.. and by doing so, it does tend to favor transparency… to that end i agree..

but… while it’s fair to say nothing official - a signed ministerial order, a regulation posted in the Royal Gazette - has been put forward yet, what i am expressing is my … concern… that efforts will be made to effectively undermine what i suspect is the intent of a single, fixed price situation. 

What I would wonder is if that price (whatever it’s stated to be) is in fact a true “nett” price, or will only the jab itself be fixed — and then individual hospitals are free to have their own additional fees, such as adding a mandatory doctors fee, facility fee etc?

In essence, I’m wondering if this is kind of run like an airline or hotel in that the “base” price is in fact quite low… and in-like with whatever “standardized price” agreement that may exist…. but when you add in the mandatory additions that a hospital is free to impose, then you arrive a much higher rate. 

2 hours ago, dcsw53 said:

So we now have the pleasure of queuing for 45 mins for the payment counter and 45 mins to have our passports stamped, sounds good to me.

 

I’ll bet it’s simply added as an added element of your ticket price - hard baked into it — like the UKs APD, rtg various taxes on US origin tickets etc.

The upside is that the airlines becomes the defacto tax collector, not the RTG, and since it’s baked into prices, everyone has to show their fares with it included as well—so it will kind of “blend” into the fares 

not saying i agree or disagree with it, only that the actual administration of this *should* be easy as the infrastructure to do so is already in place and used for many other similar taxes/fees.

i get it that availability of supply may be problematic— and sure, it’s fair to say “why didn’t they act sooner?”. but… that’s not going to change where we are today.. right now.

What Id like to see is a mass registration…. everyone who wants it.. don’t matter age, nationality, health issues etc — get everyone’s name on some kind of master list.

Then.. from there the government can subdivide that master list into sub groups based on their assigned medical need/eligibility etc… so at least there would be visibility into overall demand — and allow the government to decide groups and the number of jabs that would be required. 

.. and those on the list would be able to see where their assigned group falls in terms of eligibility etc 

.

once a group does become eligible, then they can go back to the registry same and now pick a date, time and place to receive it based on what hospitals/vaccine centers have supply etc.   and IF there is a fee to be paid (again, just a “what if..) payment can be made at the the time the booking is made or made prior to jab time by other e-payment means.